In my house the >8 years old the kids start paying rent. They get paid for normal house work (minimum wage). Rent is ~$300/month. I pay the kid minimum wage for chores because that is work and work should be rewarded. They pay me rent. That rent and other expenses are ~80% of their pay. Some must go to savings and "taxes". They have to keep books as well. The rest is theirs.

I know other fathers that charge their adult children rent, keep the money, and then gift it to them at the wedding or to help them buy a house.

▲

pllbnk 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I understand that such a game of life might be beneficial for a child. But I would like to understand the reasoning to do that with an adult.

> I know other fathers that charge their adult children rent, keep the money, and then gift it to them at the wedding or to help them buy a house.

This looks like a game which should have ended by the time a child is an adult.

I am raising a very young child so I am very concerned about the future and constantly thinking what's the right way to raise him.

▲

pizzafeelsright 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I know my neighbors very well due to my personality. There are 20-40 year old adults who live with their parents for various reasons. The foolish "children" are those who order door dash at 3am with no income or education. They are unable to 'launch' from their parent's orbit. i feel terrible for these people. As mentioned, I know them well and they do not have an excuse other than laziness and permission. The rule 'those who do not work do not eat' is something all people can agree with but few enforce.

The right way to raise your child is so that they can thrive without you while wanting their children (your grandchildren) to spend time with you. This is a tall order because it requires decades of sacrifice, pain, and difficult yet positive decisions.

	▲	inigyou an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> The rule 'those who do not work do not eat' is something all people can agree Um, no? Thanks for suggesting a possible left/right political litmus test though. We shouldn't have to waste too many resources on "useless people" but I think starving them to death is a bit excessive. We don't have a shortage of food. They're more likely to need mental health services or spiritual guidance to help them not be useless - which they can pay back in taxes if the transformation succeeds.

▲

lief79 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I suspect it depends on the kid. If they are naturally frugal and saving for things (and the household doesn't need the money), then why bother.

If they aren't frugal, and are otherwise suffering from lifestyle creep, then not charging them might be an injustice and setting them up for false expectations/never leaving home.

FYI, I was in the first group because my first job had pay cuts within 2 weeks, and then I discovered I basically spent minimal time at home anyway, so why pay more for it. Let me buy when I wanted to move out.