(Stockbyte)
My son now travels three days a week, and my daughter-in-law has knee problems. What to do about such tasks as gardening, lawn mowing, leaf raking, etc.? They could hire a gardener; but their kids, now teenagers, are confronting scarcity: Their allowances no longer cover the things they want to buy—they have become economic people.
To solve both parental and offspring problems, the kids have offered to engage in household production in return for extra pay. The garden now looks better, leaves are raked more quickly and the lawn is mowed on time—and the kids have more spending money. I have no doubt that paying the kids is cheaper than hiring a gardener—cheaper than the market solution. Of course, my son could order the kids to do the tasks, but paying them is a nice way to give them spending money. I wonder, though: Does their pay of, say $10, represent a $10 increase in income? Or does my son cut back on the things he used to pay for and now makes the kids pay for themselves? If so, do teenagers understand this kind of fiscal substitution?
and 
. You can also watch it on 
It’s not just about buy *things*, but about buying *time*. And, really, isn’t that the classic payoff of getting an allowance? Yes, a parent might eventually buy their child a cell phone, or some other must-have item, but if the child wants it NOW, then everyone benefits in the end by bumping up the value of chores. Even if the child understood they could just wait for their birthday to get the very same item they’re lusting after, it probably wouldn’t change a thing. And if that means the parent can then make the “substitution” of some cheaper gift on the kid’s birthday (yay, socks!), the kid still comes out ahead.
Well, if one of the kids knows “the secret” (that I knew growing up), they will have a lot more money than their siblings….
When I was a young man, when I made money doing some menial task for a member of the church or neighbor, I almost always gave it all to my dad. Why? Well, I’d heard stories of how he and his brothers, raised in poverty in southeast Tennessee in the Depression (or just after) had “supported their family.” That just resonated with me. So I just gave my money to my dad (who never once asked for it).
But my younger brother, that was a different matter. When he made money, it was all for him. Not because he was greedy, but just because he didn’t “get” what I had “gotten.”
Long story short, when I would go to my dad (as a teen or even my twenties) and need some money, out came his wallet and I got whatever I needed. I had built up “credit,” you might say.
But when my brother would ask for money, my dad would almost invariably ask, “Where’s that money you made the other day?” He’d push back, making it harder for my brother to get money. Or if he did give him money, he might give him a $5, while I would have gotten a $20.
So, those kids, if they’re smart, will do these things “for free.” Otherwise, they’ll get ONLY what is being paid for the chore at hand. Do it for nothing, and what you’d have gotten only $10 to do…will come back to you in $20′s.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
14 
1
Probably depends on the family. My parents’ attempts to create some sort of rational allowance setup fell apart almost immediately (we were just too disorganized as a family) so I was asking for spending cash (and usually getting it) whenever I wanted it all through high school, and my parents paid for most things that whole time. Any cash earned through chores or jobs was additional income, without question. Fortunately, my siblings and I all managed to learn a pretty good work ethic and solid spending habits, so I guess it worked somehow.
My husband’s family was much more organized, and by the end of high school he had an allowance (and got jobs over the summer) and used that money to pay for quite a lot, including lunches (his mom billed him for the groceries used in a bag lunch). I was surprised when we got married that he has such a clear list of which of his things were his and which belonged to his family, but it worked for them. Now he has an amazing work ethic, but his spending habits are actually a little worse than mine, mostly because he rarely did much shopping himself.
If your son is like my mother-in-law, then your grandchildren probably know perfectly well what they are and aren’t expected to pay for and whether chores are worth it. If your son is more like my parents…not so much.
My family solved the problem by just assigning me the chore in the first place. Substitution problem solved.
Is there a value to the spending freedom that the kids now have? If I’m a teenager and I want to go to the movies on a given day, I may be limited only by the fact that my parents don’t want to give me $10 at that specific time.
http://www.ChorePay.com is planning on solving the gap for fiscal responsibility with kids