I’ve heard that in Wisconsin, it’s common for retirees to sell the family home and buy a cabin on a lake. The dad spends his remaining years fishing and enjoying the quiet.

But downsizing to a lower-cost, rural area often means less access to healthcare. Eventually, Dad passes away, and the widow is left snowed in each winter: unable to afford moving back, now that home prices and interest rates have climbed far beyond what they sold for.

> If you can’t afford your home without help, you probably shouldn’t buy one and you don’t have the financial stability needed for it.

My prediction is more and more families will provide down payment support. $2m homes are affordable if you put 100% down and just need to worry about taxes, repairs, and insurance.

Assuming everything else even (career/income, etc), the person with the family assistance will get to own the home pushing the goal post further away from the people that don't have family assistance.

▲

raw_anon_1111 2 days ago | parent [-]

Looking at statistics of how much most people have in income in retirement and how much most depend on social security, people aren’t retiring rich.

While I understand helping your kids to “launch”, letting them move back in for a couple of years after they graduate, subsidizing some of their expenses because they aren’t making enough to live where the opportunities are early on, etc, I never understood why parents pressure themselves helping grown kids buy houses, pay for expensive weddings etc.

I told my parents plenty of times they should “die dead broke” - in other words spend their last dollar on their last breath and not worry about leaving me anything (only child).

▲

itake 2 days ago | parent [-]

I can’t explain the parents pressuring themselves.

if you look at any tier one city’s job centers unless you have a great career, living in a comfortable home near your house just isn’t affordable on a regular person salary.

Which means your kids spend more time in their car and less time parenting their kids.

Many families, especially ones that were careful with their spending, will choose to support their kids and enable them to live in neighborhoods. They couldn’t normally afford on their lower income.

▲

raw_anon_1111 2 days ago | parent [-]

That’s just it, why should parents feel a moral obligation to be careful with their spending above helping their kids through college, helping them early on and then after that, it’s time for parents to “enjoy their best lives”.

But let’s be realistic. The median income of a retired couple is only around $85K a year.

https://www.gobankingrates.com/retirement/planning/what-aver...

The median net worth is around a quarter million.

https://www.cnbc.com/select/average-net-worth-of-americans-a...

Parents should set expectations early on - don’t have any expectations that our job is to make your life easier once you are launched Once you decide to get married and have kids, your life is your responsibility. If my wife and I have any excess after taking care of all of our needs and wants. We will help our adult children. Even now at 51 and 49. Our older son (28) knows that we will help him a little but not much and our younger son 23 knows that the subsidies are cut once he turns 26.

I save “enough” for retirement for my wife and I to be comfortable. But we aren’t over savers. We travel a lot, and enjoy ourselves.

We asked our younger son was he absolutely sure he didn’t want to go college. We told him once he made that choice, we were moving to Florida, left him in Atlanta at our house and he and two of his friends paid us (heavily subsidized) rent for a year and a half and we helped them move out on their own when we sold our home.

We have a two bedroom and one is an office. There is no room for our kids to move back in Even when we leave for months at a time we rent it out as a short term rental (prime location six miles from Disney).

▲

itake 2 days ago | parent [-]

> it’s time for parents to “enjoy their best lives”.

Personally, spending money doesn't bring joy to my life above a certain threshold. Research agrees with this sentiment [0]. I don't believe that a $400 camping trip near my house is 10x worse than $4000 trip to Europe. Likewise, you moving to FL (reducing lifestyle costs by 20%) doesn't make your life 20% worse than wherever you were living before.

My issue with broad national or global surveys is they are largely meaningless on the individual level. You could be double the national income/wealth, but you still can't retire in Manhattan (if that is where you want to live due to being near your kids). Also, why stop at national? Why not compare yourself to global income/wealth?

But circling back to the original point: If the next generation wants to live in a good area [2] in a tier1 city, the either need to the top 10% of their field or their parents need to lift them up. If someone wants to skip college to pursue plumbing, great! but they will never be able to compete with DINK tech/finance/medical households or trust fund kids bidding on properties in Buckhead.

Land isn't growing, but population is. Even if only 1% of the parents each year subsidize their kid's housing, as t approaches infinity, cities will be filled with DINK and trust fund families.

[0] - https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/does-more-money-correlate-g...

[1] - https://www.amazon.com/Die-Zero-Getting-Your-Money/dp/035856...

	▲	raw_anon_1111 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		And most people don’t live in a tier 1 city and they are fine. It’s not our responsibility as parents to fund extravagant life choices. They don’t have to live in Buckhead either. I have one son that lives in North Cobb and the other lives in Gwinnett. Heck when I lived in metro Atlanta, I lived in Marietta, Decatur, John’s Creek and finally outside of Cumming. I’m looking at the apartment I use to live in Marietta that I paid $700 a month for in 2003 and it’s now $1100 a month and still gets decent reviews. And why would an older person want to live in Manhattan? You remember I live in Florida the state where a lot of retirees come to get away from cold weather, their expensive homes, etc. And as you can tell, I’m not attached to my children I loved them. But we feel no need to be under them constantly. Our jobs are done. It’s up to them to find their own way in life. I moved from my parents the week after I graduated from college. They helped me launch and subsidized me to live to Atlanta early on. People can’t always have what they want - thst goes for children wanting to be in an expensive city or parents wanting to be near their kids. Even though in my social circle of mostly 10% of earners, we aren’t really that tied to our grown kids wanting to live near them. We want to have our own lives. Admittedly, most 50 year olds don’t have the freedom we have with low expenses, only one person working and working remotely. As far as money, we don’t spend much on things. But we do spend on experiences, travel by ourselves and with friends and crossing off our bucket list.