U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-23-2009, 05:25 PM
 
4,711 posts, read 11,494,406 times
Reputation: 3789

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyB View Post
You do realize don't you that the big musicians so lauded by the Boomers - Joplin, the Stones, Hendrix etc were all members of the SILENT GENERATION. They're not Boomers. You were just the guys who listened to them.

The music you deride, late '70's, early '80's - THOSE guys are Boomers.

Well, that's debatable. The Silent Generation is considered to be those born from 1925-1942. The Baby Boom is considered to be those born from 1946-1964. So, what happened to 1943-1945....the period that most of the artists you mentioned were born?

Just as I don't think the late boomers (say the last 6-8 years) are "true boomers"....I don't consider the late silents (or the missing years) to be "true" silents. Translation: the generational lines are blurry...

Both my parents and all my friends' parents were born in the mid-to-late 20's....and any comparison between them and Jimi Hendrix or Janis Joplin is absurd. I'm cracking up just thinking about it! LOL


Just goes to show....attempting to put tens of millions of people in one neat little box, as the OP is trying to do, is IDIOTIC!

Last edited by car54; 08-23-2009 at 05:45 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-23-2009, 08:25 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,470 posts, read 18,210,220 times
Reputation: 4343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
And that can be done without continuing to support them financially after they've reached majority with the ability to go forth and earn things for themselves.
No, not in the way I'm speaking of matters. I'm talking about a financial head start.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
It's not what I'm writing about, either. I'm writing about parents spending >100K to send junior to a name-brand university, or ponying up for a house down payment the child should have saved himself etc.
Investing in your kids future is not "nothing is too good for junior" kool-aid. For a wealthy family spending $100k on school is equivocate to a middle-class family paying for their local state college, the numbers are all relative.

Regardless, having student loan debt is a shackle that sets you back financially. A shackle that could be avoided if the parent saved $1,000~$2,000 or so a year.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
$2000 a year for 18 years at 1.5% above inflation (assumption 5% IRR and 3.5% mean inflation rate) yields about $41K in today's dollars. That's hardly enough for a 4-year university education, even at a state school.
With an inflation rate of 3.5% you could get more than 5%, I was being rather conservative with the 5%. You should be able to get 4~5% in real terms. Also, $41k would pay for the tuition at most public 4-year universities. Also, if the family is not able to save that much the kids could start at community college. In most states $40k, should pay for 2 years of community college locally and tuition, dorm, etc for the other 2 years at a public 4-year college. In California you could get by with $25~$30k or so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
Few middle-class Americans can truly afford sending several kids to college and saving for retirement...and an oversized house...and three cars...and...
Right they can't afford all these things, they've decided having a large house, fancy cars, a house filled with junk, etc is more important then their kids future and their own retirement. That in some sense, is the boomer way. Although, I don't see Gen-X saving much better for these things either.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
Each is succeeding in is/her own way and under his/her own power. They would not have been able to succeed without what we taught them, but they are more than able to succeed without being spoon-fed. And yes, they ARE stronger for it.
Looking at them now is irrelevant, look at them in 10-20 years. Additionally, you have no idea whether they would've done better with more aid from you or not. Oh gee, the "they are stronger" bit. I think this is more so an excess for being cheap, than anything else.

Due to the power of compounding financial aid from parents can make the difference of being a pawn or on top.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
....is far more important than turning the kid into a trustifarian.
Everything is in extremes to you. You either don't provide anything or your a "trustifarian". There is a rather happy middle ground, namely helping your kids financially when they show aptitude and interest in things and making them work for any extra ordinary consumables.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
I'm not only under the impression that upper-class families allow their kids to waste their college years on degrees that do not relate to earning a living--I see it every day.
You do? I'm thinking you don't know what upper-class families are like as you are unlikely to encounter them at all, let along on a daily basis. You see, they don't exactly mix with the lower classes much.

What their kids are allowed to do depends on the details. If the kids will be joining the family business, then the parents may not care too much. Otherwise the boys are pushed into high paying careers, e.g., investment banker, lawyer, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
I marvel at what parents are spending to send their kids to Colorado College (an expensive private liberal arts college here in Colorado Springs) to major in music, art, theater etc.
Why? Are you under the impression that nobody should study music, art, theater etc? If someone shows an aptitude and strong interest in say music, why force them to study engineering? They are far more likely to make a good living with music than engineering in this case. Contrary to what you want to believe, there are a number of jobs in music, art, theater, etc most of which are well paying.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2009, 08:41 PM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,805 posts, read 17,572,960 times
Reputation: 9435
user_id wrote:
Regardless, having student loan debt is a shackle that sets you back financially. A shackle that could be avoided if the parent saved $1,000~$2,000 or so a year.
That same $1000 or $2000 ( and even more than that ) a year can easily and realistically be earned from a part time job during the teenage years and while attending college.



IMO, a childs success or lack thereof happens partially in-spite of what the parents do, and partially because of what the parents do. Children, while certainly influenced by their parents, are also individual beings in their own right.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2009, 09:51 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,470 posts, read 18,210,220 times
Reputation: 4343
Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicWizard View Post
That same $1000 or $2000 ( and even more than that ) a year can easily and realistically be earned from a part time job during the teenage years and while attending college.
Huh? I'm talking about saving $1,000~$2,000 a year for 18 years. If parents start saving the moment the kid is born its not too hard to save for their college.

Working during college is counter-productive. To really succeed you're going to want to get involved in as many things as you can and that leaves little time for work. Just going to college and taking classes is a direct path to mediocre job, you need to get involved in projects etc. If you play your cards right you may be able to get a paid research assistantship though.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2009, 10:21 PM
 
5,748 posts, read 11,171,456 times
Reputation: 4504
Cosmic, it is unlikely that a high school/college kid could earn enough from a part-time job to cover a significant chunk of his expenses at a typical university, especially given the current economy. It was still possible when I went to college in the mid-eighties for a student to pay his way through, especially if he lived at home. But now? Not so much.

I think user_id's point was that a parent who puts aside a couple thousand dollars a year, beginning at the child's birth, would have the resources to put a serious dent in college expenses. Given the importance of higher education in today's workplace, I think it's a great thing when parents can give their kids a leg up, but only as long as it does not prevent them from putting aside adequate retirement savings.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2009, 10:23 PM
 
Location: Seattle
1,369 posts, read 3,052,726 times
Reputation: 1496
Some thoughts:

Almost every startup business either is founder funded or receives funding from friends and family. A business needs to reach a certain size before it will attract outside investor financing (in an extremely large majority of cases). If it's founder funded it's usually from proceeds made from another business or cashing out from some lucrative job opportunity, or it goes on credit cards, a HELOC or something similar. Having family support for a business is really important. Sure, sometimes people are lucky enough to start in a type of business that can grow with very little startup capital (depends on the business) but most kids (or anyone) starting a business will need some kind of support early on in the form of friends, family or close associates. It can be done without it but the odds decrease dramatically for people who don't have some kind of support.

I think a lot of the "who should pay for college" thing comes down to the education expectations the parents have of the children. Some parents expect less than a college degree; some parents expect any college degree; some parents expect a college degree from a top school; some parents expect graduate education; some parents expect multiple graduate degrees. A parent who expects high end degrees, which are generally expensive unless you go to a top tier public university (may or may not be available for cheap depending what state the kids live in), is going to have little credibility with an intelligent child if they come back and tell kids they are responsible for footing the entire bill.

What I've seen as standard among middle class to upper-middle class higher education families is they will pay for undergrad but then kids will foot the bill for graduate school. These families generally expect their kids will go to grad school and generally feel it is asking a bit much for kids to finance both degrees with loans. In the end I don't think it's dramatically different from families who ask kids to pay for undergrad - it's simply that kids of high education parents expect more degrees and better degrees - they still expect some of that education to be self-financed by the children.

I know in my graduate program there were very few students who had parents paying for it, even students who had millionaire parents had loans. Most of the students who had parents financing education were international students (but most of them had free undergrad so in the end it's still somewhat similar since parents are only paying for one degree). Sometimes parents would help out with living expenses but almost everyone had pretty significant loans unless they were on scholarship. I was actually surprised how few students were financed from parents - especially since a lot of those parents could fairly easily afford the bill. But even wealthier parents don't find an MBA level degree cheap, especially if they are ending their careers and are getting ready to retire, plus the degree is supposed to return a strong salary at the end. I mean if parents are multi-millionaires the cost is somewhat trivial - but parents of that income level don't generally need to send kids to business school since they can set up jobs for them without the need for an MBA type degree.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2009, 10:59 PM
 
Location: Boca Raton, FL
5,807 posts, read 9,431,527 times
Reputation: 7779
Smile Family dynamics are different

From my own personal experience, I never thought I would get married much less have children. The thought of having children was the farthest thing from my mind.

I was too busy, working 2 jobs, trying to help MY parents and then also going to school to even think about myself. Well, it happened. I did get married and had children.

If I had time to really analyze it, maybe I would have been scared off. I have always to help my parents and while it was hard, my own children have seen the sacrifice and maybe some day, they will be there for me.

Since it was so hard for me to get through college (I did it on my own), I was determined to have my children get their degrees. They have worked and the basic expenses are taken care of by us.

It will give them an easier time to start off. Living in an expensive area has shown them that we are in the minority but they have always worked and are now very independent.

I do have family members who do not help their children at all and that is just their family dynamic. I prefer to be more middle of the road.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 03:02 AM
 
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
2,221 posts, read 4,882,819 times
Reputation: 1702
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Investing in your kids future is not "nothing is too good for junior" kool-aid. For a wealthy family spending $100k on school is equivocate to a middle-class family paying for their local state college, the numbers are all relative.

Regardless, having student loan debt is a shackle that sets you back financially. A shackle that could be avoided if the parent saved $1,000~$2,000 or so a year.
Having to work and/or incur debt to pay for college puts a perspective and worth on school that those who are gifted their educations rarely appreciate. I know I sure worked a lot harder because I earned the money needed to write the tuition checks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
With an inflation rate of 3.5% you could get more than 5%, I was being rather conservative with the 5%. You should be able to get 4~5% in real terms.
In the last 10 years, 5% real returns are not a pat assumption...for college funds or for retirement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Looking at them now is irrelevant, look at them in 10-20 years. Additionally, you have no idea whether they would've done better with more aid from you or not. Oh gee, the "they are stronger" bit. I think this is more so an excess for being cheap, than anything else.
No, I'll never know for sure how they would have turned out if I had just given them an enormous handout. I do know without a doubt that my own success is a direct result of the incredible confidence-building effect of putting myself through school. I see the same signs already in my kids...confidence, appreciation for the value of work and money. They are strong and running on their own power.

I have a friend that put his daughter through a couple years at Texas A&M and a cost of over $40K per year...she had what it takes to succeed, but she goofed off and flunked out. I watched a bunch of spoiled classmates playing Dungeons and Dragons, Poker, and Spades night after night in the dorm rather than studying, and most didn't come back after the first year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Due to the power of compounding financial aid from parents can make the difference of being a pawn or on top.
And if Paris Hilton's parents hadn't left her $20 million, she wouldn't be nearly as wealthy now, either. It isn't a race...I prefer to focus on the ability to have enough, not whether or not I or my children have more than somebody else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Everything is in extremes to you. You either don't provide anything or your a "trustifarian". There is a rather happy middle ground, namely helping your kids financially when they show aptitude and interest in things and making them work for any extra ordinary consumables.
Working without a net forges a different kind of person. When you rely on others to provide some/all of your means, it's not the same experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
I'm thinking you don't know what upper-class families are like as you are unlikely to encounter them at all, let along on a daily basis. You see, they don't exactly mix with the lower classes much.
I got to know a bunch of them while in graduate school. I went mid-career with a lot of work experience and my employer paying the very expensive tuition. A lot of the rich kids were there right after finishing their undergrad work. A fair number of them were there going through the motions...it was an exercise in getting the proper pedigree to add to the family name before Mommy and Daddy got them their first job. Some were very bright.

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Why? Are you under the impression that nobody should study music, art, theater etc? If someone shows an aptitude and strong interest in say music, why force them to study engineering? They are far more likely to make a good living with music than engineering in this case. Contrary to what you want to believe, there are a number of jobs in music, art, theater, etc most of which are well paying.

My daughter and a few family friends have worked at the chain bookstores off and on through the years. There are lots of people in those stores with degrees in music, art, and theater working for peanuts because their academic work left them unprepared for the working world. Study of the humanities used to be a minor for most people really interested in it, with a major field of study oriented towards gainful employment.

On what basis do you suggest that "most" jobs in music, art, and theater are well paying? I have to raise the BS flag on that one...most people I know doing that kind of work are not living high on the hog.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 07:47 AM
 
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
5,517 posts, read 9,409,301 times
Reputation: 2547
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
This is typical for white lower-middle class to middle class families. But it has a number of disadvantages. Your kids are in a sense your greatest retirement savings, helping them at their start of their life is likely to pay off towards the end of yours. Refusing to help them because it will "make them strong" is likely to be meant with a similar attitude when you're older.

Of course the opposite extreme has negative consequences too, giving your kids everything they want is not good. But helping your kids with college, buy a home, start a business, etc is a way of giving them a head start in life. As an investment its likely to pay off in numerous ways.

I think a lot of boomers are going to be surprised at how unhelpful their kids are when they age, but after continuously telling their kids that they should stop whining and and "do things themselves" it should be expected.

I grew up lower middle class, with 2 siblings, and I got little of what I wanted. However, the one thing that I received was a college education. I will do my best to offer any of my future children the same.

I think its incredibly selfish for parents with the means to assist, or completely pay for their childrens education, to instead, spend it on themselves and toss their kids to the wolves. Its amazing to wonder why so many of them end up coming home to live with mommy and daddy when their $500-$1000 a month student loan payments are sinking them in their $10 an hour job. It doesnt make them stronger at all, it just retards their transition in to self sufficient adulthood by 5-10 years.

A college education these days is almost standard these days to make any sort of living, why exactly, shouldnt parents try to provide their children with that?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
5,517 posts, read 9,409,301 times
Reputation: 2547
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Huh? I'm talking about saving $1,000~$2,000 a year for 18 years. If parents start saving the moment the kid is born its not too hard to save for their college.

Working during college is counter-productive. To really succeed you're going to want to get involved in as many things as you can and that leaves little time for work. Just going to college and taking classes is a direct path to mediocre job, you need to get involved in projects etc. If you play your cards right you may be able to get a paid research assistantship though.

This is 100% true. It is well known that the best and highest paying jobs go to kids with high GPAs and lots of contacts and internships. Its many times more difficult achieving those things when you are spending most of your non-class/non sleep time at a job.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top