Allowances Tied to Chores?
Kids earning or learning?
http://www.kiplinger.com/columns/drt/archive/2007/dt070606.html
from
JoeUser Forums
I don't want allowances to be a handout. I want to teach my children the value of work while also teaching the value of saving versus spending. Hopefully I can instill in my children a good attitude towards money, something that both my wife and I didn't get in our own childhoods.
I give my kids an allowance, based on their participation in household chores. The chores are leveled in difficulty for the age of the child: I don't require my 5-year-old to perform the same chores my 11-year-old does. But each chore is tied to a dollar amount -- since the 11-year-old can do more, he gets paid more than my 5-year-old. No chores, no allowance. If they want a raise that week, they can work more and get more money (get "overtime pay").
Where this plan falls down is in two places, one of them self-inflicted:
1) We end up buying stuff for them. Most times they forget their allowance money when we go to the mall, so my wife and I end up paying for their items with the hope that they'll pay us back afterwards. This becomes "please buy this for me" and I'll admit that we are weak-kneed in this area.
My oldest son (the 11-year-old) is a real skinflint with his money and a wastrel with ours. When we challenge him with "use your own money for that" he almost invariably puts the trinket back. He'll quite happily spend our money, but is a real tightwad with his own cash.
2) They get lunch money and snack money. My 11-year-old has a school lunch for $2 and an additional snack for $1. He can keep the snack money if he doesn't spend it. I'm certainly not advocating making my kids pay for their own school lunches, but this extra $5 per week cancels out his need to earn extra cash through chores. If he doesn't need more than $5 per week (see above) he isn't motivated for work.
I guess what I'd like to know is how others feel about allowances for their kids, and whether the allowance is based on work or given as a handout?
I give my kids an allowance, based on their participation in household chores. The chores are leveled in difficulty for the age of the child: I don't require my 5-year-old to perform the same chores my 11-year-old does. But each chore is tied to a dollar amount -- since the 11-year-old can do more, he gets paid more than my 5-year-old. No chores, no allowance. If they want a raise that week, they can work more and get more money (get "overtime pay").
Where this plan falls down is in two places, one of them self-inflicted:
1) We end up buying stuff for them. Most times they forget their allowance money when we go to the mall, so my wife and I end up paying for their items with the hope that they'll pay us back afterwards. This becomes "please buy this for me" and I'll admit that we are weak-kneed in this area.
My oldest son (the 11-year-old) is a real skinflint with his money and a wastrel with ours. When we challenge him with "use your own money for that" he almost invariably puts the trinket back. He'll quite happily spend our money, but is a real tightwad with his own cash.
2) They get lunch money and snack money. My 11-year-old has a school lunch for $2 and an additional snack for $1. He can keep the snack money if he doesn't spend it. I'm certainly not advocating making my kids pay for their own school lunches, but this extra $5 per week cancels out his need to earn extra cash through chores. If he doesn't need more than $5 per week (see above) he isn't motivated for work.
I guess what I'd like to know is how others feel about allowances for their kids, and whether the allowance is based on work or given as a handout?
).
:
- they can see through dubious schemes to pay them to shut up or do what they hate anyway. With regular chores they know they will end up doing it like it or not, but if they can get mum & dad to cough up money to do it as well, hey great wheeze lets go for it.