These parents are under no obligation to throw THEIR hard-earned money away. Their daughter may have made a bad choice but she has to live with that or change her situation. Having a house won’t make “Josh” a better husband or father. He is a bum and most likely is not going to change. DON”T THROW YOUR MONEY AWAY!!!

Tell your daughter that she and Mr. Bum will appreciate the house more if they save for it themselves, then drop the topic for good. “There will be no discussion.” Do NOT “loan” them the money, you’ll probably never see it again, especially if the guy is a bum. They will always have an excuse as to why they can’t pay you this month. Been there, done that. Also, you don’t want to become bill collectors the rest of your life and ruin the relationship with your daughter. Trust me on this, my wife and I are out thousands due to “loans” that were never repaid. They are now what we call “gifts”. We have given up trying to collect and we had legal paperwork at the time we loaned the money. It just isn’t worth pursuing our daughter in court.

Also, regardless of how you feel about your son-in-law, if she loves him, not much you can do about it…sorry. Our daughter is in an physically abusive relationship with a married man, living with him in fact. She knows we disapprove of this and him and now won’t talk to us. Be careful how you handle that aspect of her life or you may lose your daughter in the process like we have.

Good luck, be firm.

Run for it Josh!!!

The whole predatory lending thing is bunk. It was an option people had and understood when they signed their contracts. I nearly signed one too for a 3 year ARM, and you know what my thought process and most people I’ve talked to was?

It was that in 3 years I’ll just sell it for more than I paid for it, live in a house worth more than I can afford, drive a nice car and then at the end, use the $50k equity to pay off all my debts and pocket a little cash. Well guess what, the reprecussions of that are, with everything thinking the same, there’s going to be a glut of unsaleable homes all on the market around the same time when your deferred payment starts skyrocketing!

I made a good decision, I signed a 30 year fixed, and even with buying my home in CA a year before the bubble peaked, I’m still upside down in my loan about $100,000-$120,000. About 30% of the original $345,000 value.

My question to all the people who want rates frozen, payments forgiven, and a handout given for making a poor choice, where is my loan value reduction to market value that a lot of these politicians are proposing for people with ARM’s? I lost my job, got 3 months behind on my mortgage, but guess what, I work hard and made it back up and am now rebuilding my savings account. Where is my $100,000 gift because these other people that couldn’t actually afford these homes drove up the prices so astronomically?

Also, for those not in CA, a $345,000 first home was pretty cheap 3 years ago, to be in a nice neighborhood that was about as low as one could be found. Also, I started this whole proccess when I was 21, newly wed(my wife was 19, almost 20) with no help from family at all on my own credit rating!

I’m getting so tired of people expecting hand-outs, bail-outs and other GIMME GIMME programs. And honestly, when I see the Social Security tax coming out of my paycheck every month for a program that will be insolvent and long gone by the time I’m probably even 40 and know that if I could simply put that money every month into a Roth IRA I could have close to a million dollars by the time I’m 40 thanks to the gift of compounding interest, it makes me want to vomit.

I have an interesting perspective too, right now in Elk Grove and Stockton, CA, where we’re leading the nation(or at least in the top 10) for foreclosure rates. I work in a business where I see a lot of people trying to buy expensive cars, secure financing and not taking any responsibility. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard “Oh, I’m going to put no money down, my credit should be pretty good, and I won’t pay more than $750 a month for this $50,000 car.” These are usually the people with an income around $4,000 a month, if that, with their credit card balances run up to close to 90% of maximum (typically 10-20k if not more) and a house in FORECLOSURE (sometimes they’re trying to buy this stuff BEFORE it hits their credit report). When I tell these same people they need $35,000 down on that $50,000 car, their interest rate is 24.99% and their payments are $750 a month with their large down payment I get to hear the sob story about how they were taken advantage of and it wasn’t their fault they lost their house. Most of these people too were TOLD up front their mortgage payments were going to be reaching over $3000 a month BEFORE they signed a contract, and they did anyways. Heck, I even had one person tell me “I had the chance to live the high life and didn’t care if I couldn’t sell out at the end, I had fun while it lasted”. COME ON!!!!!! These are the people getting hand-outs, it’s sickening.

Let me take Russell’s point one further: Only those who have defended our nation by serving active duty in the military should have the right to vote. So there.

Wow, lots of comments. The in-laws may be right about their son-in-law, but they may not. I’m always a little suspicious of women who gripe about the men they won’t leave (and I’m female). And the daughter, at a minimum, has complained about her husband going out too much to her parents. Down payments need to be earned by the people who are going to be paying the mortgage. Giving down payments is a bad idea that teaches young people to not be self-sufficient. And although many of the creative financing ideas are correct, having one spouse own the house that the couple lives in together is not going to improve the marriage. I can hear the arguments now…

Oh dear, once again, Liz, you miss the boat and the point.

Poll taxes were outlawed (as was the language test, etc.)…as an unfair burden on those who couldn’t pay.

No argument; they should have been.

Federal and state taxation are, however, the obligation of every citizen and paying SOMETHING - even $1 - into the system should be a pre-condition for voting.

No one, period, should be exempt from income taxes - even at $7 per hour, one should pay SOMETHING.

Offensive - sure, to those who don’t pay taxes or believe that 40% taxation for me and 18% for you is “fair,”…my, how the language has evolved!

At the minimum, those who pay no taxes should NEVER be able to vote for representatives who tax ME.

The motto of the Revolution, of course, was “no taxation without representation.” To this, I shout: “no representation without fair taxation.”

I can’t believe the nerve of the daughter to expect her parents to fork over their money for HER house!!! That’s her problem, not theirs. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but owning a home is a luxury, not a right. Ol’ hubby needs to step up and quit wasting their money on partying. Bailing out your children for stuff like this will not help them in the least.

When I help with a down payment, it is always in the form of a registered second mortgage. Full re payment on demand with 90 days notice, 0% interest and no monthly payments. If the marriage fails I’m protected, and if all goes well forgiving the debt makes a nice tenth wedding anniversary gift.

It’s obvious that these people don’t like their son-in-law. A man with a toddler who who goes out with his friends 3 times a week doesn’t strike me as a bum. We don’t know if he’s just having a beer with his friends after work or coming home at 3:00 am and passing out.

That said, the writers have no obligation to help with a down payment for a house. Offering money only to they daughter looks like they’re trying to split them up. It would be in their best interest to respect their daughter’s marriage, especially if her child is their only grandchild. They don’t have to like their son-in-law, but their daughter has no obligation to let them see their grandchild.

As far as voting and taxes, poll taxes were outlawed in the 1960s for a reason.

By contributing to what you do not support you continue to enable the bum and keep the daughter in a state of blissful wishful ignorance. Set aside the money for the grandkids’ college, private school, whatever, but if you don’t support the situation, do not pour your income into something that will wind up on the negotiating table in a divorce. By contributing to the welfare of the CHILD, you in turn free the parents from the concern, THUS enabling them (if they are smart and saavy about their money) to have that much more potential disposable income to save and put toward the purchase of a house. The parent is NEVER under an obligation to assist the child. It’s THEIR hard earned money, and they have earned both the cash and the right to do with it what they please (including NOTHING at all.). And only they know the situation the best. Trust the gut and leave the checkbook out of it for anything that bum-in-law will directly benefit from.

First, the “point” of this article…

1) Definitely the decision of the parents. EVERYONE is different. It helps some on the road to a great life, it puts other down a financial death spiral. (Personally, with what we’re given, put the checkbook away)

2) Going out 3 nights a week with his buddies, with a toddler at home? Does he think he’s 18? And many people in these postings said this is fine? Wow.

3) The parent said “going out with his buddies”, which makes us think “drinking” and such. Given that, Let’s do some math, using some wild*ss assumptions: 3 nights/week X 4 beers/night X $4 per beer … starts looking like roughly $50/week.. X 4 weeks a month… $200/month will start getting you someplace. Not fast, but its a start.

Now for the rest of the entries

1) Russell, will you run for office? Please do.

2) “Offended”? Are we so worried about being politically correct that we can’t say what needs said? No voting without paying taxes offends people? Most likely, people not paying taxes, I’d assume.

Someone in an earlier entry mentioned “Atlas Shrugged”. Read this. Then read “fall of roman empire”. I also recommend listening to “Economics” by Prof Timothy Taylor (not the Home Improvement guy). Google him.

I can’t remember off hand who said this, but there was a quote that went something like “A democracy can only last 50 years or so after the voters realize they can vote themselves money from the public coffers”. Most people believe that happened around 1970.

And now, back to the topic at hand. I wouldn’t do it, but this is still America, and they can give/loan/lend her money if they wish.

Reading these comments I find myself appalled at the beating Russell has been receiving….amazing!

Facts:

40% of Americans who actually file pay NEGATIVE taxes - that is, receive more money from the system than they have paid in

10% of Americans who actually file pay no taxes

50% do pay taxes

10% of Americans pay 70% of the income taxes

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income taxes

About a third of Americans who work/recieve benefits don’t file and thus aren’t counted.

This means that a bit more than a third of Americans actually pay income taxes. About 2/3 of Americans pay payroll (FICA, etc.) taxes.

Yes, indeed, that’s a “fair share,” being paid, isn’t it? Think about the social rifts here - 40% bear all the burden. 10% bear most of the burden.

Do you seriously believe that this system can continue? The losers and freeloaders mentioned in the column are merely indicative of the GIMME attitude in America, which is best examplified by its system of taxation.

Replace the IRS with a national sales tax - 10% - add billions to the economy in productivity by eliminating the drones - government workers, lawyers, some CPAs, and more.

Add a 1% income tax to everyone who makes more than $200K per year, JUST TO MAKE CERTAIN the poor downtrodden realize they can still scalp those who work, and work hard, for their living - and target EVERY SINGLE DOLLAR to training and education - real training, real education - not K-12 administrative nonsense.

Maybe then, once these issues are addressed, can we expect a 27 year old to actually WORK and EARN the right to purchase a home!

The problem goes far beyond our freeloading bum, his ignorant spouse, and their co-dependent parents.

It is parents responsibility to assist kids. They are responsible since they … gave birth .

Based on the statement and question what should we do?
It’s obvious the in-laws despise the husband. So we pass judement with only half the story. Based on the description, Josh sounds like an uncaring ogre of sorts. Then again, 3 nights out with the boys is such a big deal? Is he out whoring, drinking, gambling or at the strip club? Or is he a volunteer at his local religious establishment? I suspect the truth somewhere between. But doesn’t that activity make a huge impact on your perception of what is happening in this marriage?
If they can’t afford a house, go buy a co-op or a condo. Anyone notice the subprime mess and credit crunch? Family bail out plans never work and tend to leave at least one party either openly upset or silently angry.
Let them stand on their own and stay out of the way. Donate money to your grandchild in the form of a 529 plan or consult an attorney and set up a trust.
By the way, if you’re rich, it was hard earned, but if it’s insignificant and amounts to pocket change to you, then that’s a different story. In that instance, perhaps you should support the love and faith that your daughter has, rather than being too cyncial. Either way tread with caution.

Indeed, linking the right to vote to those who pay taxes DOES raise some troubling questions….as does Death & Taxes arguing I should be “careful,” about even DISCUSSING the issue.

As usual, the contrapositive argument holds - linking the right to tax ME to those who don’t contribute or suffer from the system (that is, don’t pay the taxes they impose) is equally problematic, and well worth discussing (no matter how carefully).

I further submit my “rant,” may have offended most of America in “one line or another,” as asserted. It is about time SOMEONE be offended by what that “rant,” is about: freeloaders (like the bum & daughter subjects of this forum) and the endimic nature of freeloading (as represented in the ONE example I have discussed, our tax-and-spend, credit-based, consumer-centric society).

If you are offended by the bum & daughter, so am I. I am offended by the parents, as well, who have not taught their offspring the basics of survival in a monetary economy.

Doubtless these parents will drain their own retirement accounts to assist these able-bodied children with their lifestyle. Doubtless these parents will, 20 years from now, be lobbying for increased Federal benefits to cover their current irresponsiblity.

Offended? You bet.

These parents are horrible people.

Russell,

I hope you were being facetious when you suggested that you were “rich” because both you and your wife earn in excess of $100k a year. If not, you are suffering from a similar delusion as most of America. Wealth equates to Assets less Liabilities. You can earn $500k a year and be in the poorhouse if your Liabilities exceed your Assets. Britney Spears, although having a high income, is worth less than most of Middle America as she rides her monthly cash flow as close as she can to bounced checks.

If you were being facetious, touché! It’s the dang tax system, democrats and the subprime freeloaders that are keeping hardworking people like us from becoming rich. I am sorry to hear that your son was accepted to Harvard. I hope they do not corrupt his mind!

Adopt a new daughter. Ditch the loser. She is a gonner anyway.

Dime a dozen.

Russell Jefferds(a few down), your rant is off the point and manages to offend the majority of America in one line or another. …

Russell,

You are right about one thing. The parents are under no obligation to give their child money. That appears to be the overwhelming sentiment here, and it’s probably why this thread turned political …

Two words of unsolicited advice:

1-Don’t presume that those of us who are okay with the current tax system are freeloading the benefits. My check to the tax man was every bit as high as yours last year. I might be better off paying less, but it’s a payment many in higher brackets happily make.

2-Please be careful when discussing limiting suffrage to those with the economic status sufficient to pay into the system. Economics and race have a troubled relationship in our country, and … [linking the right to vote to being a taxpayer raises some troubling] questions. …

Loan the money to them and charge them interest that is below market lending rate but above CD rate. Hire a real estate lawyer (a few hundred $$) who knows what he/she is doing to see this through. Win Win!

It amazes me that … a bunch of people … whine about taxes, they complain about the government, all the while taking money (forgetting that a Republican president has to sign any law).

No offense, but she should divorce him right away. Her husband is a worthless idiot who needs to be taken care of. He is dragging his family down. Let him go drown in debt by himself.

oh, and somebody needs to ask what bob in seattle a couple posts down is talking about, he’s rambling on about nothing related?

She’s probably one of those hot chicks who fell for the jerky bad guys instead of the nice ones who will actually have a future.

Hate when that happens

My my my! How the fact that I have worked HARD to earn what I have has depressed, angered, embittered, and otherwise ticked off folks on this board!

Austin is closest to right - my primary home (paid for in full) is valued at about $800K. Probably would sell today for $600K, but….since I paid $300K for it, I am not worried.

Again, all you Socialists MISS THE POINT!

If the parents here WANT to give the money, let them. My advice is not to.

My government can not and should not have the right to STEAL from me to fund YOUR folly.

Kidney transplant? OK, I’m in, I’ll support that, whether you are poor, rich, drunk, or not. Need a hand dealing with the crooks & wardheelers? Yep, I’ll cringe and reach for my checkbook.

I note though that all the liberals here who support wealth transfer are recipients of that largesse! Even the President can’t sign legislation raising (its) own salary - but you can tax the living CRAP out of the productive all you like.

I now come out and say it: the franchise (sorry, for those of you who attended public school, the right to vote) should be extended only to those who pay the bills.

There. It’s on the record. No tax, no vote. No contribution to the commonwheal, no vote. It’s that freaking simple.

Even the United Negro College Fund asks for a hand, not a handout. You and me, dear American friends of means, are about to embark on the greatest handout in human history.

All to support the feckless, worthless, and weak.

“Lesson: Do not get married until you are 30 or older, otherwise odds are that you will get divorced within 3 years. Work hard and save money until then! ”

That is actually not the lesson, and indeed nothing in the article even hints at your conclusion. While maturity *is* a factor in maintaing a long and healthy marriage, there are plenty of young couples who stay together, and there are many older couples (especially serial divorcees) who make divorce lawyers very rich.

Indeed, advising a woman to wait until 30 to get married is fool hardy advice since:

1. Fertily starts to decline in a female around age 24, and the fall can be quite rapid.

2. Men above 30 often do not want to marry since they are more set in their ways and have developed single lifestyles that they do not want to change. Whether they are highly successful with women such that they can met their needs without marriage OR they are men who were ignored by the women until a stable provider is needed as she ages, older men often do not see marriage as a benefit and will avoid it.

I can’t believe how many comments this has generated. I like the original advice of keeping the checkbook closed. My parents taught me how to survive and that everything I was going to get would have to be earned. They gave me advice, not financial gifts. Usually that advice was to go work hard for what you want and you will probably get it.

If you don’t work, you’re a bum. Taking care of 1 child is not work. If you think it is, you have a sad life. So we all know who the real bum is here!

Lesson: Do not get married until you are 30 or older, otherwise odds are that you will get divorced within 3 years. Work hard and save money until then! YOU HAVE TO POSITION YOURSELF FOR THE FUTURE INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN HEADFIRST. I’m 25 years old and have been furthering my education (MBA) and saving as much as possible. My friends go out a few nights during the week and every night on the weekends….not me. Unfortunately, I go out only once a week now, but am easily saving $250/week or more. I have under $13k so far in undergrad/grad loans, no credit card debt, $18k in stocks, a solid emergency fund, and own a $450k house with my 2 brothers (we rent 1 floor). Yes, I have been making a lot of sacrifices, but that’s how hard working people get ahead in life. People, especially girls, my age today expect that everything should be given to them, when in fact they should be appreciative of what they already have….a brighter future bc of the hard work of their parents.

Reading many of these comments makes me wonder if most people have missed the point in regards to what they are replying to. Instead of constructive advice, this is a collection of political rants, bragging, moral judgments, etc.

If you have nothing positive to contribute, then you probably shouldn’t.

Why work in America when you can ride for free?

I am an educated White Male, and many people have asked me why I have never considered pursuing business opportunities. A friend of mine went so far as to whip out the ol pocket book on the spot during one such conversation.

I always remind them of two things: 1) taxes are outrageous in this country and 2) everyone wants to sue at the drop of a hat.

I think I and a few of my friends could probably build a prototype car that could run on ordinary tap water, and we could probably do it in 5 years. We could then start our own motorcar company and revolutionize the industry. But why? Why risk such an effort only to loose it some low life jerk in an obviously insane lawsuit (ie the McDonalds Hot Coffee lawsuit)? Or why pursue the dream, only to have the government tax you into oblivion 5 years into your business plan - all because you made ‘too much’ money?

When the candidates talk about ‘making sure everyone pays their fair share’ - who do you think they are talking about? It sure is not the people that are working a few months, and then living the other six months on welfare!

I won’t take life to the next level and live to my full potential because I can live easier with my wife and kids enjoying the status quo! Let people like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, et al. worry about taxes!

I don’t want the headache!

I think this is crazy. I am 29, have been married for 1.5 years, have never been above middle class, and purchased my 4th home when I got married. My wife is a teacher, so no, she didn’t fund it. It’s all about hard work and sound decision making. My mom helped by 1k in closing costs when I bought my first home. I now rent it out just like my 2nd and 3rd homes. My current home is a nice 3500sf cape cod style in a good neighborhood. The most help I have had was a joint venture with parents on a rental (I was strapped and a good deal fell in my lap) I was able to do most of this by buying the homes no one else wanted in good areas and managing my money wisely. We plan to build our dream home in 2 years. Middle class, early 30’s, 4500sf dream home… go figure.

One thing ole Mother-In-Law doesn’t say is if Melissa thinks the husband is no-good. The “going out” three nights a week might be the arrangement. And what does “going out” mean? He goes for a few beers from 7pm to 9pm (which I think is ok)? Or he heads out at 10pm and doesn’t roll in until 3am, smelling like perfume and beer (which I think is not ok)? I think people also need to consider that ole mother-in-law may either (a) not fully know how these two conduct their relationship, or (b) she is overbearing and sticking her opinion where it isn’t wanted. I think we all know a mother-in-law who offers her opinions and values where they shouldn’t be. Consider that Josh might be working full-time plus and is what many of us would think of as an excellent father and provider. Now, even if Josh is a good guy, not sure I would loan or give them any money yet, but let’s lay off Josh unless you know the facts.

This why people should have to have a license to have children. Three nights a week out with his buddues… he should not be married if he is still wanting that life. I would hope he would want to get a sitter and go out with his wife. Whether she works or not is not the point, I bet she works harder in a day than he works in a week if he can muster the energy to go out three nights a week! Leave his butt home with the toddler, and watch him panic!!! The parents should have a heart-to-heart with the daughter and hope she sees the light

Paul,
The level of services here is far better than most (you included) are willing to admit when you look at your alternatives. There are 13 moderately developed nations in the world with lower state/federal/social security taxes than the highest US rates. Note this excludes VAT taxes, real estate transfer taxes, etc., which are through the roof in most of these places. So, here are your choices.

Worse services: Poland, Greece, Mexico, Hungary, Turkey, Czech Rep, Slovakia, and Korea. People in these countries pay the highest rate at a lifestyle equal to $15,000 to $60,000 income per year. Have fun.

Other choices: New Zealand and the UK. Have fun with the housing costs, estate fees, and VAT not included. You’ll pay at the highest rate when your income hits about $50K.

Your other choices are subsized through geothermal (Iceland), North Sea Oil (Norway), or being a tax haven for multinationals (Luxembourg).

Most of the comments are so biased against the male right up front and jumping to stereotypical conclusions. If I said my daugher-in-law is going out three nights a week ,what would be your response? That she deserves it? That she needs a break from the kids? Well, why doesn’t he?

We don’t know who works outside the bome or for how many hours. We don’t know if he/she’s a stay at home dad/mom. We don’t know if she was begging for a child and he said he didn’t want one, but would do it just for her. We don’t know if she *chooses* to spend more time with the toddler.

Nevertheless, unless there is some unusual circumstance in their life that isn’t really in their control, then have them stand on their own two feet. It doesn’t matter if he’s really a bum or not. There’s already enough people around who think they’re entitled to everything they want when they want it. Real life requires us to learn to make choices: kids or fancy cars, house or boat, cable tv or milk, steak or children’s clothes. The sooner an adult learns to make choices the better.

Dear Democrats,

Thank you for all of your monetary support. I closed on my first home recently, with $17,750.00 of your help. I’d like to say that without your contributions, it wouldn’t have been possible to purchase my piece of the American Dream – but I’d be lying.

What is the American Dream? Arguably, it can encompass any number of things; but traditionally, it refers to a journey of hard work and self-reliance that leads to a piece of ground and an abode of your own.

Thank you, Democrats, for eliminating the hard work and self-reliance from the equation. Why scrimp and save, deny myself the Joe’s Jeans and Louis Vuitton bags, forgo another round of shots, eschew the fancy car payment, when the Democrats are back on the Hill, voting for another free ride?

Sure, I could have waited and socked away a piece of my paycheck each month for another year or two for closing costs, chatted up mom and pop for a small downpayment, and made the leap to homeownership the traditional way. I am perfectly and totally capable of it – I have the determination to stick to it, the courage to walk by the Coach store without looking, and the education to understand that the sacrifices are well worth the future pay-off.

But thank you, Democrats, for making all that effort so unnecessary. Your service is furthering not just the American Dream, but the American Way. You know, the way everyone deserves, even has a right to, something for nothing.

The real tragedy here is that this money could have made a bigger difference in someone else’s life. Don’t think I don’t appreciate it – I’m ecstatic to have been able to attain so much, so young, with so little stress – but someone could have bought a home for her family, taken her first step on the path to a secure financial future, set a cornerstone for stability in her topsy-turvy world.

But why expend the energy contemplating another’s fortunes? That’s not the American Way! Thank you, Democrats, for alleviating self-responsibility in this country. Your welfare programs have certainly helped someone out – me!

Thank you, Democrats, for giving me the opportunity to say those three words – no, not “God Bless America.” No, not “I love you.” No, not even “Thank you, Democrats.” You know the three:

I GOT MINE.

My in-laws loaned us the down payment on our first house. The house was $100,000 about 16 years ago. At the time, my husband had been working for a few years after graduating from college, and I had already been working a few more years more than him. Saving up for the down payment was just hard at the time, and we had rent to pay. The small house was a great deal, and it was new construction, so he asked his parents for help. They said yes but there was nothing formal about payment plans or anything like that. They said just pay us when you have the money. We’ve been paying them several thousand dollars here and there over the years. We had absolutely no problems paying the mortgage or maintaining the house. Three kids later and we’re now in our second, bigger, home. We bought our current house with the proceeds that we made from selling the first house. My in-laws eventually decided that we don’t have to pay them back for the loan. They said to save the money for our kids’ college. We are doing fine financially, but they know that we have a lot of expenses with 3 kids.

My point is this, if your kids are responsible adults, why not help them out? We never asked for anything else, just a loan for a down payment, and we kept up with all the expenses that come with owning a house. We’re very grateful for their generosity.

I believe as well, leave the checkbook in the drawer. With the housing market as is and things not looking good for a while, people need to be more tight with their money. I know you love your daughter and grandchild, but she needs to make it on her own, and prove she can do it, before you shell out anything for her or her bum. If you really want to help, set up a college fund for your grandchild that can only be added to, so that no on can siphon from it when the amount grows.

My parents received an “inheritance advance” to purchase their house from their parents. My paternal grandparents inherited a house two years after they married, and my materal grandparents inherited a farm. My husband and I received a check from his parents to do likewise on our wedding day… and they live in a home that they were given by my MIL’s parents.

How is it so unusual for parents to assist in the purchase of a home? If the parents can afford it, will not be sacrificing their retirement savings, and offer to do so, where is the harm? I find a slight issue in “Melissa and Josh” asking for money, but if the parents wish to refuse, they have every right to do so as well.

As a resident of Texas - a 16k tax bill on a primary residence declared as a homestead (for exemption purposes) would put the valuation of his home at roughly 750k with an effective 2.1558 tax rate [Austin's rate]

I find it pretty damn hard to listen to a chump here in Texas whine about how little money he has when he’s rockin a 2nd home. Live within your means, bro.

John Allen Paulos published a book in 1989 on “Innumeracy” (Lack of understanding of numbers and the problems it causes).

A great many Americans don’t have any understand of how to balance a checkbook, create a simple financial statement, start a retirement savings program, obtain a loan to buy a car, etc.

This can lead to disastrous credit card debt, and the worst sins of all, too-frequent automobile purchases, gambling, over-borrowing for consumer toys, lack of understanding of how statistics rules your life, etc.

High schools teach many useless things. We see the effects of financial innumeracy in our society every day, with consumers paying 15-21% on their credit card debt!

Giving money to people like that is like passing it through a paper shredder.

sanjosemike

An idea would be for the parents to provide a down payment, put the house in THEIR name and let the kids rent it via paying the mortgage bill. If the marriage does indeed breakup, then the “bum” moves out, and their daughter and grandchild can either stay in the house (unlikely due to the expense) and/or the parents can then sell it and be sure to get their money back.

“Death & Taxes,” misunderstands - again - my position.

The CAPX gains were paid as a result of exercising stock options; aforesaid tax being accrued on the delta between the strike price and the market price on the day of exercise.

The fact that the stock tanked WHILE THE SHARES WERE BEING DELIVERED (below the strike prices) did NOT alleviate the tax burden. No way, no how; and further I cannot take the losses in any one given tax year.

Bottom line: the services received by me are worth say 10% of my income, or perhaps even 20%. The services paid for by ME and received by the 50% of Americans who pay no Federal taxes (of which 20% actually pay negative taxes, even with payroll taken into account) are doubtless very valuable to that population.

I appreciate all of the reductio-ad-absurdem arguments made in the classical attempt to make me feel “guilty,” for not being cheerful about “my fair share,” rather than focusing on the overarching issue: one of handouts.

The article is against an intrafamily handout. I am against that, but much more so against the interfamily handouts I am FORCED to support against my will.

Those folks who bought houses and can’t pay for them are unfortunate, no doubt. Those who argue that they DESERVE my money to correct THEIR folly are also unfortunate, and humorous as well.

Rome fell as a result of bread and circuses paid by the Empire (read that, the rich) to keep the less-than-rich quiescent. Such largesse ALWAYS fails.

Ayn Rand has it right - sooner or later folks like me will simply give up.

By the way, I own the houses I mention free and clear; further, my son was admitted to Harvard yesterday - for their early entrance program.

Intelligence wins out, and effort pays off. My efforts should not be subsidizing the vast majority of Americans too lazy or too stupid or too both to succeed. The entire family focused in the “bum,” article is such.

Wow - interesting read of comments posted to this page.

I will not attempt to answer any one particular comment made here, or even the article that sparked all of this, but I know how to spell ‘responsibility’, and know how to live it too.

I left home at 19, and I completed a 4 year degree at a State University in 11 years of night school - I worked hard to earn it, and I put off marriage and other life pursuits until it was done, with the understanding that I could enjoy the finer things in life if I worked hard *first*. My mom and dad did not pay for my education, nore did any beneficial employer - I paid for it.

I married, and my *younger* wife immediately starting nagging that we needed to buy a house. Educating her to reality was a big challenge, but it paid off in the end. We had to pay off all her credit card debt, and that took several years to finish.

All said and done, we have almost finished paying a 30 year standard mortgage for a significant amount of $$$ in five years. It has been tough, but when we are paid off, it’s ours.

We did not ask anyone for handouts, we did not look for instant gratification, and we did not resort to guilt trips against our families. And yes, my mother-in-law does not like me either, and no - I don’t stay out three nights a week. And no - we did not take the easy route of an ARM to get into a home that we could not afford - either the mortgage or the taxes!

It seems that some of the people in this land have no concept of what hard work is, or how to pursue a dream through hard work and saving money. It’s like the wise man once said - if someone hands a person a crutch, they will use it, instead of learning how to stand on their own two feet. In this case, the government is bailing out the Mortgage industry when they clearly should not, and the big banks are handing out credit cards like it was free.

Lack of responsibility, easy access to credit with little/no responsibility, and Government bail-outs are what are destroying this country!

Let them buy their own house. It will mean more to them in the end. The parents’ money should be used to support their retirement. If there’s any left over, then it can go to the daughter in the will.

If the husband wanted to go out every other night, he should have stayed a bachelor.

I quite agree that investing in an asset which be jointly owned by your daughter and a son in-law who you do not like is a bad idea. I strongly suggest that in order to protect yourself and your daughter in the worst case scenario, which is her husband being separated from her, you should not give them that money. If her husband is unable to care for his family, too bad. In any case, if she ever gets separated from him, you can support her with some of this investment. If he really needs money, whatever happened to the banks?

Russell,

Income @ $208K will not trigger $46,000 in tax.

Gross of $208K with all of the deductions will be in the $38-42 range w/ cap gain tax. Unless he really got the shaft on AMT.

Also, you and your chick need to max out your 401 and dump the second house.

I do not get the excise tax on the cars . . . I live here and do not have to pay that. I think Russell’s jive does not add up.

Russell - drop me a line so I can make sure you prepared your taxes correctly.

To those of you criticizing Russell for his “choosing” to be taxed by working and owning property:

By working harder, smarter, and being willing to take on greater risks and responsibilities, some people sometimes earn more than others. Maybe instead of trying to ostracize Russell, you should be taking a lesson from his playbook.

Or maybe you could live to your own “standards” and not own property so that you don’t get taxed at a “higher percentage” of your income.

Like the daugher & son in law in this article, people need to grow up and take responsibility for THEMSELVES and stop expecting Mommy, Daddy, and the Nanny-State to take care of them.

I paid my way through college by manual labor… essentially working my ass off.

I worked my butt off again to be the top sales rep at 3 different companies in the computer industry over the last 15 years.

I lived well below my means and had my first house paid off at age 35. I drove cars for 10 years so I could invest the money that I saved.

My w-2 this year will be over 500k… and I cringe knowing that the around 200k that I pay to Uncle Sam this year will help bail out ridiculous idiots that lived ABOVE their means and made BAD decisions on their mortgage.

This country needs to learn WORK ETHIC and realize that you need to LEARN to be financially RESPONSIBLE. Take accountability for what you do, including buying houses.

I agree, I don’t see why the guy is such a “bum” because he has a social life. He probably works, she probably doesn’t, so he wants to decompress.

I don’t solicit gifts from my wealthy parents. Once they bought us some nice things to furnish our home with, but the process was so unpleasant (micromanaging) that we’ve sworn off accepting anything more.

They’ve been very good to me, gave me a loan for college, which I worked off in under a year. I have a lot to appreciate.

However we never asked them to help with our down payment on a condo near them because we want the opposite of what the other poster talked about. My wife has a kid coming soon, and have definite plans to relocate, find new jobs, etc., far, far away. Who wants to be near acerbic, sloshed, psycho “dad” all the time? They would probably be a bad influence on the kids.

I know this sounds bitter, and people can change, but I think they need several more decades of their expensive psychologists to get over their issues. This is why we keep them at arms length, and just make ends meet on our own. Maybe we’ll see them once every 3 years… but it is difficult living in the same area.

“the level of services we do here…”

What a freaking joke.

Our infrastructure is crumbling, we have spent far more than we have (medicare, social security both broke), and the level of wasteful government spending is horrid.

The level of services may be great for the lower 50% of all Americans who pay NO federal income tax, but for those of us nearer the top paying the vast majority, I assure you we are not getting any bargain.

Atlas Shrugged is happening before your eyes. The government teat will soon be dry as we bankrupt our nation by subsidizing laziness and dependence.

As to the family mentioned, any man who goes out three times a week leaving his wife and infant child at home is not a Godly husband, and the bride’s parents should be very upfront about exactly why they are not going to support that family until the man starts behaving like one.

Actually, Russell, the income you’ve included is only for you and your wife’s salary. $208,000 of salary would = $46,000 of federal taxes. This is with no tax shield for 401(k) contributions and no tax shield for a mortgage. It’s about as much as anyone could pay for your level of income.

What is not included in this calculation is the earnings you have accrued on realized investment gains. Assuming 2/3 of your capital gains taxes were for long-term holdings and 1/3 were for short term, your effective cap gains tax rate is about 21%. If you’re paying 12,000 of cap gains taxes, this means you made about $57,100 from investments.

If we add this to your combined salary of $208,000, we get total income of approx. $265,100 and an effective tax rate of 40%.

You would be hard pressed to find any mature economy in the western world where you can get the level of services that we do here for only 40% of your income.

I’m a bit alarmed at some of the vitriol heaped on these parents for wanting to help their kid with a downpayment. Cutting out the husband is one thing, but people are really critical of the parents and their daughter as well.
Using money on a downpayment is usually a really sound move. It’s not irresponsible for the daughter with a new child to want to make this step if she can. And it’s normal for caring parents to care.
I really feel for some of the people on this comment page. It seems your parents taught you that kids are meant to be abandoned by the side of the road on their 18th birthday.

Russell, you’re right on. JK is spouting the traditionl wealth redistribution of the socialist movement. Taxation removes the ability of the individual to pursue their own social agenda, and replaces it with the government’s idea of what is right and wrong.

Social security is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme, and I guarantee that ANYONE under 50 today who is making a decent living and actually manages to save enough for retirement will never see anything from social security.

All the lazy and irresponsible people (same ones taking out ARM and then complaining they were taken advantage of) will collect because they haven’t managed to save anything.

It’s time to tax less and spend less (get rid of social security and privatize accounts so people have control of their OWN money).

Get the government out of my life. Stop them from giving out money they don’t have to give, or very soon we’re going to be owned by China.

A house is a “want” and not a “need”! Where do full-grown adults get off asking their Mommies and Daddies for these handouts, when they can get by on their own by renting and minimizing their spending?

I’m 27 and don’t own a house because it is not economically sound for me to do so. I have parents who I could beg for money for a down deposit too, but I’m an adult, responsible for my own spending and actions. So why it is that people can’t live within their means like me? Why do some feel they are entitled to things they have not earned?

If these parents put a down deposit on a house for them, they can kiss it goodbye. Besides the fact that the couple may split, they are not financially savvy enough to save the deposit themselves, so what makes these parents think they can make the mortgage payments (or the payments to the parents)? I say give it 6 months to a year before they start calling Mommy and Daddy again when they can’t make the mortgage payments.

You’re not doing them a favor. Cut the cord already!

Two words:

Raging herpes.

Bye bye, loser.

Lots of folks postulating that I was “given,” the assets I own (or am buying). My wife and I busted *ss to earn them.

True, I do believe superior ability does beget superior responsibility, which I is why I write the checks demanded by the 40-odd taxing authorities I directly pay or indirectly support.

However, those who are analyzing my tax situation - good, bad, or indifferent - have indeed missed the point. Subprime exists as an issue now not ONLY because of predatory lending - but ignorant folks who signed contracts without understanding immediate or future consequence.

This is the case presented within the article itself - an ignorant daughter seeking a handout from her ignorant parents, while presuming and pretending to be kind, gentle, good, etc.

Unfortunately, this tendency has spread to our governing bodies as well - witness Miss JK who scraped upwards of $26,000 from “the system” to fund her home. Good for her, I am glad she has a home, and were I eligible for such programs I doubtless would have used them.

Unfortunately (if you wish to look at it this way), my family is simply too successful to qualify for any one of the 300+ programs designed to help poor people buy homes, that are in fact funded by the taxes everyone pays.

Now, on to those taxes: yep, I excluded the “gains,” from my $208K income figure - because there were none. I exercised stock options - and the underlying promptly sank in value. I thus owe taxes on dollars never received (via the AMT - one is taxed on the delta between the strike price and market price, irrespective of the fate of the underlying after the purchase. I can declare a CAPX loss to the tune of a whole $3,000 next year).

As to the “insurance pool,” spoken of surrounding Social Security - well, right, I am forced to accept a NEGATIVE 2% return on those funds, assuming I get to actually draw from them at retirement. Given that Billary at least is proposing Social Security benefits be means-tested, I likely will not see dollar one.

What I am whining about is the FORCED redistribution of wealth and the continual argument that someone who earns $100K is “rich.” The post we are commenting on is nothing more than another redistrubtion - but at least this one is voluntary.

A cousin of mine recently celebrated his 25th wedding anniversity. I asked him what it was that kept them together all those years and his remark was “We agreed that whoever left had to take the kids.” Although I knew he was being funny, I think this might be a good clause to write into a prenup. No bum would want to get stuck with the kids, so this would deter him from getting married in the first place.

Russell doesn’t seem to account for the fact that a decent sized chunk of his taxes are self chosen. In 2006, the average property tax bite in TX was 2.9% of the assessed value, so I estimate Russell has a primary residence in the $550K zip code and a vacation home in the $275K area. The second home is clearly a luxury item ,and the primary home is a choice he’s made. The median house in TX in 2006 was $167K, I’ll even say Russell doesn’t need to live in the median and say a nice above median house is $200K. This means $18,200 (~9% of income) is from Russell’s choice of luxury both in a second home and a primary home well above (over x3) median.

Another $14,000 (~7%) of those taxes (SS and Medicare) are actually an insurance system/shared risk pool, which upon retirement they will both draw benefits from, unless of course they’re from that wing of the Republican party trying to starve these parts of the system to create a crisis so they can break the social contract that’s existed between generations since the New Deal.

He also claims $12,000(~6%) of capital gains taxes. This is disingenuous, since it’s clear that the capital gain wasn’t included in the income number—Russell claims over $100,000 in income for each of them and an income total of $208,000—this also doesn’t take into account holding period, which you gain a tax benefit from as well, but since he didn’t include it in income doesn’t get included.

Then you have $2,000 (~1%) in gas and auto taxes, which are user fees for the roads Russell drives on. Which leaves us at 29% of taxes that aren’t from lifestyle choices, a shared risk pool and user fees, I would then ask who Russell expects to protect his properties from thieves(police), fire(fire dept), natural disaster(FEMA, National Guard, State Patrol), foreign threats(NSA, CIA, DoD), and so on..

And maybe, Russell, the reason you can’t afford expensive educations for your kids has more to do with how much you’re spending on luxuries rather than your tax bite. Which do you want more, that big primary house and the vacation home or a good future for your kids? At $275,000 with a 7% fixed for 30 mortgage, that second home is $22,000 a year, I’m pretty sure if you were setting that aside in tax free education savings accounts for your kids they’d have no problem paying for any school they could get into. Step out of the really nice house and into something at $300,000 (well above Texas median and not exactly a hovel) and that’s another $19,000 a year for your kids’ college education. Maybe you need to rethink your priorities between action and words there if Harvard and Julliard are so important to you?

Russel,

…

In order for you to spend $7,500 on local general sales taxes in Texas, you would need to spend at least $90,909 on General Goods.

If this is the case, then you should not wonder why you have no money.

We learned from experience. If you are going to loan money to anyone (especially relatives), you need to get everything is writing. Oral contracts, even when admitted to by ALL of the parties in a divorce court, are not legally enforceable, at least not in the State of Ohio.

“Predatory lending” - euphemism for “stupid borrower”

No excuses Cleveland - the “A” in ARM stands for something, you know.

Regardless of Russell’s tax situation, his initial point is still valid and being ignored because people are distracted by the taxes that he has paid.
To lie and cheat to get a down payment through local, state and fed tax dollars is part of a huge problem in America. People feel that someone else should be footing the bill, even when they are quite capable of doing so.
The more people that cheat these programs, the more useless the programs become in helping their intended targets.
Perhaps JK should receive welfare, food stamps, and other such aid, even though she doesn’t need it? Why not?

Again, the sympathy is difficult to summon when looking at your SECONDARY home taxes, Russel. Maybe you don’t realize that we all pay the latter portion of those and then some (for those of us who have state income tax - Texas does not). And of course since sales/excise/property taxes are not scaled to income (though obviously nicer house/car generally implies higher income) as federal income taxes are, we “poor” folks actually pay a higher percentage. So maybe we should be the ones complaining about the leeches of society taking all our money.

Salaries of over $200k go pretty far in Texas, but Russel is complaining his son can’t go to Harvard because his 53% of taxes is funding the worthless. Well, to have $12k in taxes on capital gains means he has a nice sized portfolio AND he has two houses as well! You are in much better position to pay for your kids education than most. PS Real estate and excise taxes don’t fund the programs for the worthless you hate so much.

Russell,

I see over 30K in taxes based on what you’ve directly chosen:
$16,000 Real estate tax - primary home
$8,000 Real estate tax - secondary home
$7,500 General sales taxes - Texas
$1,000 Excise taxes - gasoline
$1,000 Property tax (autos) - Texas

You don’t have to live where you do. Find somewhere with lower property and excise taxes if you’re bitter. Downsize your homes if you need to make adjustments to meet the educational ambitions of your children.

To whom much is given, much is expected.

I don’t know if the letters are shortened, or what, but I have a couple comments.

(1) Going out with friends three nights a week doesn’t make someone a bum.

(2) With the help of an attorney, there are several dozen ways to minimize or virtually eliminate the risk of the son taking an interest in the property at divorce. Some good suggestions have already been put forward in other comments. One method that has not been mentioned is the establishment of a spendthrift trust in favor of the daughter.

I am currently married to a bum! My dear bum came into the marriage with 50K worth of credit card debt and a taste for fine things.
I was stupid enough to allow my parents, who live in an east european country, to use their savings to pay for a gorgeous wedding with my American bum.
He, too, likes going out with his friends while I am crunching pennies to pay his debt faster. He also enjoys calling and going out with ex-girlfriends and lady-friends from work… because I can’t tell him what friends should he have.
He is currently talking about separation (because his feelings are hurt by me being mad about his behaviour and telling his parents about the drinking, the debt and the baby that he had me abort cause he “wasn’t ready”).
My friends, my parents are all saying that I have to cut my loses, but I still love the bum, and he doesn’t even want to go to marriage counseling.
His father gave us the money to pay the rest of the debt as a loan, and he is saying that it is going to be easier to split now.
I am a 29 years old with no kids, no savings and basically no hope (while still beautiful and book smart: I have a masters degree). Don’t give any money to your kids if they are not worth it. Pay for their education if they are behaving and if they are smart enough. And teach them to stay away from people who are willing to leave a spouse at home (with or without a baby) while they party with their buddies.

TO: Russel Jeffords

Somehow, your whining about secondary home taxes fails to move me. Here in Cleveland, folks are losing their homes due to predatory lending and a poor economy. Get a grip!

These parents are NOT obligated to give their daughter anything, whether they like the SIL or not.

That is a tough situation. Here is what I recommend: Help them purchase the house, but put the down payment in your name. Therefore, you can help your daughter out financially, while still protecting yourself from possible divorce.

Unfortunately, a lot of young women are looking for a handsome, “exciting” man who likes to party, drink and have fun. They turn away from balding, slightly over-weight men as though they have Leprosy. The “exiting” men turn out to be more interested in themselves than anything else. Until and unless young women are able to distinguish between real men and boy-toys, they will get what they deserve.

In the mean time, parents should stay out of their financial lives, because it will not help.

Young women who make those poor choices are often mirroring the image of their own father, but not always.

Some are just extremely naive, and well…stupid.

And, by the way, I am NOT balding and fat…

sanjosemike

Let’s analyze that 53%, shall we?

Income - $208K between my wife and I

$46,000 Federal taxes - from salaries
$12,000 Federal taxes - CAPX gains
$12,000 Federal payroll (Social Security)
$2,000 Medicare
$16,000 Real estate tax - primary home
$8,000 Real estate tax - secondary home
$7,500 General sales taxes - Texas
$1,000 Excise taxes - gasoline
$1,000 Property tax (autos) - Texas
$1,000 Excise taxes & fees - utilities and services

Total $106,500 - which represents actual taxes PAID in 2007 (not just withheld and refunded)

Comes out rather close to 53%, no?

If you did provide a loan for a down payment, the loan should be fully documented and a repayment agreement should be entered into in the event the house is sold….or, if possible without creating an incident, there is a divorce. Say your lawyer insisted.

PS Any adult father who is partying 3 nights a week is a bum.

First, don’t give them a dime while she is married to the bum, not one cotton picking penny.

In the will, make sure any asets are in a pass through trust to that grand kids for when they are of age (25 or older). Daughter doesn’t get squat while she is married to the bum.

529 for the grandkid ok, the bum can’t tap into that.

Russell, I agree with other posters here. … How you got to the point in your life where someone is willing to pay you that much money when you are obviously not smart enough to realize you don’t need to pay nearly that much in taxes is beyond me. My wife and I each also made well over $100,000 last year, but paid less than 20% in taxes, and we live in NY! They are called deductions, my friend, look into them.

My parents first house was $5,000 in Irving TX in the 60’s. My dad made more than that in a year and was able to move up….The story is different now..My first home is a very modest 100 y.o. property that sold for 369K … I make a great income at 68k a year, but wouldn’t be able to find a property for a yearly’s wage like previous generations..In fact a 20% down on this house was more than my yearly. The friends I know who are my age and own homes, most have gotten a little help from their parents to get into them… The ones who didn’t are renters. So if you have it, help out and have a good talk with your son-in-law about your feelings before you do to see where he is at.

I understand the need to want to help your child. My husband and I, who just recently married, are currently buying our first home. We are using a state housing program to help us get the financing we need to get our home. I refuse to accept any help from family regarding this matter.

Your daughter is a grown, married, woman. She made the decision to marry this man, and they need to figure out how to buy a home on their own. I realize the need to want to help your daughter, but in the end, you are not helping her at all. You are only enabling her husband to go on doing what it is he is doing.

If I were you, I would put the money aside for her when she really is going to need it, which will be when she finally decides to divorce the guy.

Russell,

If you paid tax at the highest marginal rate - 35% (a bracket which, I doubt you are in), paid 6% of all of your income to social security (from which you will benefit and is capped under 100K of income), 2% to medicare(from which you will benefit), then your state income tax rate would have to be 10%, which I highly doubt. As pointed out earlier, you do not pay 53% of your income in taxes, and you benefit from those. Do you drive on roads (paid for with taxes), highways? Fly? Go to a park?

Taxes don’t just shift money from the rich to the poor. I’m not in the highest income tax bracket, but would gladly pay more taxes when I am there.

I think the mother should try to trap the son-in-law with the help of an escort service and then show the (explicit) pictures to the daughter. After the divorce, she can buy the house for her daughter!

To JK

While Russell may (or may not) be exaggerating concerning the amount of taxes he pays, he is not off base. You say that you found ways not to use your parents hard earned money. Well congratulations, I suppose. Instead you found ways to use the equally hard earned money of strangers who have no say in whether they want to help you, a person they have never met and know nothing about, buy a home. In fact, many of them probably would like to purchase their own home. But instead, the goverment gets to decide how their hard earned money is spent.

I am a 26 year old man who works hard and strives to be successful. I was taught to treat girls with respect, and I am your perfect example of a nice guy finishing last. The mom in this situation can only blame her daughter for staying with a guy like that. Why is it that girls think a guy is going to suddenly change his ways?

How quick some of us are to judge others!
I love the “generational argument” or as I like to call it, the “uphills both ways in the snow, barefoot to school argument.” We get it. Life was harder back then before pencils and electricity, and we know you taught yourself everything and worked hard for money before money was invented. But one harsh little reality you didn’t seem to learn is that the world changes and those who don’t change with it are buried by it. Is every change good? No. But constantly preaching how things were better when you were younger (which, by the way was when? I can’t seem to find a decade in American history without some sort of struggle) is certainly not the answer.
In today’s world, it is infinitely harder to get started in life than it used to be. It was, at one time, as simple as, work hard, save as much as you can, be loyal to your company - you’ll get a pension and everything will be great. That reality died in the 80s. Companies MUST provide incentives for work to hire a talented work force and stay competitive.

When the sex stops, you know separation or divorce is right around the corner.

I would find out who really wants the house and why (among other considerations) before making a decision. If this will improve quality of life for the daughter and toddler, it might be worth the parents’ peace of mind to give some money. Perhaps it is only 5K in addition savings they have to reach 5% on a house.

I am actually glad that my ex-inlaws did not give my ex-husband and I help buying our first house when they could have easily afforded to. We managed to save 5% two years after we got married, set a strict budget for the house, maintenance, and other spending as well as keep saving for retirement. It is quite possible. Even though I had a “bum” for a ex-husband! He was the play video games on the couch all of the time bum, not the going out kind. But then I didn’t feel beholden to split the money from the house when we divorced three ways instead of two

You make choices about where you are going to spend your money. West and upper east coasters that complain about the cost of living there — you could move elsewhere. It is not that hard. I could have twice or three times the size of house if I wanted to live on the outskirts of Houston, but don’t like commuting. So I chose a small house near downtown. Not everyone would choose the same things. Please don’t blast them because of their choices.

I do think a few of these comments must have typos in them, though. I also make over 100K and I don’t pay 53% in taxes…I get the feeling he added his tax brackets instead of using the overall income and dividing by the amount of taxes he owed. I don’t take any special deductions either, just charities and house interest. I think PharmD must be talking about what he thinks his house is worth after he bought it…he might want to have it appraised for a reality check. Just because your neighbor’s house sold for over a million doesn’t mean yours will. Again, choices…I would not buy the top amount of house a bank would lend me because I don’t want to pay so much in a house notes, nor do I want to keep up with the Jones.

I know a couple who did loan money to their son and his new wife. He had the young couple sign a contract that if they divorced he would be reimbursed.

Keep the long term concern of your relationship with your daughter, and perhaps her husband, in mind. Any time money is involved with family, you need to make it a gift rather than a loan. Loan and the repayments color relationships. Your daughter does not need your judgment - just quiet support when she is ready for it. Your son in law may grow up - my wonderful father was out too often in their early years, too. I suggest you give them $1,000.00 - no strings attached. If she asks why it isn’t more, just tell her you have plans to invest whatever you have for your retirement, and you wish them well in their plans. You remember this stage of trying to purchase a house as a fun time with hopes and dreams with your husband, and you both worked really hard to save. Tell her good times are ahead if they are on the same page, and wish her well. (If they aren’t on the same page, the house will not happen, and she will figure it out herself. ) Sometimes people stay together longer because they hate it when everyone is against the relationship… .

I would offer to match whatever they could save or get from Josh’s parents.

My parents are both dead. So when my children come asking for a loan or some help, I point them toward the same parents I ask when I’m short of money…NO ONE.

For what it’s worth, I paid for college for both (one private school, one public) and both have BA’s, with one going on to become a dentist. I feel I have done my parental duty to prepare them for a good and productive life. That also means my obligation as a walking ATM machine has ended.

I don’t know if Mr. Jeffords is aware of this, but if the home buying program that Ms. JK used ended tomorrow, his financial situation wouldn’t change. Call me crazy, but I dont feel sorry for you if you make $100,000 each and have no retirement money. The last time I checked, a kid could go to another college besides Harvard and get a decent degree.