Can I afford to quit

SouthCoastBoy

I had always planned to retire when in my early 50s however as the kids got older it became clear if I could support financially it would help them. So here I am at 56 still working full time and think most probably will carry on to 60 if not made redundant. I have supported my children on a number of fronts. One was an elite gymnast and competed at a national level  this I would say cost me around 300 to 400 a mth for about 5 years. I would never of wanted her to miss out on that opportunity. Then uni for two kids  costing me about 40k and I also plan to give them 50k each for a house deposit. I'm pleased I can help  and if I retired earlier none of this would have been possible. I've found the older I get the more enjoyable work is mainly as psychologically I know i can walk away if i want to.

Langtang

@GeordieGeorge said:

I’ll leave it there, you are being utterly ridiculous, ignoring what was written by the OP in order to try to pick an argument.

A bit harsh, don’t you think?

Nebulous2

Whiterose23 said:

What would happen if their child, or children turned out to be a budding Jessica Ennis, Andy Murray, Pippa Funnell or even Lewis Hamilton! Where would the funds for those activities come from or would you just say to your child “Sorry son, you’ll just have to become a footballer like everyone else”

Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway .... and if they have a special talent they could apply for a scholarship (if the above unlikely scenario becomes a reality).

Actually there's nothing could be further from the truth. The world is full of talented people who never put in the work to rise to the top. It's worth reading up on Andy Murray's early history for instance. Some people make it in spite of not having the same opportunities, but they have to work even harder. 

A journalist once said to one of the top golfers that he had been very lucky. He agreed and said, you know something? The more I practice the luckier I get. 

strawb_shortcake

I think trying to guess the cost of children when you have one less than 12 months old is extremely difficult. I never found children to be particularly expensive until they started school, the cost of uniform and shoes do not come cheap, and it only gets worse as they move from primary to secondary. 
A decent pair of school shoes can be around £50-60

Clubs can be pretty reasonable depending which you pick, we do scouting and my children have been able to try different activities that would ordinarily cost a lot but have been really reasonable through scouts.
Duke of Edinburgh for example is very expensive through school but excellent value through Explorers but you still have a lot of kit to buy.

Yes, some families can't afford foreign or even UK holidays, clubs etc but that's usually not through choice, making that decision to live very frugally with children and self impose restrictions is completely different in my opinion 

Whiterose23

Nebulous2 said:

Whiterose23 said:

What would happen if their child, or children turned out to be a budding Jessica Ennis, Andy Murray, Pippa Funnell or even Lewis Hamilton! Where would the funds for those activities come from or would you just say to your child “Sorry son, you’ll just have to become a footballer like everyone else”

Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway .... and if they have a special talent they could apply for a scholarship (if the above unlikely scenario becomes a reality).

Actually there's nothing could be further from the truth. The world is full of talented people who never put in the work to rise to the top. It's worth reading up on Andy Murray's early history for instance. Some people make it in spite of not having the same opportunities, but they have to work even harder. 

A journalist once said to one of the top golfers that he had been very lucky. He agreed and said, you know something? The more I practice the luckier I get. 

I think this is a matter of opinion; there are as many stories of hard working people gaining success without having the bank of mum and dad behind them. Of course every parent wants to help and we do, but it isn’t a bad thing either for a child to work for what they want to achieve, including helping to finance their own dreams, rather than having it handed to them on a plate.
The OP’s view isn’t clear on this and whether he has considered it in his numbers, but early retirement could also benefit his child enormously has he will be around more to help them/nurture them. I think a balance would be ideal.

Whiterose23

GeordieGeorge said:

Whiterose23 said:

GeordieGeorge said:

Whiterose23 said:

GeordieGeorge said:

Whiterose23 said:

Why is there always the assumption that children will cost a fortune as they get older?

Because people are aware of hobbies, school uniforms and trips, sports and increased appetite.

Are you honestly claiming that you spent no more feeding your children at age thirteen than at age two?

If you read on I did say food costs increase. I doubt the OP is so naive that he thinks his food bill will stay the same when his child is 12 rather than one years old. 

Clothing as well, but there are means and ways of budgeting for holidays, hobbies, food and clothing. My point was more about parents who expect to pay their children through university etc.

But no-one was talking about that. The claim was that children don’t cost more as they grow from being babies, and they clearly do.

And no, there aren’t ways of budgeting to pay for these things if you’ve arranged your life around having only enough to scrape by without those costs, which is the whole thing that people were counselling against.

I took it for granted the OP had factored in the costs of a growing child re a few hobbies/food etc ... why on earth wouldn’t they?

Because they explicitly say otherwise in their original post.

I’ll leave it there, you are being utterly ridiculous, ignoring what was written by the OP in order to try to pick an argument.

Calm down, this is a discussion and we all have different opinions.
I didn't see anywhere in their original post where they had stated they hadn't considered it, and I think it is correct for people to point out that costs rise with children, which they do. My point is more about planning finances in order to dish out thousands and thousands paying for a child to go to university or pursue a very expensive hobby.

Whiterose23

wannabe_a_saver said:

Whiterose23 said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Whiterose23 said:

Why is there always the assumption that children will cost a fortune as they get older? The food bill may increase yes, but nothing else needs to.
My two both had Saturday jobs at 16 which paid for most of their needs. One left school with good GCSE and A Level results and is now working in an NHS Apprenticeship, whereas the other is undecided about university yet but will be applying for a student loan if he decides to go down that route.
They've both already saved up enough for their first cars and my life has only become easier financially since they turned 16. If my son goes to uni he fully expects to work part time to help make ends meet.

I suppose it depends how bothered you are about being able to take them on nicer holidays, or enable them to take up the hobbies they want to without having to stress too much about cost.  

Hobbies and holidays can be just as enjoyable on a budget. No need to be splashing out on all inclusive every time you go away. And if the hobby is an expensive one, find one that isn’t.

But what if the child absolutely loves and has a talent for the expensive hobby?  Would dad not feel guilty that the only reason child can't pursue something they love is that dad wanted to retire at 42?

That could be addressed later on; the OP could return to work if needed. I don't think any parent should feel guilty about not being able to pump thousands of pounds into a child's hobby. Many of us can't.

Nebulous2

Whiterose23 said:

Nebulous2 said:

Whiterose23 said:

What would happen if their child, or children turned out to be a budding Jessica Ennis, Andy Murray, Pippa Funnell or even Lewis Hamilton! Where would the funds for those activities come from or would you just say to your child “Sorry son, you’ll just have to become a footballer like everyone else”

Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway .... and if they have a special talent they could apply for a scholarship (if the above unlikely scenario becomes a reality).

Actually there's nothing could be further from the truth. The world is full of talented people who never put in the work to rise to the top. It's worth reading up on Andy Murray's early history for instance. Some people make it in spite of not having the same opportunities, but they have to work even harder. 

A journalist once said to one of the top golfers that he had been very lucky. He agreed and said, you know something? The more I practice the luckier I get. 

I think this is a matter of opinion; there are as many stories of hard working people gaining success without having the bank of mum and dad behind them. Of course every parent wants to help and we do, but it isn’t a bad thing either for a child to work for what they want to achieve, including helping to finance their own dreams, rather than having it handed to them on a plate.
The OP’s view isn’t clear on this and whether he has considered it in his numbers, but early retirement could also benefit his child enormously has he will be around more to help them/nurture them. I think a balance would be ideal.

Can you name some?
Andy Murray was clearly very talented, but had a huge amount of support and worked very hard. 
Lewis Hamilton's family sacrificed a huge amount to help his early career. 

It's reasonable for families not to have that level of aspiration for their children - going for broke can end in disappointment - but to achieve at an elite level well below the Olympic / national team level takes a great deal of family support for most people. 

Your argument has switched however - the point I initially questioned was:
"Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway." 

Quite simply - no they wont. If they don't have the dietary support, the coaching, the elite training facilities and the commitment to ferry them all over the country for competitions then they have more chance of winning the lottery than doing well.

All sports are not created equal. There is a reason why rich countries have the 3 day eventers who can afford to run a string of horses, and poorer countries have the runners who can succeed with much fewer resources. 

Whiterose23

Nebulous2 said:

Whiterose23 said:

Nebulous2 said:

Whiterose23 said:

What would happen if their child, or children turned out to be a budding Jessica Ennis, Andy Murray, Pippa Funnell or even Lewis Hamilton! Where would the funds for those activities come from or would you just say to your child “Sorry son, you’ll just have to become a footballer like everyone else”

Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway .... and if they have a special talent they could apply for a scholarship (if the above unlikely scenario becomes a reality).

Actually there's nothing could be further from the truth. The world is full of talented people who never put in the work to rise to the top. It's worth reading up on Andy Murray's early history for instance. Some people make it in spite of not having the same opportunities, but they have to work even harder. 

A journalist once said to one of the top golfers that he had been very lucky. He agreed and said, you know something? The more I practice the luckier I get. 

I think this is a matter of opinion; there are as many stories of hard working people gaining success without having the bank of mum and dad behind them. Of course every parent wants to help and we do, but it isn’t a bad thing either for a child to work for what they want to achieve, including helping to finance their own dreams, rather than having it handed to them on a plate.
The OP’s view isn’t clear on this and whether he has considered it in his numbers, but early retirement could also benefit his child enormously has he will be around more to help them/nurture them. I think a balance would be ideal.

Can you name some?
Andy Murray was clearly very talented, but had a huge amount of support and worked very hard. 
Lewis Hamilton's family sacrificed a huge amount to help his early career. 

It's reasonable for families not to have that level of aspiration for their children - going for broke can end in disappointment - but to achieve at an elite level well below the Olympic / national team level takes a great deal of family support for most people. 

Your argument has switched however - the point I initially questioned was:
"Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway." 

Quite simply - no they wont. If they don't have the dietary support, the coaching, the elite training facilities and the commitment to ferry them all over the country for competitions then they have more chance of winning the lottery than doing well.

All sports are not created equal. There is a reason why rich countries have the 3 day eventers who can afford to run a string of horses, and poorer countries have the runners who can succeed with much fewer resources. 

Sorry are we only talking about sports? I thought we were talking about success generally.
Of course parents provide support; I'm not claiming they don't, but how can you plan your finances for a 1 year old child around the fact that they might become the next Andy Murray? All kinds of sport and success stories come from rich backgrounds, there's no doubt about it, and it is an advantage (sadly) but what is wrong with expecting a child to work hard towards reaching their goals and helping to fund their dreams?
I've paid for hobbies over the years for my kids, and ferried them all over the place as a single parent on an average wage, but I didn't commit myself to spending thousands trying to turn them into the next sports star. Why would I do that? They have to have the drive to achieve that themselves and from where we stood as parents, our kids were more interested in the taking part than becoming wildly successful. I guess it's all down to the parents' ambitions for their children. I guess you are funding your children's sporting hobbies?
If the OP wants to retire early and spend time raising their child then wouldn't that be a good thing?
As for a list of successful people who have made it through their own hard work, then here goes:
David Beckham, Mike Tyson, Pele, Mo Farrah (sport)
Sajid Javid (politics)
Oprah Winfrey, Gary Oldman (Celebs)
Chris Dawson, Richard Branson (entrepreneurs)

I could go on.

Nebulous2

Whiterose23 said:

Nebulous2 said:

Whiterose23 said:

Nebulous2 said:

Whiterose23 said:

What would happen if their child, or children turned out to be a budding Jessica Ennis, Andy Murray, Pippa Funnell or even Lewis Hamilton! Where would the funds for those activities come from or would you just say to your child “Sorry son, you’ll just have to become a footballer like everyone else”

Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway .... and if they have a special talent they could apply for a scholarship (if the above unlikely scenario becomes a reality).

Actually there's nothing could be further from the truth. The world is full of talented people who never put in the work to rise to the top. It's worth reading up on Andy Murray's early history for instance. Some people make it in spite of not having the same opportunities, but they have to work even harder. 

A journalist once said to one of the top golfers that he had been very lucky. He agreed and said, you know something? The more I practice the luckier I get. 

I think this is a matter of opinion; there are as many stories of hard working people gaining success without having the bank of mum and dad behind them. Of course every parent wants to help and we do, but it isn’t a bad thing either for a child to work for what they want to achieve, including helping to finance their own dreams, rather than having it handed to them on a plate.
The OP’s view isn’t clear on this and whether he has considered it in his numbers, but early retirement could also benefit his child enormously has he will be around more to help them/nurture them. I think a balance would be ideal.

Can you name some?
Andy Murray was clearly very talented, but had a huge amount of support and worked very hard. 
Lewis Hamilton's family sacrificed a huge amount to help his early career. 

It's reasonable for families not to have that level of aspiration for their children - going for broke can end in disappointment - but to achieve at an elite level well below the Olympic / national team level takes a great deal of family support for most people. 

Your argument has switched however - the point I initially questioned was:
"Ultimately, talent shines through and if they've got what it takes, they'll get there anyway." 

Quite simply - no they wont. If they don't have the dietary support, the coaching, the elite training facilities and the commitment to ferry them all over the country for competitions then they have more chance of winning the lottery than doing well.

All sports are not created equal. There is a reason why rich countries have the 3 day eventers who can afford to run a string of horses, and poorer countries have the runners who can succeed with much fewer resources. 

Sorry are we only talking about sports? I thought we were talking about success generally.
Of course parents provide support; I'm not claiming they don't, but how can you plan your finances for a 1 year old child around the fact that they might become the next Andy Murray? All kinds of sport and success stories come from rich backgrounds, there's no doubt about it, and it is an advantage (sadly) but what is wrong with expecting a child to work hard towards reaching their goals and helping to fund their dreams?
I've paid for hobbies over the years for my kids, and ferried them all over the place as a single parent on an average wage, but I didn't commit myself to spending thousands trying to turn them into the next sports star. Why would I do that? They have to have the drive to achieve that themselves and from where we stood as parents, our kids were more interested in the taking part than becoming wildly successful. I guess it's all down to the parents' ambitions for their children. I guess you are funding your children's sporting hobbies?
If the OP wants to retire early and spend time raising their child then wouldn't that be a good thing?
As for a list of successful people who have made it through their own hard work, then here goes:
David Beckham, Mike Tyson, Pele, Mo Farrah (sport)
Sajid Javid (politics)
Oprah Winfrey, Gary Oldman (Celebs)
Chris Dawson, Richard Branson (entrepreneurs)

I could go on.

The original comment from you was in relation to sportspeople and that is what I have been referring to all along. 
Of those sportspeople you have mentioned - the only one I'd say who made it largely on his own was Mike Tyson. He had a chaotic background, showed a talent for fighting and was adopted by a boxing trainer, who helped him on his way. The rest all had a great deal of family support. They may have been from relatively modest backgrounds, but had a great deal of commitment from their families and others. 

I'm beyond the point of bringing up children, but spent a fair bit on travel, musical instruments and getting them classes and tuitions for things they were interested in. I've no regrets about any of that. 

My only foray into high level sport was swimming, where I did a bit of coaching and was dismayed that it was a money machine which was committed to the top level participants above all else. We didn't keep it up very long. It left me with a great deal of admiration for how hard these children worked however. Doing 7 or 8 pool sessions a week, with 4 mornings of 5.45 am starts at 12-13 years old was a massive commitment.

I remember one girl who was very talented, but her father worked away and there were younger children at home. Her mother literally begged other parents to pick her up and take her to the pool in the mornings, but the arrangements never lasted very long, and she dropped out. It's extremely unlikely anyone is going to achieve in swimming without a massive family commitment in addition to some exceptionally hard work from them. 

Going back to the original post - which has got lost here, all people were trying to say was that his budget is tight for bringing up a child. Hobbies, clothes and food will take more than he expects. 

My original suggestion was that he get a part-time job, possibly on lower pay, to achieve more of a life-work balance.