How much rent should my parents charge me?

Peter333

JReacher1 wrote: »

There is nothing horrible about a parent not asking their child to contribute either.

Who said it WAS horrible to not ask your ADULT child to contribute? I certainly did not. Don't make out I said things I never said to suit your agenda.

JReacher1 wrote: »

If the cost of having your son in your house was more than £50 a week then no you wouldn't be profiting from your son. If the cost of having your son in your house was less than £50 then yes you are profiting from your son.

It's basic maths

You're just unbelievable. You literally couldn't make it up.

JReacher1

Peter333 wrote: »

Who said it WAS horrible to not ask your ADULT child to contribute? I certainly did not. Don't make out I said things I never said to suit your agenda.



You're just unbelievable. You literally couldn't make it up.

I didn't say you had said that. Many posters have said that people who don't contribute to their parents lack self respect. One poster called such people parasites.....

The other post is basic maths so I don't understand why you are having trouble with it. Profit is defined by making more money than something costs so if you charge more money than something costs you it is profit.

LKRDN_Morgan

JReacher1 wrote: »

I didn't say you had said that. Many posters have said that people who don't contribute to their parents lack self respect. One poster called such people parasites.....

The other post is basic maths so I don't understand why you are having trouble with it. Profit is defined by making more money than something costs so if you charge more money than something costs you it is profit.

I imagine those having such a strong reaction to the profiting comments are those who are in fact profiting

Oh wait it's not called profiting is it? It's teaching your children to manage money.....

Pollycat

pollypenny wrote: »

Yea, gods, this has gone in a daft direction.

It might have gone in a different direction if the OP had come back to comment further.

SmarterNotHarder

Mojisola wrote: »

This is something that some parents struggle with which is why they feel it's wrong to take money from their adult children.

We all support each other in the family, as and when it's needed.

They have enough self-respect not to expect someone else to pay their bills for them.

This. My point was that if they think it's wrong to take money from their adult kids, does that mean they also feel they have a right to "manage" the rest of the adult kids' lives? After all, they're "just children" right?

If I wasn't contributing, I'd feel that I'd have to ask everytime I wanted to use something or whatever, and would have ended up moving out and renting, something they didn't want.

JReacher1 wrote: »

I'm confused why because a parent refuses to profit from their son/daughter it means that the child must have no self respect.

Mojisola wrote: »

Another adult in the house paying the extra on the bills that results from them living there is not 'profiteering'.

I don't think it helps our children to keep them as children.

I don't understand either. Why does it have to be a choice between not paying anything, or the parents "profiteering"? Surely people believe in a happy medium?

ETA This thread has helped in a rather unexpected way though. The amount I give them was calculated a while ago. I think I need to look at everything again to make sure I'm still giving them a fair amount. Thank you everyone for bringing it to my attention.

missbiggles1

LKRDN_Morgan wrote: »

I imagine those having such a strong reaction to the profiting comments are those who are in fact profiting

Oh wait it's not called profiting is it? It's teaching your children to manage money.....

No, it's called "paying your own way" - which is something all adults should do.

The opposite is "being kept by someone else" which is obviously fine when talking about dependent children but not something an adult should want to be said about them.

SailorSam

pollypenny wrote: »

Yea, gods, this has gone in a daft direction.

Yea Gods, i would never have believed such a simple thread could have kept going as long as it has.

chesky

Personally, I would expect a grown son or daughter to contribute to the household. This could be financially but it could also be some kind of 'in kind' support, like gardening or D-I-Y. But if others don't expect it from their children then that's up to them - after all, we all make our own house rules.

However, the thread seems to have gotten away from the original problem which is that the OP's mother is asking for support which the OP thinks unreasonable. So I think it would be better if we stuck to that issue, rather than say what we would have asked for in principle (or not as the case might be).

You might disagree with the mother's request but it might well be that the OP will have to move out if she doesn't contribute and she would be very much worse off in that case.

pollypenny

JReacher1 wrote: »

If the cost of having your son in your house was more than £50 a week then no you wouldn't be profiting from your son. If the cost of having your son in your house was less than £50 then yes you are profiting from your son.

It's basic maths

Perhaps I should have charged him for the use of my car, then.

Actually, at £50 a week we were subsidising him, even without him having my car. Sporty young men tend to eat a lot!

Detroit

Thunderbird, from the responses you've made to people who don't share your views, and the comments you've made about your family life: 'you've worked hard to provide for your family' 'the' wife has brought up your son, 'you'll leave them provided for' etc, you comes across to me as an old fashioned patriarchal type of person, with a high regard for his own opinion, and not much tolerance of views that opose your own.

I would imagine you consider yourself the head of your household.

People with this trait frequently struggle to allow their adult children to be independent, as this erodes their importance within the family as the source of all material wealth and comfort.

By continuing to support adult children beyond the point of necessity, allowing no financial contribution other than their own, they retain their status and self worth.

While this meets the need of the parent, it doesn't allow the child to assume the responsibility of an adult, keeping them in a state of perpetual subordination to the parent.

Obviously, I don't know you, and could have made completely inappropriate judgements about you and your motives.
As the parents accused of trying to justify profiteering will no doubt agree, that happens sometimes.