<p>Very interesting reading, right to the last paragraph.</p>
<p>I think about this quite a bit, since mine are in their early 20’s (22, 24). On the other hand, they’re in the performing arts so if they don’t have the chance to live close-to-the-ground right now, they really won’t ever find out if they can make it. And both are self-supporting in shared apartments, no cars (use public transportation), FRUgal lifestyles --unbelievably so. One acts off-Broadway, another is working on illustrating children’s books. But both get by (just) on a mix of flex-schedule skilled day-jobs as language teachers, tour guides, event photographer and so on. They are active, living in other cities, trying to make their way. I was doing the same thing at that age. (I went back to graduate school at 26 after 3 years working as a waitress, secretary, whatever trying to paint…). By that meager measure, my kids are doing “better” than I was because at least their day jobs are skilled, worthwhile and pay high by the hour. THey work them 20 hours, not 40 hours per week. That’s how they free up enough time to try to pursue their dream. It seems a reasonable trade to me. Both went to fine LAC’s.</p>
<p>Anyway, they ARE actively engaged in their work, it’s just that their work is as actors/artists. We don’t send them money, but we cover their health insurance and fly them home for December vacation. If we insisted at age 22 and 24 that they go to law school or work corporate jobs RIGHT NOW, they’d never even have a chance to find out if they could make their primary living as an actor or artist. I don’t want to be the one to break their dreams. If that’s what the world tells them, they’ll know in a few years; meanwhile, I hope they might defy the odds and BE that one. They certainly have that much talent and are working hard towards a focused vision. Perhaps at 27 I’d feel differently. H tells them to put aside for a pension (self-managed) but that is just too optimistic this year. They’re paying off their college loans, too. They are certainly working as hard as they can, 50 hours weekly on their goal-tasks. I’m not sure what more to ask of them, other than to give it all up for corporate jobs or grad school immediately. That feels like a mistake; it should be their call before age 30. I worry/wonder/think about this at times, but not Worry-and-Fret big-time. </p>
<p>I have a younger brother-in-law aged 50 who decided at age 29 to give up being a jazz club percussionist and enrol in law school. Law schools don’t mind late applicants and now he’s comfortable, but he didn’t make that decision until his first baby was born. It was his decision. And none of our extended families crave things. It’s never been about the money but meaningful work for us, too. The phrase “meaningful work” was in our home and they picked it up, growing up (clergy, schoolteacher), so I shouldn’t be surprised if they’re not primarily motivated by financial security at the outset of their adult lives. I hope it comes into balance within 10 years for them, however. They couldn’t buy homes or raise children the way they now live; on the other hand, they don’t WANT those things right now for themselves. I listen to agemates enjoying their kids buying a first condo or having a first grandchild, so there are different paths. Back to rightness of fit, I suppose.</p>
<p>I do think about this a lot lately. Thanks for the interesting article link, northstarmom.</p>