Parents resent our FIRE plan

[Nature Lover]

To OP: I think you did the right thing by venting here. Sometimes you need to get it off your chest. Now, IMHO, it is time to simply forget it, and let it ride. I would NOT make it an issue and tell them to not count on help if they spend it all (and it sounds like you won't do this).

+1 If your DH (son) thinks it best to not have a discussion with them, just let it ride and drop it. Not worth making an issue about it if a discussion won't help.

 

[HI Bill]

My mom was divorced around age 65, and she was always bad with money. I tried to give her advice, and tried to keep her from making really bad financial moves. I failed, and she bought a house in the area where she grew up, but was then unwilling to move there. I estimated that decision cost her $40K+, not including the rent she was paying at the same time. I remember endless weekly conversations where I kept telling her "sell the house or move". She eventually sold. She also paid for LTCI, and I could project out, that by the time she really needed it (say around 80 or so), she'd probably be flat broke and unable to keep up the premiums. I finally got her to drop the policy, but that took a while, too, and probably ate up $15-20K in premiums. She never conserved money at the grocery store, over-buying groceries every week. Because of her conscious financial process, I swore I'd never help her with my own $. If she had been conservative with $, and followed advice to save money, rather than waste it, I may have had a different outlook.

But in the end, it worked out. But it could just have easily worked the other way. Her spending really did decrease in the last 3 years of her life.

My wife thinks it's unfair of parents to ask their kids to support them in old age, when they did not ask to be born. She has a point, but depending on circumstances, kids might WANT to help them out.

 

[DINKFIRE]

OP why are you inserting yourself into the financial affairs of both sets of parents? It's not your business, just like your finances are not their business. Some boundaries would help all of you.

If one of my kids asked to go over our finances the answer would MYOB. And I never ask them anything about their own finances.

We have not interfered with our parents finance, and they do ask me since I'm a finance professional. My own parents regularly solicit my advice since neither of them understand retirement planning beside keeping some money in the bank. I have helped them whenever they needed me to. As for my in-laws, they asked a question here and there, and they talk about their investment, real estate and lifestyle. I got a sense of their financial situation though these conversations.

It seems to me through all the comments so far that there's no use worrying about their financial well-being, but maybe just be prepared to provide them care for what we could afford without risk our own retirement.

 

[Teacher Terry]

There is a big difference between helping parents that are good with their money and need help. That’s a far cry from spending all their money.

 

[HtownRose]

"They travel many times a year domestically and internationally, often on luxury tours to exotic places with their much wealthier friends. They dine out more often than eating at home, go to all sorts of expensive events and parties, and spend frivolously on stuff they already have, just to impress their friends."

Maybe your parents wish they could brag about you having a lavish lifestyle & high profile positions etc. to their much wealthier friends, and now that they know your plans they are realizing that will never be the case? Just a WAG & sad if true, and the friends would likely be impressed with your accomplishments anyway - I am!

 

[Souschef]

Some of this struck a nerve with me. I had been married to my (now) ex wife for about 2 years when my FIL said I was selfish for not having a child by now.
I told him that if he was willing to cover all the expenses of having a child, we would be more than happy. That shut him up.

 

[Chuckanut]

I fail to see how anyone could object to this.

Of course! Everybody is fair and logical. Plan on it.
What could possibly go wrong?

 

[copyright1997reloaded]

We have not interfered with our parents finance, and they do ask me since I'm a finance professional. My own parents regularly solicit my advice since neither of them understand retirement planning beside keeping some money in the bank. I have helped them whenever they needed me to. As for my in-laws, they asked a question here and there, and they talk about their investment, real estate and lifestyle. I got a sense of their financial situation though these conversations.

Emphasis mine. In other words, your in-laws did NOT ask you for value-judgement on their financial affairs. Stay out of it.

They travel many times a year domestically and internationally, often on luxury tours to exotic places with their much wealthier friends. They dine out more often than eating at home, go to all sorts of expensive events and parties, and spend frivolously on stuff they already have, just to impress their friends.

This is you making an unsolicited valuation on your SO's parents lifestyle. Again, stay out of it.

I've unwittingly done this myself for some of my nephews and nieces, no good comes from this.

 

[Ronnieboy]

If one of my kids asked to go over our finances the answer would MYOB. And I never ask them anything about their own finances.

There is a point where you need to help out an aging parent with finances.

My mother just text me this last weekend:

"I'm sweating because I don't want the electric bill to go higher" (our temps are currently in the low 90's)

My reply: "Turn on the A/C. Your comfort is worth more than your electric bill. You have the money to pay for it"

DM: "I have the a/c on but only for 4 days now. I turned it up to 75 for 76 then off at night with the windows and fan going. I've been so conservative that's what I do." (Night time lows are in the high 60's)

Me: "Well change. You can lower it to 72 and see how it feels. You can afford the extra electricity. Its not worth being miserable"

DM: "I have lowered it from 77 to 76 to 75 today.. I had to turn the fan down because it got chilly for my nap. I'll figure it out. It just takes time and depends what level of the house I'm on...."

LOL

This is my mom who divorced from my father >20 years ago and I helped move her 'retirement' from a FA to Vanguard and some ETF's. Helped set up Roth IRA with money she had to take via RMD but didn't want to spend.

She is 77 Y.O. My father passed Feb 2018 and her alimony stream dried up and she was adamant that she couldn't survive on her small retirement and SS that she didn't know what to do.

Here it is 17 months later and she still hasn't take a dime from her TIRA/RothIRA/and now taxable accout that her RMD's have been going into since she won't spend them. She also loaned my sister $10k (from some other stash) when she was going through a divorce in the last 6 months.

That generation (her parents growing up in the depression) is funny with money. Hard to change what has been so ingrained in you over time.

Sorry for the thread-jack

 

[pb4uski]

...Last I heard was about half a year ago, that their FA believed the market was due for correction so he/she sold substantial of their portfolio and held in cash await to jump back in at the right moment.

Given that the market is up 20% YTD, I'd say that your parent's FA scewed the pooch.

 

[tb001]

Do you have intimate knowledge of your in-laws financial situation? Are you 100% sure they are living beyond their means? How old are they? As others have said, spend changes significantly with age.

FWIW, I can easily see my parents saying something like this not because they intend to be strapped for money, but because they’re worried about their kids making a bad decision. Included in that bad decision category for them would be RE with plenty to cover current annual spend, but none of the ‘extras’ that might come with time, like kids or divorce or significant health issues or even just wanting a more extravagant lifestyle. In their case, it would come from a place of love and concern, wanting to ensure that we could live a ‘good’ life and not come up short when it might be needed most.

20 years of 120k/yr spend means their assets aren’t insignificant. Perhaps they’re concerned you see them as your backup plan? Perhaps they want more for their child?

There are lots of possibilities here. If they’re truly irresponsible with money, I find it hard to understand how they’ve accumulated the wealth they have.

By no means should you be expected to support an extravagant lifestyle when they run out of money, but something doesn’t add up here. I suspect you’re taking things far more literally than they may have been meant. Either that or there are other cultural issues at play. Are your in laws from a culture where children are expected to support their parents?

 

[rk911]

The story of the rabbit and the tortoise comes to mind.

or the ant and the grasshopper

 

[DINKFIRE]

Emphasis mine. In other words, your in-laws did NOT ask you for value-judgement on their financial affairs. Stay out of it. This is you making an unsolicited valuation on your SO's parents lifestyle. Again, stay out of it.

I've unwittingly done this myself for some of my nephews and nieces, no good comes from this.

When you emphasis my words differently than my original intent, it is not answer my question. My post is to find out what the general public believe we should do to cope with the possibility for us to support them in the future, after we retire early. I'm not here to find out how many ways my words could be interpreted, but I do see people could take our question and make it offensive to them no matter what. As I said, we provide advice only when they discuss their finance with us, and as a finance professional, I notice potential issues. It is pretty clear from several of the responses, that discussing our concern with them is a no-no since they may also be offended.

The natural follow-up question is, giving their current financial situation they should have no problem living out of their golden years comfortable, if they manage the fund prudently. We are going to retire early on a much more frugal standard. What would be the socially appropriate support we should prepare to provide if they do run out of money in the future? We need to determine that now and save accordingly before we retire early, to gauge the general opinion is why I ask this question here in forum.

 

[DINKFIRE]

Do you have intimate knowledge of your in-laws financial situation? Are you 100% sure they are living beyond their means? How old are they? As others have said, spend changes significantly with age.

FWIW, I can easily see my parents saying something like this not because they intend to be strapped for money, but because they’re worried about their kids making a bad decision. Included in that bad decision category for them would be RE with plenty to cover current annual spend, but none of the ‘extras’ that might come with time, like kids or divorce or significant health issues or even just wanting a more extravagant lifestyle. In their case, it would come from a place of love and concern, wanting to ensure that we could live a ‘good’ life and not come up short when it might be needed most.

20 years of 120k/yr spend means their assets aren’t insignificant. Perhaps they’re concerned you see them as your backup plan? Perhaps they want more for their child?

There are lots of possibilities here. If they’re truly irresponsible with money, I find it hard to understand how they’ve accumulated the wealth they have.

By no means should you be expected to support an extravagant lifestyle when they run out of money, but something doesn’t add up here. I suspect you’re taking things far more literally than they may have been meant. Either that or there are other cultural issues at play. Are your in laws from a culture where children are expected to support their parents?

They had well paying jobs and received substantial inheritance. We don't know their finance intimately because we don't ask unless they talk about it. No matter what they really trying to tell us by what they said, we just want to know what we should do, and what would be considered a socially appropriate level of financial support we should prepare for as part of our own retirement plan.

 

[Moemg]

A socially appropriate level of support is not to let them go without basic essentials .Food ,shelter and medical care are all basic essentials .

 

[Eucerin]

while everyone providing good suggestions, I will add that keep distance from them as far as you can, and communicating with them as less as you can. The things they said to you that aren't kind parents would say, stay away from them.

 

[kgtest]

Yikes. I understand everyone is different but I share my ER goals with my folks and they kinda chuckle and say, yeah we had that goal too (but they retired at 63/65).

The difference is my folks know our plans (we have kids, they have grandkids) and they certainly haven't written us out of the will. I am the executor of the estate so I have eyes on what's going on. This to me is just good family communication. Not all families are alike tho. Good luck.

 

[gwraigty]

My post is to find out what the general public believe we should do to cope with the possibility for us to support them in the future, after we retire early.

<snip>

What would be the socially appropriate support we should prepare to provide if they do run out of money in the future?

You should do nothing outside of making sure you're meeting you and your spouse's needs. You are not obliged to be part of your in-laws retirement plan. No such thing as "socially appropriate support", which implies an obligation, which truly doesn't exist, except perhaps in your mind. If you want an amount: $0

 

[ivinsfan]

OP why do you care what the "general public" thinks about how much money you should spend to support your parents if they spend themselves broke?

What is "socially acceptable" ? why do you even care it's your money, support them willingly or don't there is no rule.

I'm not understanding your comment about people taking your comment and making it something offensive …

I agree with many posters in that they either aren't kind parents or you are reporting their comments out of context.

In you last comment you threw in the nugget that your parents received a substantial inheritance which they hope to spend completely before they die. Actually you make it seem they will spend every last penny of everything and then expect you to fund them. Or maybe that's just some pressure you are putting on yourself

It's my personal opinion that parents and grown children owe each other nothing financially in either direction. All the money in the world won't make up for unkind unloving behavior. That's the currency I want flowing between us and our 2 DD's.

 

[Telly]

... My post is to find out what the general public believe we should do to cope with the possibility for us to support them in the future, after we retire early.

No problem with that. Getting the viewpoint of others may give you a solution/approach, or may trigger thoughts of your own to a solution/approach.

I'm not here to find out how many ways my words could be interpreted, but I do see people could take our question and make it offensive to them no matter what.

As threads get longer, an "inversion of intent" is not uncommon. People may jump into a topic that is well underway, not reading the "n" number of pages of responses to date. Their response can be colored by those responses on the same page that they DID look at. As such, I comment on only few topics that have gone on to many pages, as I do the reading.
In my work life, I was responsible for many people, the far majority professional people. And I was amazed (disheartened) by the varying takes many had on a situation/speech/whatever that all witnessed equally. A few were so far out I wondered if they went off on an astral plane during a big meeting (even if I was an observer too, not leading the meeting).
I learned to never underestimate the ability of people to pick up the wrong end of the stick, or to be offended if they wanted something to be offended about.
A very small number of threads around here start reminding me of work, eww.

The natural follow-up question is, giving their current financial situation they should have no problem living out of their golden years comfortable, if they manage the fund prudently. We are going to retire early on a much more frugal standard. What would be the socially appropriate support we should prepare to provide if they do run out of money in the future? We need to determine that now and save accordingly before we retire early, to gauge the general opinion is why I ask this question here in forum.

And there is nothing wrong with asking. It is better to gauge it NOW, rather than it being dumped on you LATER.
My personal opinion of what I would do if I were you I put in a previous post. As in most things, I do not expect everyone to agree with my opinion. You are in the driver's seat, and you will choose what path you take. And I heartily compliment you on planning, rather than just defaulting to putting out a (future) major fire when it happens.

 

[DAYDREAMER]

I too felt my mom begrudged our ER plans and initially took her response as jealousy, but have since realized, it probably was more concern. I changed my view after my nephew started talking about ER at age 24 (because we and his parents ER'd). My view of nephews plans in no way would work out, of which I'm concerned for him. It's possible my mom had similar concern for us.

I think your parents (in laws) are probably concerned, but addressed the issue with words that didn't sit right. Meh, you sound like a close enough family, I wouldn't let this distract too much from family relationships.

 

[pjigar]

You have your household and they have theirs. There is nothing that says you have to take care of them in their later years. I would tell what your plan is and for them to enjoy their money. You can only control what you can control and if you choose to help them later in life you can make that choice then. It’s not uncommon for families
To try and control other generations with the threat or promise of future funds.

+1.

I love my dad but I let him carry on with his financial affairs. This is one of the reason we plan on doing stealth FIRE i.e. FIRE but don't tell anyone about it (friends, family, etc.). Only me and DW will know.

I truly believe that most people have herd mentality. They easily get threatened and change their behavior if they see someone outside the herd. Parents sometime oppose ER plan out of love and concerns. The early opposition stems out of our "herd response" but if they truly love you then they will accept your plan after you explain the back story (planning, LBYM, approval of advisor, etc.).

 

[pacergal]

OP--
How old are your in laws? 60's? If they have told you their FA expects their money to run out in 20 years, (maybe 80's?), I would ask them what they plan to live on when the money runs out. Get the conversation going so both you and your spouse hear from them what their expectations are. Only then will you be able to respond to the issue at hand and you will be able to move forward with your plan--either work longer to support them or not. But all of you need to be on the same page of understanding.

 

[flintnational]

OP, it sounds like you are very thrifty and they are not. They believe you do not spend enough and you believe they spend too much. I doubt either of you will convince the other their way is wrong*. So I would not try.

Regarding up keep of relatives, I am more than willing to help sick, disabled or unlucky relatives. I will not help healthy relatives with the means to care for themselves (especially if they squander their savings). So, in your shoes, I would not consider assisting my parents. But, I suspect that is not the issue. I think the two couples just view money differently. As you indicated, your in-laws are well educated, they clearly have amassed enough to retire, and they have a FA. These folks are quite capable of making their own money decisions even if it is not the same decision you would make.

*Dave Ramsey calls it the powdered butt syndrome. Once someone powders your butt, they will not listen to your advice on money or sex.

ETA: They think you have not saved enough. You think they spend too much. I am going to go out on a limb and suggest you are both wrong!

 

[kcowan]

However, since I'm myself a finance professional, I have tried to gauge how qualified their FA was a few years back. The answer I got was the FA invite them to personal meetings a couple times a year and buy them dinners. On the other hand, they had to put major expenses (tens of thousands) on credit card and carry the balance for several months. To me things like this should not happen with a good FA, but maybe they just did not listen to their FA. They also believe their FA can time the market and beat the market return by trading their investments.

This. I think I would question why they have an FA if they do not take the advice. Do they believe that 20 years is all they care about? What if they live longer? The FA should have an approach for that scenario.

If the answer does not satisfy you, ask them if they would like your help developing a serious plan, like the one you have. This keeps the relationship positive.

(Someone should put a link in Blow That Dough to this thread.)