Debt is a cancer to building intergenerational wealth. The phrase intergenerational wealth conjures up images of the very, very rich who are able to bestow entire empires upon their progeny. Truthfully, the concept doesn’t require anything quite that elaborate. My definition of intergenerational wealth is the ability to provide financial assistance to your offspring in order to help them get ahead as adults. It’s above and beyond that level of sustenance that is legally required of parents. Intergenerational wealth is what you use to assist your child in achieving a better life – financial or otherwise – than the one you’ve had. This type of wealth is created when you’ve acquired assets that can be utilized to fund the major purchases of your child’s life when the time comes.
A few weeks back, I read an article about how black women graduate with the highest amount of student loan debt. It got me thinking. How could these women build wealth for their families if they were saddled with big student loans which required years to repay? And what if they also had mortgages, car loans and credit card debt while carrying student loan burdens? How much money would they have to earn to both pay off all debt and save enough to invest in the family’s future? What kind of impact does debt – student loan or otherwise – have on a parent’s ability to build intergenerational wealth?
My ultimate conclusion was that all debt is an inhibitor to the creation and growth of intergenerational wealth, regardless of the demographic group to which the debtor belongs. Debt of any kind impedes the accumulation of wealth because you’re so preoccupied with paying someone else that you rarely get the opportunity to pay yourself first. Obviously, larger amounts of debt have a greater negative impact on the creation of wealth because it takes so much longer to pay it back. At the end of the day, debt is corrosive to the accumulation of wealth.
If you’re making payments on your student loan, your car loan, your credit cards, and your mortgage, then your money is not being put towards your family’s future. Whatever the size of the debt obligations, whether $500 per month or $5000 per month, the fact remains that you’ve committed to giving that amount of money to someone else in order to pay down your outstanding debt. You’ve agreed to give away the money that could have been used to build a foundation of wealth for yourself and your family.
Recently, I read an interview with a millionaire where a cycle of intergenerational wealth was put into place. The millionaire being interviewed was the daughter of parents who had worked very hard at regular jobs, while also running their own side hustles. Her parents had worked very hard to create wealth for their family. They taught their children the same principles, and the millionaire in turn taught those principles to her own two sons, the grandchildren. Over time, this family had created sufficient wealth that offspring who needed a mortgage did not have to go to the bank. Instead, mortgages were issued within the family from one generation to another. When the millionaires’s sons graduated from post-secondary schooling, each of them already had $200,000 in their investment portfolios. Their money had grown from cash gifts bestowed upon them by the grandparents. (Check out ESI Money if you want to read more millionaire interviews.)
Many parents want to pay for their children’s educations. This is a worthy goal and I have no quarrel with it. In today’s world, an education opens doors and provides opportunities that would otherwise not be available. An education is not a guarantee of success, but it is certainly an asset in the pursuit of success. Parents who save for their children’s educations are providing their children with a gift, i.e. starting their adult lives without student loans. They are gifting their children the opportunity to start with a clean slate. Once employed, their children will not be required to send a portion of their paycheques to the student loan people. Instead, if the children are wise, they will start using that portion of their money to invest for the future and to buy cash-flow positive assets…assuming, of course, that the children appreciate the opportunity provided by their parents’ gift of a debt-free post-secondary education.
The children who wisely take advantage of this opportunity are then in a position to do the same for the grandchildren, when they make their appearance. The children will have continued the tradition of ensuring that the next generation begins adulthood without debt. If the children were also fortunate enough to have invested in assets the grew over the years between their graduation and the start of the grandchildren’s post-secondary education, then those invested assets may still be available for the benefit of the grandchildren and the eventual great-grandchildren.
The cycle of passing down intergenerational wealth cannot flourish if the parents or the children are required to send part of their income to creditors, year in and year out. Creating intergenerational wealth begins with the basic principle of paying yourself first. The accumulation of wealth comes from the act of setting money aside from your paycheque and investing it for a positive return. If your money from today’s paycheque is being used to pay for yesterday’s purchases, then you’re impeding your ability to invest money for your future and for your family’s future. In other words, today’s paycheque cannot be used to pay for tomorrow’s needs and opportunities. Once you’ve given your money away to pay off debt, then your money is gone forever and you must find a way to earn more. Money spent on repaying debt can never be used to change your family’s future.
I am not an expert in parenting, but I have observed families in my life who have established a positive cycle of investing in businesses and assets while also saving money for their offspring’s future. These families are ensuring that the financial lessons are passed down so that each successive generation has the money to live a comfortable life and to both grow and preserve their wealth. One of the other things I’ve observed about these families is that they do not have debt.
I’ve watched as the parents gifted down payments for homes to the children. I’ve seen the parents assist the children to buy businesses. I’ve observed the children purchase income-producing rental property where their parents did not have intergenerational wealth to pass down. Where the parents didn’t have money, they had worked in real estate and had advice to give to their children about how to assess investment properties. The children’s rental properties will become part of the intergenerational transfer of wealth to the grandchildren. Personally, my brother and I benefitted from such intergenerational transfers of wealth by having nearly all of our post-secondary education funded by our parents.
Please don’t get me wrong. Receiving a down payment didn’t eliminate the children’s obligation to pay the mortgage. However, the gift of a down payment meant that the children were able to start building equity in their homes sooner than their contemporaries who had to save up a down payment.
Even where the parents assisted a child to buy a business, there was still the need for a commercial business loan from the bank which had to be repaid. The parents’ transfer of wealth assisted the child to take advantage of the opportunity to buy a business that he understood intimately at a time in the child’s life when he did not have the money to buy the business himself. In that situation, the child received another form of intergenerational wealth – his parents worked at his business for free for the first couple of years until he got himself established enough to hire his own staff.
The children whose parents did not provide them with intergenerational transfers of wealth still took it upon themselves to start creating a strong financial foundation for their own future children. They purchased property, lived in it, and then rented it when they moved to the next home. Did they have to use mortgage debt? Yes, of course. Are they using the underlying asset to create positive cashflows in their lives? Yes, they are. The tenants pay the mortgage debt, and the cash flow from the properties is directed towards improving the families’ financial future.
I have also observed other families who seemed destined to live paycheque to paycheque. From what I can see, they make decisions with their money which will always require them to remain in debt servitude. From the outside, it looks like they actually love being in debt to someone. When a car breaks down, a brand-new car with a $700 per month payment is immediately purchased. There is no consideration given to the option of buying an adequate used car that fulfills the same purpose of safely going from point A to point B. Student loan debts are not aggressively paid down as soon as possible due to other priorities. Such loans last for ten or more years after the former student has graduated when sustained monetary effort could have eradicated the debt in three years or less. Mortgages are taken out when there is insufficient household income to handle the monthly payment, the utilities, the taxes and the other associated costs of running a home. Unfortunately, the mortgage-holders do not earn high incomes so they’ve essentially made themselves house-poor. They will be forced to live paycheque-to-paycheque until the mortgage debt is gone or until the bank forecloses on them for non-payment.
These families have purposely created situations for themselves where they are unable to create any wealth to pass on to the next generation. In fact, they cannot even create wealth for their own retirements. They purposely seek debt-burdens rather than debt-freedom, and I haven’t been able to figure out why. At the same time, these families want to live a life that they could actually afford if they didn’t have debt payments. They want the toys and the travel and the comforts that come with debt-free living yet they are not willing to do what needs to be done to rid themselves of debt.
Perhaps the distinction between the two families comes from the debt-free choosing a long-term view while the indebted choose a short-term view? I will continue to think about why some people get it and some people don’t, how some families are able to create a comfortable legacy while others are not. In the end, I guess the reason for the distinction doesn’t matter too, too much. The bottom line is that debt always inhibits the creation and the accumulation of intergenerational wealth. Debt prevents people from saving for their families’ future since it requires people to pay for their past purchases.
Just imagine what you could do for your family if you didn’t have to repay debt. How different would your life be? Is there something that you would be able to give to your children and your grandchildren that you can’t give them right now? How much could you change your family’s future if debt were not a part of your life?
