Bitcoin Forum

Talking about teaching financial intelligence to children, what do you think is the best practice to enforce this as a parent,
Scenario 1
Giving them enough money at a young age to see how well they will manage it.

Scenario 2
Not giving them enough money, so they can work for their own money.

Put these conditions in mind,
In the first scenario, it is a close condition where the parent intends to teach the child early how to manage money, and in the second scenario, the parent wants the child to learn from their own experience.

Everybody are different
A strategy that would work for party A may not work for Party B
So you have to understand the child first before picking what can be considered best
Not excluding the fact you have to be good at implementing it.

Personally prefer scenario 1 because it tells me what am working on
The essence is to see how well they manage money
Why not see that when they have lots to spend rather than little.

Like they say, power changes a Man.

I think the second scenario is better for children, because not given them enough money will make them wake up and work hard to make their own money and it will also make them to be decipline when spending money.
the first scenario is the reason why we have  lazy youths all over the world who are just roaming about doing nothing for themselves, because their parents was always giving them money so they see no reason to work for their own money and most of the children who fall into the first scenario end up being useless in the future, please note this I didn't say all the children that fall into the first scenario end up being useless I said most of them, because am talking from experience.

Plan B, that's the most effective way if you want to teach your kid some real lesson and the significance of financial freedom, but it can go either way so you as a parent should ne there to guide and help but not giving things in a platter that makes them lazy and that's what we called spoiled rich kids, isn't?

But there's no one rule that will work for everyone so it's also important to give what's the best as of your financial status. But an average middle class parent give more comfortable living conditions that is why they fail when they have to face the world on their own.

Scenario 1
If only it has been put into there consciousness that the money is for a test to see how well they can manage there finances or money then giving them enough money to see how well they can manage it is a good opinion too but when it's a constant financial support giving them enough money will only make them begin to think that money is easy to get without proper knowledge of how difficult it is to make the money.

A good example that I know is Cristiano Ronaldo's son who had abundant of money and began to miss use it because he had so much but was later restricted from using money for him to learn so giving children too much could ruin the intention.

Scenario 2
Teaching them how to manage money, how to make it for them selves is the best.

Teaching someone how to make money you must or not give the person money before you teach the person they impact of making money, what children mostly need during teaching is attention and also the basic Foundation of what you are in parting on them if your transfer in negative information to them it is what will embedded in them because it is what they brought up with

But if you want to reach them with the money by gift to them money, I think they will not take it serious to make their own money, for me the ability to teach people how to make money is through information and practical

Giving children money or not giving them money has nothing to do with financial intelligence. Most children don't even see money to be anything because they believe they have parents who are there to provide anything they want. There is a way you expose money to children it can even affect children negatively.  Children can learn financial intelligence from the lifestyle of parents as they grow and watch parents how they manage money.  The lifestyle of parents has more effect in teaching children on how to handle money than giving them money.

Encouraging children to save and having a financial interaction will even be more effective and as they grow up it will be easy for them to manage money based on what they have been taught from their parents.

None of the scenerio works for kids:

What's best for kids is to learn how to leverage their talents as well as their potential to carter for themselves, some kids are good at painting, dancing, singing and others, so why not use those natural skills to provide service to the society while the parent protecting them and using the money rewarded to care about the kids thereby teaching the kids how to manage his funds.

Doing this will let the kids loves himself/herself more and even unlock the potential in him/her to perform more of her abilities more and more, it's up to the parent to manage the rewarded funds untill the child is mature enough to control the funds by himself to the way he wants.

I am more favorable of this one. They will not know how to use money if they did not have one to begin with. Just teach your kids enough about the concept of money and being responsible and they’ll reinforce it themselves.
This will do nothing but make your kids resent you. We work hard so our kids live a comfortable life so why would you deprive them off of it?

I think it's a mix of both. You have to give kids money, and at the same time, you need to teach kids how to make their own money and how to manage money.
I believe kids should know about money from a young age, but they have to learn it gradually. There is a limit to how certain kids may understand different things, so you just have to look for a way that fits the kids.

It doesn't help being rigid when raising children. Try to be dynamic. Following the "this way or no other way" route won't always work; in fact, it rarely works.

And I think this topic should be in "politics and society"

For my own opinion, if you have a kid, you must do both things you mention: you will give your child money and also introduce them to work for themselves. However, the thing is that the child is yours; you may do what they will be happy with. Even if they have where they are going, you know they will start earning as soon as they get introduced, so it will take a lot of time before they start getting their own money.

So the first and second scenarios are something you must do as long as the child is yours; I don’t think there is a way to escape that.

The second scenario is more better is not that a parents cannot give his children money, but release to much of money for the children is the leading some child to do what pass their power a moment they begin receiving big amounts of money they will not give anyone respect claim that their parents has money which is not proper.

Their some kid that know matter their parents rushed money for them it will never show for their body hence they will keep this money on their account or for their mothers account till after they grow up before they can use the money, because by then know how the life goes they will can only begin think of business that can generate more money for them; by creating another way of success of income.

True that children are each different and different parenting styles must be applied however I also think that a child will turn out exactly how you raised them. If you raised them right, they will end up well. So, you also have to consider teaching them from an early age and build foundations that will be later on used in life.

I think the first one will be a better choice in my opinion. It's like they will understand the effort:reward ratio. So they will have to focus into working something to achieved that they wanted it life. Let's say they want to buy their own car, then they will work for that and manage their time and money to get that goal.

So you are teaching them the appreciation of money, and then what we call delayed gratification, which is I think a good mindset for them to learn very early in life. And this can trickle to everything like in investments or their 401K and any savings that they will do.

Also they can understand the "needs vs wants" dilemma and which one to chose.

First all of all, giving enough money for our children is a must for any parents. You need to understand that giving enough money doesn't mean giving an excessive money. When you say "enough money", it means the money is used for the basic necessities for the children. But, if you give a lot of money or an excessive money for children, it is surely a mistake. Children who always get what they want, they will too depend on the parents. So, they will be difficult to be independent. As parent, I always learn my children to be an independent individual since they were kids. So whenever they are already capable to work, I will lead them to work according to their ability. The main goal is not intended to get money to fulfill all their own necessities but it is a way to make them learning about working and understanding the value of money.

to be honest i think that there is some pros and cons for both approaches like if we give them money they will have first hand experience of what’s it’s like and they can realize themselves how money works and why they should be careful with it

on the other hand the 2nd option allows for them to be disciplined and not always dependent on us parents

Best way to teach teenagers or adult how to manage money is to asked them to source for a job and when they secure it they would know it's that difficult for them to receive that amount while working. Teaching them at home like culturing them about how to use and spend money is also a better choice because most children or people aren't that careful on how they spend money possible It could be that it's inherented of their wealth and they could be able to maintain such wealth then watch out to see the wealth would vanish because they don't know about finance and how to secure sustain them for long.

It is the duty of parents to provide for their children I think this is a necessity but them enough money depends on what they actually need the money for, you must have to teach your children financial value, don't expose to money much,make them to understand the importance being desciplined in things that relate to finance, they must be aware of how to build their own wealth from scratch without depending on any person, i mean financial independent, many of us come from a home where our parents are very desciplined, we know how we got to where we are today.

I think a child learning his own experience is also good but there must be a heads up by parents their children, lets not forget that in any thing  thatv concerns children we must be very careful because at this age we may encounter many problems by putting their heads straight that we also give them time to adapt to things, if we consider giving children enough money to see how careful they could be in managing it as you said may be disasterous because these little ones may not be able to manage it, although it all depends on their IQ  but if things doesn't go as you planned you won't blame them much because at this time they may not necessarily think for themselves, they are easily carried because they got no responsibility, I think it is parents responsibility at all time to tell them how important it is to save if they get a job in the future so that they estabkishe on their own without solely depending on salary or wages.

I don't think you'll get a single answer to this question, because the answers will vary depending on each person's thoughts and beliefs. Every parent will try to implement the scenario they see as best for their children. Therefore, I believe some parents will choose the first scenario, others the second, and some may not like either scenario and choose an alternative plan for their children.

For me, I choose the second scenario, which is not giving them enough money to enable them to work on their own, because not giving them money teaches them to be self-reliant. Don't forget that life is difficult, and you may not always be by their side to provide them with everything they need. Therefore, it's best for them to learn to be self-reliant.

This scenario is much better so that they know how to value money when he hasn't much of them. Less money will be force him to spend less while you also encourage him to invest in something. This will make him manage the money even in the smallest amount.

The scenario 2 is for the rich family, you don't wanna show him how wealthy you are that he may not even try harder. Because he sees rich parents is there for him.

This is not so appropriate because they have no experience at all in utilizing the money in an effort to build a business or any job.
Sometimes children need to be given responsibility first and they must master their talents before being given money for the testing process to achieve financial success.

It is better to give them experience first and try to make them like something that can make money.
For example, given the task of learning to develop a business at someone else's place or in their father's business so that they learn how and strategies to develop the business well.
After that, slowly give them the trust to manage, but it must still be controlled because usually children at a young age find it difficult to be consistent.
If a child has different talents from their parents, then parents can entrust them to experts, so that children can also learn to develop these talents before being given the big step to build something they want.

I choose scenario 1 where I give them enough money to manage it. I want to see how good they money management skill and if they can not do that, I will teach them how to do that so they can continue to manage their money. We can teach them about money management at a young age so they will not have difficult to do that when they are grow up. But if you want to let them work to earn money, you need to think about how good they can manage their salary for their life.

I dont believe that either of the two ways you have outlined is the best way of teaching your child how to be financially responsible. giving him too much money can get into him and make him assume that things comes to easily and refusing to give him enough money when he/she knows you have enough will also make him look at you as someone that does not care about his well being. the best strategy is to do proper education by telling him what financial accountability is and to try to practice what you are preaching. children learn more by observing what the people around them are doing and so, the best way of transferring a value system to them is by practicing things and allowing them watch and learn from you.

Every parent has a different strategy on teaching their child financial intelligence. I am sure, in real life, both scenarios are still used by parents for the sake of their child's better future. I would choose the second scenario, children must be educated with independence, they will be more careful in managing the money earned from their hard work, but if parents facilitate their children with a certain amount of money, they never hesitate to spend it because they never feel how difficult it is to struggle to get money.

Parents must teach their children to be independent so that they have responsibility for what they do in the future.

No matter how wealthy you are always make sure you teach your kids financial discipline. now don't get me wrong, if you are wealthy then you must give your children the best, their needs must provided but not all their wants should be freely given, there's a big difference between those two words. The second strategy is the best, you can't always dance their tune and just give them anything they request for because you are rich, teach them hardwork and discipline. Some fortunate kids suffer in the future because they stopped gaining access to their parents wealth, you won't always be with them forever so make sure you teach how to work for their money

Number 2 is the best strategy, kids shouldn't always rely on their parents money, if you really care about the financial wellbeing of your kids you'd start teaching them how to manage money and also create a source of income instead of spoiling them with wealth. Inherited wealth is good but assuming it isn't there anymore it means that your children won't be able to take care of themselves. Make them understand that life is all about working smart or hard.

How do you envision children "working for their own money"? Child labor is forbidden in most normal countries around the world.
What kind of "children" are talking about? Teenagers or kids? Teenagers are allowed to work above the age of 16, but I wouldn't call them "children". How much money is "enough money"? Enough for what? For a daily meal? If I ever had a kid, I would never give my kid a decent amount of money at a young age. Maybe after a certain age, the children should be taught a lesson about money management and basic finances, so I would pick scenario 2. ;D

I think I will follow the second scenario. The reason that people are called manager is because they are saddled with the responsibility of managing people and money. So to be a manager you must have known how to utilize these two factors successfully.

So if children are not allowed with a lot of money in their disposal, they can be able to manage with what is left for them and that supposedly is to shape their lives and character formation to be good managers but to live them with lots of money can make them become lavish inclined and not being able to control their financial challenges and needs when it is not available because there are actually sometimes that live throw some financial challenges on someone except people who are born in an affluent home.

However, it all varies because you still see poor children who are not good with money.

For me I will chose scenario 2, not giving them enough money , sothat they can work for their self. Why I chose the number 2 is because a person that start his or her journey without help always bear it in mind that in business you are on your own. Which means that when dealing with business son hope on anyone to assist you if you fall, and this will encourage the person to strive to make success without depending on anyone. In the other hand a person who is tested or given money to start up a business without passing through the school of self decipline may succeed from the beginning and thinks that he/she is smart or  everything is ok until he or she begins to face loses.

Both are important to teach them, so you need to do both. First, give them enough money and let them use that money for whatever things they want to spend it on, but let them know that they need to do everything with it and they aren't getting more money. They might use that money recklessly, most probably, because they don't have any experience or understanding and it's like free money for them because they didn't earn it, but you shouldn't disturb them first or tell them anything. Do it on a monthly basis, so for the initial couple of months, do that.

Later, once you are done with that experiment, now give them less money, and tell them the same thing; that they have to manage everything within that budget, and then see how they would do. Now that they have a low budget and can't be reckless with it, they will start learning to manage their finances because they know they have to manage everything within the budget and that's what we need to do when we grow up,

Most of them will lose free money easily. If you love them and want to help them, let's teach them how to work, earn money then individual financial management properly. You can not give the young money and teach them about financial management. They won't fee difficulty in earning money and they won't value those airdrop money rightly.

It's the right advice and by working, facing with life including challenge, barriers, the youth will mature with time and own experience. This way, you actually help them in maturation and you can teach them about financial management at a right time later.

If they're not children of course I will give them money, and is even normal making it weekly up keep for them, at least an amount that would buy them things they need, the joy of having a parent is the safety and the excessive love they give both in finance, how a child will treat her parents in the future comes from how the parents treated them as they were growing up, is okay to be mean sometimes as the parents but they shouldn't deprive their children the support they need because we can never plant something and expect another thing to come out for them, not everybody who has the heart to forgive after a dipp pain is been done on them. So I will continue to give my children money so long as they're on the age to be using money for important things till I no that they are financially strong to even send to others.

Scenario 1 will only result that them wanting to buy toys and they won't be able to grow that. So, as expected, the money will be spent for what they want to buy.

Scenario 2 will give them an idea of how hard it is to earn money. That mindset is going to give them an idea that they are reliant to the parents, and I think it's normal for the kids to think of that until they can stand alone.

Both scenarios can be helpful to their growth but the most important one is to guide them and give them tips on how they should handle every scenario.

The choice of this scenario depends on the age of the child, if they are already adults or in the category of already attending high school I will do option no. 2 I want to see them independent and how it feels to earn every penny is difficult, independence will shape them to be more responsible and disciplined someday, but option no. 1 I will also apply in the category of the child is still very easy, so this strategy can be done depending on the right time.

Our principle in educating children in financial or economic matters, do not give them money, but give them fishing and bait to catch fish is better than you give fish to children.

Tell the child to make something work, whether it's drawing or other hands, then the work they make can be marketed or you buy yourself, so that children will know how difficult it is Looking for money, in that way they will think long to spree, usually children will be aware that they are easy to understand how to invest.

This is an important question about age, so that everyone can give the right opinion according to their age.

And if they are still children, option number 1 is the most ideal and must also teach about saving and investing by managing money well so as not to be wasteful and also teach to buy something that is really needed.

And if they are teenagers, option number 2 is something that must be taught and understood how to find or make money with existing skills or develop existing skills to make money and get used to it until adulthood because skills if developed early on are likely to be successful and become experts when they are adults. And it is also important to teach investment and also adapt to technological developments.

Scenario 2 is better.

Scenario 1 is only how to know whether your child have a good or bad money management, so if your child make wrong decision, you have to train them. But, in scenario 2, either the child have a good or bad money management, they're forced to learn how to make money and manage their money.

I was taught by my parents with scenario 1, I made few bad decision, but as time grows, I learn how to manage my money.

It is up to parents to find a balance, i do not advocate that parents should give their children too much money, children are children and they are so young, there is no way you can expect them to manage money, doing that can be counterproductive and they might end up with the wrong idea of money.

Having said that, the best thing to do is to teach your children about finance, if you teach them about finance, they will learn and they will know what to do with money when they are older and start to make their own money.

Personally I will say both scenarios are much better to be implemented or incorporated together to actually test the child’s ability

The first scenario the parents usually pampers you on and give you money for all your needs and this doesn’t stops this helps the parent to see what kind of a spender the child is and as he continues to grow up then you as a parent instill the second scenario into the child and this scenario gives the teaches the child two things,

Firsts is that not everything you have will continue or better still your source of income might actually stop one day.
Secondly is not be comfortable at any zone no matter how comforting it will be.

 This second scenario if introduced will also let you know what your child had saved during the phase of the first case and how he would grow that savings. The both combine teaches the child financial management and also makes them see the love from the parent, but utterly denying them all through long will cause problems for them

Scenario one is a risky gamble because you aren't really sure of the outcome... giving them enough money and waiting to see if they can utilize it properly can turn out to be something you might find disappointing...if they don't know how hard it is to make money they would never value it and learn to manage it effectively...Even though they are born with a silver spoon they should be taught financial management and how to invest, most of these rich kids don't know how to anything but just spend..in the long run this is something that can affect them.

Understanding your children to know which strategy will best educate them is what's you'll need to know as a parent and not blindly following the society because they said the first experiment or the second one is better. We have children with different learning abilities and either case scenario might favour them hence you need to know what to use in teaching your children and making them because responsible individuals. What's more important is for your children to be able to handle life situations in the future hence you can try either scenario to see which one best teach them and when they learn then you continue. Exposing them to lots of money might be a risky move but all have their advantages and their disadvantages hence I won't say either is the best experiment to go with to teach them better.

Before implementing the two scenarios, there are small things that need to be applied to children so that we know their character so that it is easier for parents to direct where they really are.

Starting with small things like their habits when tidying their rooms, their habits just before going to school are natural images that they have so that when they are taught about finance, as parents they already know what kind of business will suit them or what profession suits the child's character.
It is true that people's strategies are different and do not have to follow the two scenarios you mentioned.

The kid needs to work in a real business to see how things in real life work. He should understand how hard it is to make money.

You might be a rich folk and it might be easy for you to print money with the clap of your hand but the kid shouldn’t get used to your habits right from the start.

He must understand that what you have now is a luxury which came with a price. It wasn’t free and if he doesn’t understand it fully, he will learn it by the hard way by losing all that wealth very quickly.

Just teach your kid how to run a business. Teach him tax laws and the rest will come naturally. If he is able to run a business successfully, that means he doesn’t need your guidance anymore.

Some small things will mean a lot considering they are children. They have to learn to manage something simple even if it is not material, even if it is just making the bed. Pampering children will basically only make them dependent and make it difficult to achieve independence when they become adults, but educating them too hard is also not recommended. Some parents don't want their children to experience the same difficulties they had when they were small, so pampering their children within certain limits is allowed.

Not all children's wishes must be granted, this will shape them into independent individuals in the long term. Children should be able to be controlled, not the other way around, but it is people's job to teach them independence as early as possible. At some stage, they should also be taught to save, it is a good lesson for them.

Best is to give them something to teach them how to manage and value money, but not overdo it. Giving a lot and nothing are both bad ideas that lead to problems.

A kid that gets everything from young age will feel like it's normal and will keep coming to you for money as an adult. If you don't give your children money they will become laughed at, unable to find their place among friends who have some money to spend. You don't want your kid to be always the poorest in the group, right?

Give them a little, make them work for it (good behavior, chores). Reward them, but just enough to make them save up and value every gift. If you give them too much they'll quickly lose interest with the things they buy, chase new things all the time.

Using both strategies will be more effective. Giving your children money for them to keep or manage it is could build their ability to safe and not misuse money. With strict supervision, you can monitor how they are using the money.

The next pattern would instill the ability to seek means of making money themselves. Not giving them much money will make them take advantage of any viable opportunity to make money. Some rich parents send their children to work in places where they earn peanuts. The focus is not the money but the development of wealth creation skills.

If only the world was so black and white, but it is not. You'll find that most parents have enough self awareness not to spoil their children too much growing up, but we all knew kids in school that probably received far too much. Then there are levels of wealth that can make it hard to distinguish, if your parents are barely scraping your family by on minimum wage jobs, then your luxuries might be a trip to McDonald's once a month. However some kids might have parents so rich that they live in a world that is so incomprehensible to the poorest family. It is a good idea to teach the value of money, rather than just letting kids have whatever they want, even if they are taught to mow the grass or wash the car to understand that life needs work.

Neither strategy works if the kid doesn’t understand why money matters to begin with. That’s the layer most parents skip. You can’t gamify financial literacy like it’s some mini-version of adulthood and expect it to land. It’s not about the amount. They’ll either hoard it, blow it, or fear it. What you’re really teaching is how money connects to self, to others, to power, to choice

Scenario 1 sounds generous but easily backfires. Give a child too much too early and you’re not teaching them money management - you’re teaching them artificial abundance. The issue is no stakes. No skin in the game. It’s not real to them. They know there's a safety net. You end up teaching controlled simulation, not emotional or practical consequence

Scenario 2, though, looks more “hard-earned” but it risks a different distortion. The child starts to link money to struggle. That’s dangerous. It breeds guilt, fear, or obsession. You’re no longer raising a financially literate huma. You’re raising someone who may equate self-worth with hustle and always feel behind

Spoiling them at a young age will make them feel entitled that they can get everything that they want. So, for me, it's the scenario 2 that is a better strategy.

Not spoiling them I think is the right term for this. But we shouldn't be giving them too much money because if they're going to need something, they know that they have to work for it and they won't get it on an instant because it will take time.

You could choose the plan A which is to determine how they will manage the money which is very useful in my opinion when they will earn through hard work but I would say that the best option is Plan B which the plan A is also in the plan B. The reason why I said that is that if you didn't give them enough money then they will surely think of different strategies, ways or options to manage their money since you didn't give them enough money. However, if you choose plan A then you should tell them what will happen if they didn't manage the funds well and what will happen if they won't earn their own money.

Since I was little until now, I was a child who was never spoiled with money by my parents. I demanded some things from my parents when I was a teenager, but they would not fulfill them, even if they were able to. I eventually realized that they did it for my own good, but as a normal child, I was certainly very disappointed when my wishes were not granted at that time.

I choose the second point as a good approach for my children now, they need to learn that not everything can be obtained easily. They need to know and learn and enjoy the results of their hard work with full happiness.

Lucky when you are not spoiled from childhood so that growing in the process of adulthood will provide a more independent life.
Parents must have a much better view of their children so that they try to do their best, even though sometimes we judge unfairly.
The process of living life is not easy and we need to be trained to adapt and by not being spoiled and following all desires will make our lives more independent.

The approach in the second point is indeed much better and I more choose that version to educate children because that way they can live much better for adjustment.
Achieving success with your own sweat is much more satisfying, even though sometimes we don't get great success like others.

I will give them money when they are ready to know the value so they can manage their money. I already explained them about saving, start from small amount and they like to save it in their piggy bank.

I want to be close condition with my children and teach many things that is necessary to them. We don't know what will happen when they are grow up so we need to prepare them to be ready with the future.

If they can manage their money with right, they will not waste their money by buying something that they don't need it. They will choose to save their money or by invest in something like Bitcoin.

Most kids nowadays are spoonfed by their parents and I agree that a kid needs to work in a real deal business or employment so that they will know how the reality will set in earning money. Without the actual experience, they'd always think that they can spend it for anything they want if they didn't earned it themselves. While having a good minset is important and if that's how they think but they also need to understand the difficulties on how a person earns money and how they work hard for it.

Give them a budget on how they should spend and then make it a challenge to save part of it that you put in a piggy bank. At the same time teach the importance of saving and spending and how they need to be balanced. Both methods might need a bit of intermixing to see the best effects.

I dont expect them to work right out of their school days. So here teaching takes much importance like using the bus instead of the cab. Walking for short distances. Keeping a limit on the amount spent on snacks and fast food, encourage healthy eating and so on.

Each of these strategies works differently in different environments. In my place here, no one will take you serious as a parent when you give your children enough money to spend in order to monitor their financial habits. In fact, majority believe that such practice is the easiest way to spoil a child when it comes to financial lifestyle. There's a popular adage here that you should not give someone fish if you really want to help them, teach them how to catch a fish and that's what we believe in here. No parents will give you penny to spend and you'll be call to panel if you spend too much out from the money you work for on your own.

The second option has been the best and working strategy for us here. When you teach a child how to make money, teaching them how to manage it would become very easy simply because they know what it takes to get the money and won't be happy to see it finish. The first option might also work for some people but I don't really see it as effective here. It will probably give a child the mentality of entitlement expecting more money from their parents after spending the initial one given to them.

Agreed, we should combine both for better results.

1. Give money to children and let them keep it but under their control, this will teach them the virtue that even if they have a lot of money, they should not waste it. Spend only when necessary and save even if they become rich later.

2. Letting children earn their own money not only helps them develop wealth-creating skills, but also helps them understand that earning money is not easy, the value of money, and helps them appreciate money more.

Teach them to understand that rendering a service is the only way to get paid, I know someone who pays his 8 years old kid for house chores, under some conditions like if he clean the who place very well he will earn $2, this kid now have some good amount of money in the bank at a very small age, which is good because he won't grow up to depend on his parent like some 25years old doea today.

Both options you gave might work but not every effective like the example that I gave, if you give them money at a young age they will think the money is that easy to get, remember you are giving them for free.

This means you teaching them to rely on you for everything, I doubt they will manage it well, when something is free it will be handled in such manner because it is free.

Not giving them money might make them believe that you are not caring enough as a parent too, they might grow some thought against you, instead let them know why you doing things this way, still I believe you need to make them know that nothing comes for free in this world.

Financial intelligence is making informed choices regarding your money and expenses, thus it’s more on how you manage your finances to avoid financial mishaps rather than making your own funds. So I would chose the first scenario.

However, it would be better to educate or teach your child first on how to budget and spend only on the necessary things, and ignore those not so important items to avoid overspending, before you decide to give him his money or allowance.

Of course, that is effective in implementing it from the beginning to children so that they know the difficulties in making money, because when children experience it themselves in running a business or other work, they will appreciate it when they get the money, so they will think more economically when they will use the money and spend it on something more useful, thus indirectly educating children to appreciate it more when they get money.

Totally situational because not all parents or families do have that good condition or having that fine financial status on which even if they want to give money but still cant provide then it will void up totally the idea.

Scenario 1.
-On the time that you do become too loose on giving them money then you kids might actually be ending up into those possible vices and since they do have the money then they could do what they want.
It will be requiring out to have that good control and discipline into your kids on how and on where they should be spending up that money but for me then having those kind of funds that they will be that handling is not that my preference because when they do have the money then they are prone into tons of potential distractions and influences on which it might be ending up for them to get engaged into since they do have the funds.

Scenario 2
-This is what i do prefer on which trying out to tight the budget on which giving them only sufficient on their main needs and the rest then they are the ones who would discover out on where they could get more.
This might that look harsh or too much but its a good way to make your kids or children to know on how hard is to earn money on which if they are that being raised on this way then children who do go pass through with these kind of challenges do become that even more mature when it comes to financial handling or management on which this will be that totally contributive at the moment that they do have their own lives or having their own family. They already know on how to handle up their finances and do know on what are the viable things or must to be done.

It all matters about on a certain parent because whatever on the way that we are trying out to apply about discipline and other correlated stuffs, we do everything and shows on how much we do love them and we do just wanted to make their lives that not harder at the time that they do become independent.

In the first sense, I would love to give my children enough money for all their activities until they are of age(adolescents) which I would reduce how I give them money and make them understand that they should work for their money in order to survive. I would introduce them to various skills of their choice and attach them to environments that would see them work for their money. Not to stress or punish them, but I surely need them to understand the importance of working smart for their money which is what they should know from a small age, so that survival doesn't become a problem for them at a later time.

I would love them to make enough money for themselves, and I would surely guide them to managing it properly, they would manage their own money which they would make themselves. I would love to teach them to make money and manage their own money instead of relying on managing my money without knowing how to make it themselves.

I consider the first scenario a failure. For me personally, it is obvious that the second scenario is the only way to raise children who will have an excellent understanding of how money works and knowledge of their own money management.
It's just very strange to give children money in the hope that they will show some innate skills to manage it. This is doomed to fail in the basement, as the children will immediately spend the money on all sorts of useless nonsense and will not learn from such a lesson.

In addition, I think we are the same in assessing what we should do for the future of our children. The arrangement or pattern of education must be prepared as early as possible by paying attention to aspects that we think are important.
Basically, the growth and development of children from childhood to adulthood must be observed so that it will not be difficult for us as parents to hope for their future goals.

Children will learn more if they will invest. By investment, they can earn money and they can be rich in life and can be successful persons in life . But if you will not give money to them then they will search for money and will do effort for it . Effort is necessary for everything but they have to learn skills if they want to earn money in life . Continues learning is necessary if they want to grow in life because they will improve in life and their life willl change with time .

Children need mindset and rich people can get this mindset by their parents but poor children have no facility . So poor people have to learn from rich people which is best effort but it is not any easy as we heard.

Actually, both scenarios are good for children depending on the parent's approach to the child at each age. Because each age has a different approach, maybe the first scenario is applied to children under 14 years old and 15 years and above using the second scenario.

Basically, parents before teaching their children about finance, first give them an understanding of money. As smart parents should start teaching children about the importance of the basics of financial planning. Children have started to recognize their pocket money when they enter elementary school. If you have taught an understanding of money, then scenarios 1 and 2 can be applied. However, it is back to each parent to choose which scenario because each parent has a different approach to their child.

Being close to children and preparing them for their future is an important responsibility of a parent teaching them financial education is a very necessary skill in their life which will help them in many ways. But I think in such a situation there is nothing to be done just to give or not give money to children they need to be taught how to manage money. Children need to be taught to find their unique skills and interests and use them make them understand the value of money from an early age and give them some money to meet their small needs and teach them how to spend that money. This will help them succeed in their future careers and contribute to society.

In my opinion, Scenario 3 would be better:

- consult the child about finances (theoretical part).
- give him some money and set the task of spending \ using \ increasing this money (practical part).
- work on mistakes, discuss with the child successful \ unsuccessful decisions in his actions, explain how it would be better to act in similar situations.

These steps are performed for training purposes.

After this, never give the child money just like that (it is possible in the case of a reward and encouragement). If he wants to buy something for himself, then let him earn it. You have already explained the basics of finance to him (see the point above). If you give him money for start-up capital, then be sure to return it.

Children need to be introduced to adult financial life immediately, from childhood.

Of course, all actions should be carried out in a playful form and the tasks set should take into account the child's age.

To make my children financial intelligent, I will prefer scenario 2 but both the scenarios have their positive key points alongwith some drawbacks. If I give money to my children to use in their own way as they want, may be it will distract them from their destination. They will be lost in the luxury of this world and the second point is If I will provide them with the money, they will not understand its importance so they will waste it. It may create a sense of financial freedom so they might not learn the things which we want to taught them.

The scenario 2 is best in my opinion, because they will understand the value of money. When children are not provided with the facilities, they will dream to get them. It may take time but this thing will motivate them to make their own assets to earn. Children will get practical experience of managing finances, savings and investments. So, Scenario 2 is better than the first one in my opinion.

There are parents who will want to go with the second scenario to observe how the child can develop the ability to be scruple with the little given to him and by that they can be able to put to good utility when much is given. But I think I prefer the first scenario, giving the child much enough money to see if they can commit to good money management skills even with much. Because it's easier to to have the mindset to manage with little given than with when much is given.

The choice is quite risky because it gives option number 1 but the child is not mature enough in managing finances, so it is feared that they will never succeed.
Giving money in large amounts is not a good parenting pattern because they may not be able to use the money to be more productive.
It is better to train in mastering skills so that they can use the money given by their parents to develop talents in business.

This method is much better in my opinion compared to giving a lot of money to test them.
There are certain limits that must be passed by a child because they will reach a stage of maturity when they have experience in life, especially regarding how to manage finances.

With the investment, they can prepare their future without have a problem. They know how to use the money with right and will not just waste it. Not many young generation now know how to use money because they can ask for the other money from their parents without think how their parents get the money for them.

We can teach them how to rich themselves and using the investment is one of many ways. They need to have a positive mindset that will help them to think what they can do that will benefit them to earn more money.

Having a positive mindset will be important to them especially if they are not grow up so they can think before decide.

If I would be a parent teaching financial literacy to my child, I would prefer the scenario 1. You just give him a small amount of money and tell him it's good for a month or more. It's up to him if he will splurge it quickly but clearly say that you won't give anything to him until your time limit pass. We know that some children can be clever and they know we won't be able to resist them even if they broke our agreement so if you're serious about teaching your child about managing their own money at their young age then you should be firm with what you've said.

Scenario 2 has a disadvantage for me in the long run. You teach your children to be reliant on something before doing anything. It might be difficult to make them do household chore if they always expect something in return.

I choose the scenario 1 if my finances are capable of doing it but if my economy is average then I will do scenario 2, by continuing to teach them skills so they can earn money, but I am sure all parents will choose to give more money to their children and whether they are able to manage it or not there are other things that every parent will try to improve by continuing to teach them how to manage finances well.

Children this days are known to be with much higher  intelligence and brilliance at younger age than in anytime in history. And we wouldn't know which child can be capable to exhibit such intelligence even in finance management not until we try to change the norm which is the option number 2.  Mind you, I can always come back to choice option 2 if I later observe that the child isn't capable of passing the test. Sometimes we should be objective to experiment both options towards our children if we can afford doing it.

Every parent must have more options to try on their children in everything which means that every parent does not only stick to one option if there are several better and unlimited options to try so that we can know which option is best for our own children at this time. Because it is undeniable that the difference in intelligence of children today is indeed visible because of the influence of teaching from their own parents in everyday life. I also agree with what you said because we really need to be more objective in looking at the behavior and real results when we apply one option to our own children so that we can know if another option might still be better than the option we have used before for the same thing.

I think it always starts with option 2. They have to learn that people just can't give them money without doing something in return of it. And they cannot always ask us for money with it. But as you have said, there are kids that have the intelligence that they have developed throughout the period of time as they grow. And so, giving them will make them curious on how they are going to grow it. This also gives them the idea of not being scared of failing so they can start again. And so, we should also teach them to keep trying and not to give up early.

It mustn't always start with option 2, in fact there's no where it's written that must start with that option. Like I earlier said, if the parents can afford it then they can objectively attempt other option to test the money behaviour of the child, with that, it can help the parents understand the weakness of the child as they grow to adult to know what they can be able handle.
My friend, when you're so wealthy there are criteria you will term needless in relation to giving your child money. They mustn't do something always to earn money from you as a father.

Yeah, there might be no written rules to it, but ask every parent. They would always say to their kids that money is hard earned and even the most spoiled kids, the parents of those would give that lesson to them that money should be earned, and they need to give importance to it.

It's not earning money to their parents but if it's given, it's different from earning it actually and from receiving it from the parents. The wealthy ones I think also teaches their kids on how to earn money and how to enrich them with the idea that they need to sort it out and cultivate the money given to them.

I would say the first strategy is the best, not giving them enough money when they know that the money is available might have some negative effects. Some children might start even learning how to steal from their parents when they are not given enough money. The best strategy is to give them enough and see how well they are able to manage it, identify their mistakes and help them out at that early stage of life so they won't grow up with that character if mismanaging money

Up to a certain age, of course we have to let them think about how they can get money by working or whatever, not getting money for free. Or they can make a proposal to us so that they get money, that's a valuable lesson of course.

Usually they will also think, and if they don't think then most likely there is a problem that makes them like that. Maybe because of the way their parents educate them or whatever. Well, of course we also have to give them an explanation, or in other words we give them a reason why we no longer give them money for free.

In my opinion, the second scenario is preferable, although it looks tougher. But if you read the biographies of famous businessmen of the past, then almost always their childhood was similar to the second scenario. At the same time, I do not exclude at all that a child who was raised according to the first scenario will grow into a successful businessman. This also happens, although not often. However, I once read statistics that only about 9% of the population have a penchant for doing business and a talent for it...

As parents, we have to give them an allowance if they're going to school. But for certain tasks or behaviors, that can be incentivized depending on how parenting works for these parents. That will also give them something out of doing good things. And as these kids grow and become teenagers, they'll start to understand that this is life. Things that they want to have should be worked hard and saved money for. It cannot be obtained as quick as they want it to be and so that's what we have to tell them and teach them to be patient too.

While the same strategy may not work for everyone, Strategy B may work for most children. My personal experience is that children should never be given more money than they need and should always be kept in poverty so that they can work for their own money and learn to earn. If a child gets enough money from their family to fulfill their needs or hobbies, why will they try to earn money? And if they don't try, how will they learn to earn money? So I think Strategy B is effective for most children. But there is no obligation that the strategies will work for everyone.

There are many children who work to meet their own financial needs without falling into either of these two strategies. In fact, you need to understand the child and have an idea of ​​​​the child's talent. If you think that if you give him a chance, he can do something good, then you should give him a chance without forcing him to earn money. If a child is not talented in physical activities along with studies, then it is better to force him to earn money.

That is right. Like those kids selling lemonades and the reason for that is saving it for something that they want to purchase. It's just the start of it and they have realized that there's more to this life and their parents have been working hard so badly to provide the things they need and also what they want. While it is a responsibility of parents to provide for their kids, making them realize that early is also going to give them pure love and acceptance that they're special to their parents and they should it as an example for them.

Parents' approach to their children in terms of money management certainly varies and this also depends on the economic status of the parents and also their education ^{[experience & knowledge].} Parents who were previously raised by economic independence without strong financial assistance from their parents probably do not want their children to feel the same hardship as they did. They do not want their children to feel what they felt before when building their economic condition - but this kind of approach will usually make children dependent and not dare to take risks on their own when they grow up.

I don't want my children to depend on my economic status - meaning they should be able to be individuals who think positively about their future and they should be able to take reasonable risks. Even though I am able, I am not always willing to give it easily, at least they should try and be patient before I grant their wishes. I don't want my child to depend on others, even if it is the government - meaning he should try to be someone who is useful to others, not someone who wants to be an employee.

I will go for the first scenario because the parents will teach them the usefulness of money while they will still be given money to see how they can be able to manage it. If most of our parents had that mentality of teaching us about how we can be productive with our money at a very tender age, most of us would have grown to become financial experts and good economist but the reason why some people are not able to manage any funds they have with them is that they were either not taught on the dangers of mismanagement of funds or they don't put in much efforts to make money. If parents allows their children to work for their own money it's also a good one but they shouldn't grow up with the mentality that their parents had more than enough and still allowed them to work so hard to make money, i know it's like a kind of training so that they will know the value of money and not spend lavishly or extravagantly but parents who already have a lot of money shouldn't exposed their children to so many dangers just because you want them to be disciplined with their finance.

Both conditions are good and in practice I believe that every parent has a different way. In general, the two conditions of the scenario are good because the goal is the desired desire, namely wanting their children to be successful for their future.

Isn't it true that as time goes by and children get older, they have their own mindset that will not shift much from what they get from other people's education when they start to understand how they should do with what they have?
That's why I say that the methods and patterns that will be applied by each parent are different in practice and the dominant role that can make children attached to education is carried out by the mother.

Training them at an early age about the importance of investments and generating money for themselves is going to help them a lot. There are stories of rich kids that later went broke probably because they lost their parents assets. The second strategy would teach them how important it is to work hard and have their own money. But it goes beyond just saying it, you must show them practicality. Even the bible says that we should train up a child in the way they should and they get old they won't depart from it.

Yeah, while both are good, every parent is different and every child is different, what is perfect for a kid, would be terrible for another, and that is why we can't really give a correct answer. What could work on my kid, may not work on your kid, plus just teaching them like this, isn't the only way they learn.

For example, I learned about money from my father, not by him teaching me, but what he lived, and because of him, I have ended up with something much better, and I am richer right now, at a younger age than he is right now, why? Because I saw his struggles, and I saw his mistakes, and because of that, I decided not to make the same mistakes and I am doing better thanks to learning from his wrong actions.

As I said, of course it doesn't make sense when they are still in school we don't give them pocket money, because it is our obligation as parents to give them pocket money when they are seeking knowledge.

However, when they are out of school and they should have an income, then we also can't treat them the same way we treated them when they were still in school. We as parents must be present not only as parents, we must also be present as friends and so on. We were also once at their age, so we should know very well what they need and what we should do.

I agree with you. It is seen that if anyone gets money without any effort then he / she doesn't know the worth of it. They may take undue risks and eventually lose their money. They may not know that how hard it is to earn the money.

On the other hand (Scenario 2), if someone earns money for himself, although it may take some time to progress, but it will be a long lasting progress. In this situation, the person will not spent money without analyzing and will take less risks. I think this approach is better. Even if the parents are rich, they should make the children work for the money as it will be good for them in the long term.

I sorta like and appreciate the question setup and combination.Both approaches are teachable financial lessons that they offer different purposes through understanding the value of money and how to manage it wisely.
I can't really say but I'll like to engage both exercises consecutively because I'll help the children to understand,memorize and introduce and prepare them financial Independence.

The one who goes through difficult and poor times in his childhood becomes successful in his life. When you give your child a large amount of money at a young age, he will never understand how valuable money is. He will only waste money at that time because no one cares about his future financial condition at a young age. But when you make your child understand the lack, then your child will understand the real life and will prepare to work hard to support himself financially. And then if you can give him some good advice and show him the right path, then your child will be successful in the future and he will never lack money.

So always try to teach your child about real life. Avoid giving him big financial support from an early age to lead a better life. Then you will see that he will learn to deal with difficult moments and work harder to earn money. Success never comes in a lazy life.

This is much better because there is an awareness from childhood to pay attention to what the second and third parties do so that it will become a habit that will later be easy to practice.
This kind of character or type is what certain parents really hope for because I don't want to use the word parents in general.

The example you gave is exactly what I experienced when I was a teenager and when I became a parent like now, I only added another pattern that is better for me to practice with my children.
Being spoiled is not an option, except for girls. Even then, there is a measure that I treat.

I do not accept all the strategies you have presented here to teach children financial intelligence, especially the first strategy, because children cannot be given enough money at a young age to teach them financial intelligence. If children are given enough money at a young age to teach them financial intelligence, they will stay away from education, which will be the opposite of teaching financial intelligence. When a child is educated, he should be educated. After completing his education, when he can understand everything on his own and can stand in a position, then he can be taught financial intelligence, but there is no need to pay him any money to teach him financial intelligence, he will understand on his own because his knowledge will teach him.

Of course, children's education in any case is an investment for the future and we must try hard to provide the best for them. Financial education for children should actually be differentiated by age level, for example 3 to 6 years or 7 to 12 years and so on. Each stage of the age level must be taught based on each child's understanding and we must not force it beyond the child's abilities. You probably understand what I'm saying and I'm sure you are a father who is now starting to provide financial education for your children.

The main goal of financial education for children is for each of our children to become financially responsible individuals and know how to manage money properly. But most importantly, we as parents should be able to set the right role models for our children because basically all children will learn many things from what they see.

You have a point but remember that it also has some disadvantages too. Not giving them enough money might make some kids pick up negative habits like stealing or selling valuable properties that doesn't even belong to them. not every youth that are being provided for ends up being lazy and useless. I think that as a parent, you should provide financial and emotional support to your kids. As you are giving them what they need also teach them the basics about investment and the importance of having their own money

Yes, this is the risks or the negative effect or could happen when you are trying out to squeeze them up in terms of financial support on which it comes into a point that they are suffering about on low budget or cant buy up something because they dont have money on which it could lead up with that potential stealing on which it is just that a shame as a parent. You can provide all the necessary stuff on what your kid needs but always give them some extra money(not that big) so that they can be able to buy up things that they do want on which of course everything should be on limit. Everythings too much is always that resulting into bad situation or effects. Parenting is never been easy because you would be needing up to be balance on everything.

We cant be perfect parents on which on raising up our kids but as much as possible we do want to provide on whats best for them. There are really just that those times that providing everything becomes that excessive on which it is that resulting into problems afterwards.

I think the second one is more appropriate to teach than the first one. Many parents love their children so much that they do not teach them to do any kind of work or plan. That is why those children face many obstacles in their life. But those whose parents teach them to gain practical experience. They are the ones who achieve success in all fields in the future. I have seen many pictures that those who have been made to make money habits since childhood are not willing to work in the future but they only learn to waste that money. And those who are not given money but are taught to earn money try to do it with their own ability in the future. That is why I think the second one is the most effective.

Giving them free money, without anything further, we could safely assume that we could make some of these kids learn how to use that money, but it has to be limited. So the two options is; you make them work for a certain amount, or you just give them a certain amount, but you never give them unlimited access to your finances, never make them be blind to it.

If you just give them whatever they want, and tell them no only when it doesn't make sense, that would be dynamic changes and they won't realize what is reasonable and what is not. But if you have a limit to what they can spend, then you would be able to see them learn in either case, because they would know what is budgeting and they will grow up according to it and be better ready for adult life.

We both agree on that, we should be there to guide them and it depends on your relationship to your kids as a parent and the same goes being the used to be a kid and now able to find a job and work for their own future. Parenting is colorful and great and it reflects what kind of parents we are based on how our kids doing as of the moment. Both can be a good strategy but I'd really think to give them the highlight and make them understand the importance of owning and earning their own money. And soon, they'll realize the importance of giving too not just to their parents or anybody but to themselves like a prize or reward so they'd continue to grow what they have achieved.

I will share my story, and how my father raised me.  I didn't struggle for things growing up, but my father was no daddy warbucks handing out cash like water.  He taught me about every single important aspect of life, provided what I needed, spoiled me more than most kids get spoiled, but nothing crazy.  One thing he taught me about very early on, 10-12 years old, was the stock market.  Asked me if I could "own" a piece of any company, what company would I choose?  I replied, "Nike".  So he bought a few shares, and the prospectus arrived a week or so later...and my teachings of the stock market and finances in general began.   I remember thinking "this is the most fascinating coolest shit ever, but I just can't quite understand how it work, I probably never will".  decades later my trade is being a financial advisor lol.  I was given a lot, but I also worked hard and made a good life for myself despite never needing for anything growing up, because my dad instilled important traits in me.

Indeed power changes a man and giving your children more money is giving them more power and teaching them how not to let the power (money) you’ve given them control them but rather how they should control the power(money).
What’s the essence of our hard works and hustles if we can’t afford and give our children what they actually need even when we can afford it and it’s good for them? As a parent, your first priority should be your family’s provisions at all levels.

All scenarios have their own challenges and risks, but for me personally I prefer to provide financially but with controls that we have definitely set.
It doesn't mean that I want to suppress or curb what my child wants to do because of course I want to provide the best facilities including providing what they need as long as it is within reasonable levels for a child but that doesn't mean I will also give whatever my child wants because if that is done (when all his wishes are carried out) it will only make my child spoiled.

I want to make him a good person with my attitude and actions, of course when he grows up he must also be more able to behave and be responsible and something like that in my opinion can happen because of the good behavior and actions that I give as an example.
I do not intend to curb my child's desires later, but in this case I will also try my best to train him to be mature and responsible according to his age.

In my opinion, about first and second scenario are working for our children education but I prefer for first scenario "Giving them enough money at a young age to see how well they will manage it".

In my viewed, for parent have financial freedom better give our children enough capital for building business and difficult way start business without have capital. I know every parent want to their children become more independent and learn business from scratch without capital from their parent, as parent have much experienced how to start business from zero and we won't our children faced what have our bad experienced firstly.
Give them enough money for start business but we must be guider for them how to manage well with business after having enough money, its get faster for business growing up than if our children start business with second scenario points not giving them enough money and work from their own money.

In both cases, you didn't give a range as to what age you're referring to; whether teenagers (13years–19years), or those below 13 years, or even really grown up children who are well into adulthood. The age range matters a lot when it comes to handling money.

I will go with the first scenario, and I'm considering the teenage years. Just give them cash to play with but let them know it's something they can invest and put to work if they want. Stay back and watch what type of ideas flood them and how they may seek your advice on what type of investment they would like to get into or if they would just want to spend such on fashion and toys. If they seek my advice on investment type, I would be there to direct them. Otherwise, I just let them do what they feel is right for them.

On the second scenario, that would come after I had tested them with the first scenario and they messed it up.

For the first part you should take note of the age grade of whom you give out money to manage, cause in the real sense you don't expect a 3 old baby to know how to spend the money you give out to them, definitely they will spend it on sweets and those stuff but even with that there are some that would not spend a dime out of it. But that too will tell how well they'll eventually spend it.

For the second scenario I think you can do that to the teenagers and as well teaching them in the early stage is better where they learn what money is and how to manage it but regardless apply both scenario for effective results.

Perfectly said, children need to be taught financial management and the importance of having a skill because no matter what they learn in school nobody Will ever teach them these things and they are the most important things kids must grow up to know. Instead fo spending lavishly on them teach them how to work to make their own money. This doesn't mean that you are not going to provide for them as a parent, that's actually your duty but getting the things they really desire should be earned.

I also think like you. Both scenarios can actually be applied depending on age, because different ages have different needs so it is less effective when the age is still young to apply the second scenario. Basically Children and money are one of the most worrying issues for parents for the future of their children. Every parent always wants to give the best for their children, therefore applying both scenarios will be more effective depending on the age of the child.

Because in the end we have to realize that financial success is not about how much we earn or give, but how well they save and manage it. There are many cases of parents who are successful in financial matters but not with their children. So when children grow up when they have a large income but still have difficulty managing finances because they cannot save or manage expenses. So as parents, we must instill a mindset in children, saving and managing money is more important than just looking for a high income.

I agree most teachers don't taught their children about money management, even math teachers and economy teachers don't taught them. in my experience from primary school to university, there was only one teacher who taught about money management.

He's not even a math or economy teacher, but he taught religion.

I really thankful to him because he care with their children, not just teach what they have to.

Both scenarios need to be applied if you really want to see the success of your child, but you need to apply the second scenario before the first, as the second scenario is all about practical teaching, which will make the child know the value of money and how they will be able to utilise the money and also the business they will be able to invest the money in to get a good profit. Before you can give them the money for them to try and see if it works or not, the best part is to make sure your child knows about finances in his early age before it’s too late, just like the quote that says, “Let your child know how to catch a fish before he knows how to cook the fish.”

I think it should be a mix of the both strategies to teach them about the value of money.

On the first scenario, this well teach them to save. This will also give them the idea that money does not grow on trees; nor money is free. Children will quickly realize that money can be used to purchase various items but once they exhaust it, they will learn how to save.

On the second scenario, giving them a relatively low amount of money can force them to save money. If they want to purchase something that is beyond their budget, they have to prevent overspending from a certain item.

If you mix both scenarios, this will not only teach them how to save, but this will also instil in their minds about the general value of saving money. I do think that this kind of approach works better with kids.

Queentoshi I love this thread you created because it will help parent know the exact thing to do after going through the reply of people in this your thread, now from the two case scenario you gave I think Scenario 2 is the best because it will help the children no how difficult it is to make money and there by helping them know the value of money if you give them the money at a very young age in other to know how they will manage it then you are taking a risk because they may not use it well and even if they managed it well they won't know how valuable and difficult making money is.
A child that has tested how difficult it is to make money will for ever be grateful to the parent and will understand how important it is to manage there money very well a child without such experience won't understand how important it is to manage money very well so I will go with Scenario 2 which is Not giving them enough money, so they can work for their own money.
I know what may work for someone may not work for the other person but in this case scenario 2 will favour and work for majority than scenario 1.

The important point here is how parents teach good character in managing finances. And I think both options mentioned by @Queentoshi are very situational. We need to see how our children's characters are. If our children do not understand finances well then you need to provide the second option where you limit your children from giving them something that makes them have to work hard. But if our children already have a good interest and understanding of finance, such as being able to delay gratification and understand about investment, then the first scenario is a wise choice. Because with enough money, children will have the opportunity to make money and compound interest by using the money we give. This will allow them to skip the stage of collecting money to immediately try investing. -CMIIW

If there's a chance that I can merge both scenarios then I will do it, but if I will choose one, it would be the 2nd one.

The 2nd one is harsher than the 1st one, but if you want your child to learn something about money, this is a better approach. Of course as a parent, don't put it at a point where you will really not give them money at all. Remember that it's still a child, and a child still can't work for their own money. Let's minimize it at least, and teach them how to save their money as well. Sometimes, their environment also affects them because maybe they might be curious on something where they can earn from it, and since the money you're giving isn't enough for them, they will find a way.

I want my child to learn from their own experience, but as a parent, we still need to guide them, teach them, and take care of them until they're capable of doing it themselves. I think my opinion is leaning more towards the 1st and 2nd scenario being merged. :D

I would assume giving them "income" for work is the best way. Americans do it the right way, well not all of them but some of them do. They do house chores based on money and those kids learn to make their money based on how much they work, so they know the value of it. Taking out the trash, doing their homework, cleaning the dishes, etc etc, all of these have a monetary value and if they want to, they can decline to do it, and parents will do it instead, but the kids won't get the money for it, whereas if they do the work, then they will know how much their work is worth.

For example if they do clean the dishes, it may take an hour to do so, and they will be tired of course, and that could be like 10 bucks or 20 bucks whatever, and then when they are spending that money, they will know how much they had to work. This will implement in their mind on "I have to clean dishes this many hours to buy this thing" and that will help them in the future.

Teaching children about financial management teaches them to be aware from an early age and with it to be frugal themselves. If children receive such education from their teachers, they will be able to learn that their parents are working hard for money and will be able to prepare themselves accordingly. Children should not be accustomed to living an excessively expensive life sometimes and they should be introduced to such situations that they develop the habit of being tolerant towards others and not spending excessively.

If a child does not acquire any knowledge about finances at a childhood, then he will not be able to acquire good skills in this regard even when he grows up. On the contrary, if the family does not control him in the beginning, then it will be difficult for him to control him in the future. That is why I think that the child should be taught about financial management according to his age.

As a result, a child will be Frugal and in the future these children will be able to manage money properly one day when they grow up. In most cases, I have observed that those children who can manage their lives with difficulty from a young age are successful later on. If they want to understand life and reality, they should definitely be taught to survive.

I make the assumption that I have serious money.

1) I would do this one second and check back in six months

2). I would do this one first and tell the kid do well and in six months I will do 1)




Lastly once I year past I would show this thread to the kid and discuss the ideas here and ask the kid what do you think did I do well by the way I tried to teach you?

What distinguishes today's children from children in the past? Is it because the assessment is based on increasingly developing technology or is it because in theory the intelligence of today's children is much better than that of children in the past.
Option number one does not educate them experientially so it will be very difficult for such children to make decisions in the business activities they undertake.
When a child is given responsibility, they will learn how to develop their potential and they will never be spoiled for any problem.

The objective level in the pattern of skill development is not how much they are spoiled but how they can be given responsibility.
Regardless of the first or second point, when children are educated and given responsibility in life, they will be much more prepared to face the pressures in life.

What makes the difference in my opinion is that in this era, parents or people can see things differently from their children, and one of them is because of the development of the era in which there must be technological developments. Maybe children today are the same as children in the past, but in the past we didn't really focus on looking at such things, unlike in this era.

I agree with you that the first option might make them "spoiled", because they can easily get money without any effort. So is the second option better? I say it will also have drawbacks, because if children can't accept it, then their assessment of their parents will be wrong, so the approach between parents and children will be very influential here.

Actually depends on a certain parents because each one of us do have that different handling when it comes into our kids. Some of parents are way too loose when it comes to financial aspect on which they are that giving out money at the time that their kids do wanted it. Its not bad to provide everything but we do know that it should be having that limitations because having too much will be resulting into potential problems on which we've seen that kids do have that tons of money could ended up into some vices like drugs, alcohol and other things on which it could that destroy their lives. This is why when it comes to finances then im that strict when it comes on giving out budget into them because i dont like that they would be getting involved just because they can buy something they want since they do have the money.

It is understandable that we parents do wanted up for our kids to have that not struggling into something on which it cant be avoided sometimes that providing then on the best thing that we could possibly give
but we do know that having too much is always been that a bad thing and not something that advisable. It all matters about parents guidance plus having that good handling and advising your kids about good and bad things. Of course it might not be always effective because there are indeed kids that who do get influenced despite of those reminders from their parents.

You’re right about one thing, Money can indeed give someone power, freedom and exposure and that’s more reason why one must be very careful of how much power (money) they give to their children, because it could be the easiest way of exposing them to the kind of power that’ll end up controlling them. What do I mean? Yes, a man’s family should be his number one priority, but it’s important to strike a balance between taking care of their children’s/family’s needs and their wants, because when you excessively fuel their wants and desires simply because you can afford it or you feel that’s your responsibility, you’ll only end giving them the kind of exposure that’ll likely destroy them and at this point, do you think you’ve done them any good? Absolutely No.

The development of the era does make some differences for the growth of children now, but overall it is almost the same as the lifestyle of children in the past.
In the past, parents taught how to make money with different methods because a child had to work in the real world, but now they can use technology to make money even though there is no role for parents.
In this case I agree that the era is indeed different but the role of parents in educating children is almost the same as before.

Each option certainly has its drawbacks but out of the two options available we will definitely look for the much better one.
Children today need to be educated on how to make money because if given comfort in fear they will not be ready to face the harsh challenges of life.
Working in a real environment like public jobs may be difficult because of the limited job sector unless they have skills in technology.

We thought that giving enough money to our kids would teach them to become responsible, but it was not the case now. Instead, we are teaching them to think that money can be gotten too easily without any sweat. A good way of teaching our kids is to limit their money and make them feel that it can't be gotten easily. It is teaching them that in order to achieve their goal in life, they must work hard. It is guiding them to be more responsible, not just in managing money but in surviving real life.

Yes, we have to be strict with children in terms of money management, teach them from a very young age to handle money with absolute care, not wasting it on all sorts of nonsense that they will no longer need in an hour.
I think that in modern conditions it is much more difficult for children to be careful with money than it was for us in our time, because now many bloggers that children watch show how unwisely you can spend money while having fun on camera.

In addition, we also have to shape their mentality since they are at home, because the mentality in the environment, especially in the competition to get money, is getting harder now. We see where the job market is not growing along with the development of human resources.

Mentality will help them compete in real life, both in work and the business they will run. Here we also have to look from a wider angle and must be open again to the views held by others. Principles are important, but in holding them we must also not be selfish.

According to my opinion, in the first situation, a child will gradually go towards the darkness of his future. Children should always be made to understand the lack. If a child ever asks for money despite having money in your hand, then let the child understand the lack and do not give him money immediately. If he gets something as soon as he asks for it, then he will not want to do any work in the future. Again, according to the second situation, this can be a good decision.

Through the second situation, a child will understand everything about the life cycle. Children will be interested in working from an early age.

It's not about being frugal, but more about how to learn to control their finances and not be forcing to them. If you have a lot, then you can spend a lot while still saving, like a person who makes a million a year, could spend 800k, this doesn't make them frugal, because frugal means that same person live on 50k, instead of 800k, but in both cases, they are not overspending, that is important.

So whatever you make, if you are capable of saving 20% of your money aside, that means two things; you are not making very little (people who make minimum wage can't save) and you know how to spend money properly. Many people don't do that and the results aren't always that great, we are going to be forced to learn how to be better at this.

Children learn a lot of information from their parents' behaviors and actions. Therefore, improving yourself financially also means improving your children. This education should be provided by both the family and schools because financial education is an education that will be used at all times of life.

Excessive spending is not a correct behavior in economic terms, regardless of your income. Knowing how to spend money correctly is one way to protect your income or assets.

It is unfair to compare intelligence of children now compared to before. Obviously there are more information that are passed now onto children and there are a lot more and better tools to find said information. So in general, kids these days would always have an edge over kids from the past since kids back then did not have much to study about anyway. Science was not as advanced. Math as well. Technology most especially.
A balance should be maintained I believe. Do not spoil them too much but also do not make your kids suffer to the point that it will be considered as an abuse already. You want to teach them how to be responsible but you would not actually want to see your children suffer too much.

Yep, we actually need to make them experience both situations. First, give them enough freedom and enough money so that they can see how it feels to have money that they didn't earn and have more money than they need. And after that, give them less money than they actually need, reduce their freedom, and ask them to earn some money themselves if the money is less for them. This way, they will understand the difference between the money that they've gotten for free and the money that they had to earn themselves. They will also learn how they need to manage within lower budgets instead of overspending.

Every person will have their own way of teaching their children what they want them to learn. Some parents give so much freedom to their children that ruins them and makes them completely reliant on them, and in future, when the parents aren't around, they have a very hard time surviving because they were never taught how they can survive without them.

Giving a sense of responsibility is very important, so that when they are trusted to hold money or not they will know what they have to do, because talking about money is up and down in this life, so instill a high sense of responsibility to make them have an open mind when they do not have money what they have to do and when they have money they will use it very wisely for their future.

and that is the right way to teach children, it is true what you said, giving children enough money makes children not want to try hard, because children think they don't need to work hard to get money, and there must be a difference with giving children who are limited of course their mindset will be different, of course trying to learn skills or find work to be able to earn, that way children don't depend on their parents by trying on their own.

In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with parents practicing both for their children since they must be taking care of their children. However, we should not use the first example of spoiling them with money because there are other ways to raise your child with money which will fail to educate them on how to manage money, because some children are raised in a partying lifestyle, spending money on useless expensive stuff, we should not raise them in that way.

However, other parents claim that they will not give their money to their children since it can cause them to live a bad life, while some claim their parents did not give them money when they were young, they would not do the same. I was not raised in a rich home, but that does not mean I should do the same thing as my parents, no parent wants their children to suffer, the two scenarios are not bad, but there should be some limits.

Logically, Plan B will work better. Because when you yourself supply money to your child, he will not know about the amount of work that needs to be done to earn money. Due to which he will never be literate to work hard. And when you stop supplying money, a financial deficiency will appear in him and that is why he will work hard and earn money due to his need. And at that time, of course, you will get a better result than him. So I will support Plan B. Plan A can also work, but its chances will be very less.

It's quite obvious that the scenario 2 is the best for a child to grow in a right way, and understand that money is not that easy to get. Because once you train up your children by giving them money everytime it would going to be very hard for them to have a self control whenever they are being given a huge amount of money, due to the fact that it have became a habits to them. However, unless is those types that understand the value of money, and even though they are just few.

As parents we must understand the child's ability to do any activity so that it is much easier to direct them.
If parents have a business but their children do not have an interest in developing the business, but parents still force it, then this is usually not successful because children do not have a love of work they live and I see this as one of the big problems.

In certain views children must be directed by parents even though sometimes they do not have the same interest.
But in some cases this will actually encourage children to be late to achieve success because he has no same interest as parents in developing business.
Building mentality is important because life is now so hard and children must understand the conditions of life that must be lived and work is not as easy as imagined.

Giving responsibility does not mean increasing suffering, this is the wrong thought because usually parents will see the interest of a child first.
When they have the same ability as parents, giving knowledge about business is a good step but when children have different interests, parents will also support it.

Of course it depends on the person in question. I believe that people who will have the mindset to give money to their children at a Young age to see how well can manage it as a test are the rich guys. I doubt if the poor guys will do that.

I will prefer not to give my child money for him or her to hustle on their own and see how difficult life is. After I may have seen his/her effort them I can decide to give a lifting or helping hand to support. If such child struggle so hard to build wealth, they might find it difficult to misuse it. There is a slogan in our language we often say that it's only a baby toad is use for practical, meaning that we don't use expensive things to play which means that real cash that was hard toake, May be misused instead we use the less relevant ones. And that is why they need to work hard on there own.

As long as you teach your children to manage their money, they will not lose control using that money. They will know that getting money is not easy and they must work to earn money. They will not waste money for something they don't need but they will split the money based on their needs.

Perhaps, saving will be the first thing you can teach to your children as many parents do to their children. They also teach their children that they need to earn more money to fill their needs. So parents need to tell them that money is something they can use to fill their need but they should save their money for their future.

As their parents, we will give the lesson so they will not make a mistake related to managing the money. We know that they can lose control so we teach them to manage themselves. Every parents want to give the best for them so they will prepare many things for their children.

In fact, Plan B isn't perfect either.  Your children can earn money, but if they don't know how to manage and spend it wisely, no matter how much money they earn, it will never be enough. That is why many people work hard, earn a lot of money but do not know how to manage their finances, spend lavishly, without control, making it impossible for them to have a stable life.

In life, to ensure a stable life, we not only need to know how to make money but also need to know how to manage finances to bring results. So don't just use one of the two, combine both to teach your child to become a child who knows how to earn money and manage finances effectively.

You are right, we can only guide and we cannot force them to have the same interests as them. However, by guiding it means that we also do not release our responsibilities as parents, because as parents of course we have responsibilities.

I understand that sometimes we have to force something, but we must be able to know which can be forced and which cannot. As in directing schools, of course if we let everything depend on them, then they will prefer a school that they think is good and of course with many friends who also go to school there. Well, here our role as parents is very much needed, and in my opinion this can be forced as long as it does not exceed the limit.

Yes, it is very closely related to parents in providing everything for their children by paying attention to their needs, especially educating them about finances, as provisions for them when they grow up, if they are not taught financial management since childhood, they will lose control, and become wasteful in terms of financial spending if it is not implemented as early as possible, it is an important thing that must be implemented.

Giving a kid Money is just like wasting it because him might not know how to use that money properly unless they are mature enough to control money though most adult can even control money when given to them but the case of children are different such opportunity will definitely be misused just like the prodigal son in the holy Bible.

But I think is best to give them the money to see how they can be able to use it well or manage it properly because it is difficult to survive to from nothing expecially in some country where opportunity can't reach the less previllage ones.

You see, at that very tender age, most children don't understand the difference between wants and needs. They really don't know what they want, so they just want to lay their hands on everything that attracts them at any point without knowing that there is a price that must be paid for it, which is money, and getting that money isn't something to template on because you must work for it.

Like you said, it's good for parents to teach their children how to save.
In as much as a child needs to enjoy being a child, a parent must let the child know that he/she doesn't need a particular thing that he/she has already got. If parents can interpret the principles of wants and needs, then I think the child has learned more than 30% on how to manage finance.

China can be the best example to educate children in terms of financial and investment, they do well the world to admit it.

Children should not give them money, give them a fishing fish to catch fish.
Meaning: Teach them some creative expertise in Creating something or product, give them a debriefing to do crafts and products and you as people can help market what they make, that's the best strategy.
If the goods are sold, of course the economy will flow and give 50% of the income for children as investment motivation, 50% to buy their equipment to be more creative, children can automatically fish themselves and flow the best economy.

To ensure a child's bright future, he needs to be well informed about all the subject from a young age, not only in terms of money but to teach a child all the issues from a young age, parents need to guide their child in all aspects at all times.
It cannot be limited to just formal education, parents also have to always keep an eye on their children, along with financial education, they have to be given moral education, human education, and these are mostly the responsibility of the parents, the role of their parents is the most important behind a child's bright future, so any parent should understand when their child needs which education, not all education can be given at once, each education has a specific time and according to that time they have to be educated step by step.

Those that passed through hard or difficult situations in tend to be more experienced in life than those that finds life easier,  B is the best strategic way to apply if you really want your children to learn funds management, if you exposed them to funds they will tend mismanage funds because they saw it in abundance, but when they have a limited access to funds, they will learn how to manage what they have and from their will be able to manage and appreciate bigger funds.

Actually, in this case, for me, it depends on the condition and readiness of the child himself. Although this method is certainly good, it cannot be denied that not every child has the same understanding, so we also need to be a gentle figure so that the future goals that we hope for the child to do are not misinterpreted by harsh education.
This does not mean that we have to obey all the wishes of the child, but on the other hand, we also do not want to mature the child, but in the end we also have to wait and see whether our child is ready or not with all the rules that we have prepared to make his future better so that what we think is best for the child does not actually make them distant from us as parents because they feel constrained and oppressed.
Not a few parents who force their will as if they can prepare the best for their children in the future which ends with children who are mentally disturbed because they are unable to cope with the demands of their parents. For me, educating children is quite flexible because on the one hand there must be firmness but on the other hand we must also try to create a comfortable space so that children are not burdened and that is the role of parents because we only provide the best facilities as a form of our love and responsibility for our children but we cannot immediately regulate the future as a whole because children also when they have a transition phase to adolescence or adulthood they can determine their life goals and as much as possible from the beginning we apply good parenting patterns so that children can know the goals they want to achieve without the need for our intervention to direct them as a whole.

It depends on what you mean by enough money. I prefer you give them money that is appropriate for their age. One that is huge but not too huge to do some level of inappropriate things. Why I think the first idea is good, is because they will have to make plans, which is the first thing anyone will do when they have money. They may plan to spend it lavishly or plan to do something good. Once they have their plans you as a parent will see how they value money. I know they wont be so perfect at that age, but if you look closely at them there must be something you will observe that you can teach them to help them do better next time.

It's not a good idea, because children who have access to money easily don't learn the value of it and how hard it can be to acquire it. As consequence, you might end raising a noxious individual, who won't care about personal responsabilities and discipline, since everything has came easy to him along the life.

It can sound harsh, but you have to teach your children to achieve their own things through their labor. I like this concept, because it puts the individual in contact with reality, where things aren't that easy to be conquered, and focus plus dedication are needed to accomplish your goals.

Progressively, as the child displays genuine interest for learning and improving, he will be given rewards and responsabilities accordingly.

Sure. The second scenario is the effective one: go children. If they grow up, they will have that motivation of looking for their own money. Without depending on their parent’s money, as you said already, they will decouple, spending their own money when they make it, because if it isn’t their money, they will squander it without any proper planning about it, so it’s better they earn their own money.

You’re right: the fishing pole approach works only if the child is ready to hold it. Otherwise, you are giving someone who has not even considered why catching fish is important tools

You discuss emotional, environmental, even existential preparation. Some youngsters will be crushed by the weight of expectation if it arrives before inner scaffolding is developed; others can absorb entrepreneurial thought early on. The economy wants innovation, certainly, but also penalises early scaling of underdeveloped capabilities

How can we encourage independence free from psychological debt? Because the actual debt is about love made dependent on performance. Many adults unintentionally lead youngsters onto paths that seem free but are very structured in order to get them ready for independence. Being a parent is not venture capitalism. It’s early-stage ecosystem building. Neither forced IPOs at eighteen years old nor hypergrowth expectations

I think we are talking about adults, those who are big enough to be given money and tested for their financial management skills. It's obvious that you can't expect a kid to have financial management skills or even have any knowledge about how they should manage the money that is given to them, as soon as they get the money, they will run to a shop, and buy whatever they want either for eating or for entertainment and they don't even care how much it costs as long as the money they have is enough for it.

When kids reach a certain age, mostly between 16 to 18, they become mature enough to understand how much money matters, and they also start to understand how they should use the money that is given to them because that is an age in which a person starts thinking about the future or the things that they need to do for a better future, so they will most probably think of using money in the best way possible unless their parents spoil them.

The two situations will give children different experiences. That is why I think both aspects are important. If children are given enough money and if they start using that money, then they can get good feedback on how they have used that money throughout the month or whether they have kept it under control. There are some children who, after giving money on a monthly basis, will find that they have spent all their money before the due date. Those children will not be able to spend money in the following days from which they can learn their money management.

Again, if children are not given money, they will learn about how to earn money. Those children will learn to value money. When a child can value money correctly, they will not have the tendency to spend it randomly. Which will help children to become more diligent, they will be able to value money.

I agree with you, actually if a child gets everything as soon as he asks for it, then he does not really understand the real value of money, they need to be made aware of the real value of money, and they will only understand the real value of money when they earn some money with hard work. Or, do not give them everything they want, give them a limited amount of money, because if they are given too much financial freedom, then they will develop a tendency to spend money on unnecessary things. So, they need to be made aware of the value of earning money, they need to be taken through different experiences step by step, so that they can maintain their balance and self-control in financial matters and can give up unnecessary expenses.  ;)

That's the point buddy because in the end it all comes back to love without any coercion. We do as parents expect our children to grow up to be someone even better than ourselves as parents but it cannot be denied that in this case we are also not a god who must do all our will to be accepted by our own children because after all our children have their own desires and we as parents only have to facilitate and provide the best without having to make them lose their mentality of confidence just because of our great expectations.

It is not wrong to direct children to positive things including in financial management because we are also obliged to guide it, it's just that making them mature prematurely is also too much because children also have their own lives and we cannot intervene directly just because we want to achieve it quickly. Patterns that sometimes impose can make children constrained so we need to take another approach so that we can channel our desires indirectly but on the other hand children also do not lose their adolescence because we are deprived of great expectations.

This depends on what you're giving your children the money for. Do the children have an interest in entrepreneurship or is it a salaried job they dream of? All of us, when investing reach our current position through years of accumulated knowledge, capital, mistakes, missteps, gains and losses. To gain this experience, everyone needs to put in their own effort, think it through and take action. Remember that money earned easily is also lost easily. Money earned through hard work is used more carefully.

That's actually true, the best way to teach a child something is by allowing him or her to have a little bit expirience for him or her to be fully awear about the risk he or she is trying to involve himself. Just like they said that the Best way to learn is by experience. When I was a kid, I dreamt of Riding a bicycle but I never knew how hard learning bicycle is, not untill I was given the opportunity to ride and I sustained a lot of injuries before I learnt it. So if I don't have Bruces, I will never learn. Somethings are left untold till you expirience them, and that is why they say experience is the Best teacher.

The current generation is different from the previous generation because it is difficult to guide today's children to follow their parents' interests, especially in terms of achieving good finances.
We need to direct children to be more successful in the future but parents must also see the child's own abilities.
For example, if a child has skills about the designer, the steps that need to be taken by their parents support the process of progressing the child in his asking.

Sometimes imposing the desire of parents will not make a child succeed because they have to think to follow the steps of parents instead of doing something based on their interests.
What is needed by a child is only support in the process of achieving the success of the life they are building.

That's why this is something that must be considered, because it is not easy to direct them, especially now that anything negative is very easy to access, once they take a wrong step then maybe they will continue to walk on the wrong path. And it will be even more difficult if that happens, because not only will they not listen to what we say, in the worst case they might fight back.

I can understand what you mean, yes we must be able to see what the potential or natural talents of our children are. However, we still have to be able to direct, meaning we have to support them to continue what their talents are, but we also have to direct the best place not just being parents who agree with everything they want.

I would use both strategies so they learn to budget in times of abundance and save in times of scarcity.

In my opinion, both are equally important skills, specially in today's times when we can't predict what will the future bring.

Our job as parents is to control, protect and continue to provide education regarding the achievements in the process of growing up a child and at the right time we will give them the freedom to choose a path that suits their interests and skills.
Negative things are quite easy to be contaminated now because there are indeed many factors that can ensnare a child if parents do not control them properly.

The role of parents is not only to ensure the growth and development of a child, but we need to ensure that they get good knowledge in determining their life steps, especially since life is now quite negative if a child is not properly guided.
Support in the form of formal and moral is quite necessary because it will make children more responsible for the life process they are going through.

The current obstacle that I see from some parents is that they provide all the facilities, let's say it's money and so on, but they forget to set an example for their children. It is undeniable that now there are many people who are actually very well off, but they have problems in family harmony which has a big impact on children.

Communication is an important factor in a family, without good communication, a harmonious family will not be created in my opinion. Indeed, some people are different in expressing their love language, but what must be attempted is communication in my opinion, especially for children.

If parents don't teach the children how to use the money well, they will not learn anything from the money giving to them, because they will feel their parents have enough money that is why they are giving them those money. Like those parents who don't give their children money,  it will push such children to work hard to have something on their own to further their education, which is very important to every human beings on earth not to depend on anybody.

I guess  scenario 2 is better for parents not to give to their children, and it will help them to learn and grow up their own businesses and it will be hard for such children to depend on their wife or husband in the aspect of finance when they get married.

Facilities are provided based on the needs of the child although there are some people who provide excessively and generally it is only owned by rich parents.
Parents are sensitive to the needs of their children but they do not provide facilities so that children can learn to be more independent in matters of life experience.
This talks about parents who have the ability to teach their children to grow and develop with more independent responsibilities.

Every family has different levels of problems, there are parents who are rich but are unable to take care of their children properly so they are trapped in free association.
Some parents do not have much money but they succeed in educating their children to be better so that when they are adults they can express themselves according to the educational pattern given by parents.

As parents, we have our own ways of educating our children about money. or finances. I will educate my child about the value of money in human life and I will also teach
him how to survive in this world.

When we teach them how to manage money correctly, it is a good start so that at an early age they will immediately know the importance
of money for survivors like us in this world.

people confuse provision with preparation. Giving your child a tablet, a tutor, and a custom bedroom doesn't imply you're preparing them for life. Most children growing up in these circumstances grow up shielded, not powerful

Being wealthy does not guarantee being wise. Most upper-middle class parents are unaware of this; they maximise for comfort rather than character. Some low-income families create very grounded, outspoken adults. Why? Because scarcity becomes a pressure cooker for creativity, patience, and self-regulation while necessity enforces resilience. Actually, that is the course of life

Parents wish for their children to have what they never had. But what if what you never had (those challenges, those wait-your-turn events) were precisely what taught you adaptability? This is less about parenting style and more about parenting philosophy. Do you raise a child to negotiate complexity or to escape discomfort? Give a child everything and eliminate the friction, then, ask why they fear at the first hint of doubt

Perfect circumstances for development are not what we need. We need real ones. And “real” sometimes means saying no, leaving gaps for kids to fill with their own agency

The best strategy remains that to make your children to become financially intelligent in terms of managing resources it's the parents responsibility to ensure that the children have a good financial education through the way that money is managed at home children learn from what ever there parents do or say so a parents that are financially careless can't be talking about teaching their children financial management skills because the children will definitely be like them while growing up.



I think that the both option that is given will not be of help to children because if you give children money at a early age abuse will set in due to the fact that they don't know how the money is made and so they will feel lazy and become wayward at the long run only a few amount of children will actually learn so to me it will be a wast of time, thesame thing when you deprive your children of money it will do much harm than good because that child will have psychological problems when growing up because depriving your children of money is not a good thing to do

Of course, by seizing a child's money, it will clearly have bad consequences because the child will remember our treatment as parents who acted rather harshly, by providing a good example, that is what is needed, such as giving gentle advice so that the child understands how to use finances wisely, the point is that patience is needed in educating this child to be financially intelligent and it requires a fairly long process so that the child can understand it.

I think that is quite a difficult challenge because educating a child will make them better when they are adults and eventually they themselves will become someone who is responsible for their family after marriage.
If the pattern of education given by both parents to the child is full of pampering then how can they live a much more independent life because they themselves were never taught to be responsible in the process of their life.

Ideally we should ensure that children become more responsible and direct them towards their interests and skills so that when they grow up, they will understand how life is not easy and they can adapt well when life is full of responsibilities.

Personally, i support option 2, because at an early age, it’s hard for a child to truly learn how to manage a certain amount of money. Even though it’s not a bad idea, we all know that children are curious and interested in everything at that age.Scenario 2, where you give the child only a minimal amount of money, can have its advantages because the child will learn to appreciate it and understand how hard it is to earn money nowadays. This also provides additional assurance that they will know how to save in the future.
Definitely option 2

Time changes, and we change along with it. The same goes for parenting styles or approaches in raising children, everything must align with the times. However, education has always been the foundational priority for all parents. We realize that the first education begins at home, parents are the first teachers who will shape character, self confidence, discipline, and so on. Regarding interests, potentials, and aspirations, these are things that emerge later in life. The role of parents is to accompany and motivate them in achieving their goals. Many parents realize too late that the time spent raising children is sometimes more valuable than money.

Personally, I would also go for the second option like I said before but this case is more beyond what we can see here and it's not just about giving them more money or not. To some extent, I think it has more to do with family background than it has to do with mere giving of money. I have look around my environment and it's unsafe to conclude that a particular scenario is the best strategy among the two mentioned in the Op thread.

In as much as I'm not comfortable with the first strategy, I can confidently confess that I know a family that practice it and it's working well for them because the children still go out to source for extra source as they have no parents fending for them. It all depends on how you raise your children and the financial character you instill in them.

Agreed, only training them with one strategy isn't going to help them in the future because times are now getting rough as the economy is getting harder to be predicated accurately in all parts of the world and not only in one country. As a parent we're supposed to know when we'll give our children enough money to teach them how to manage money properly and also when to not give them enough money so that they can learn to manage what they have.

In life this is also how it works because sometimes you'll have abundance of wealth and other times, things will get so difficult for you that you won't be able to give yourself a healthy meal. Without learning how to survive in both conditions, you'll find it difficult to life a comfortable life. When their is abundance, you invest for the future and when there isn't,you cut down on your expenses.

Although times have changed, every parent needs to think about the best way to educate their children and it aims so that when they grow up they can be much more prepared for the conditions they will experience.
Education is indeed a priority for parents in educating their children and it is commonly done by most parents.
We know that every child must have different ideals and maybe the role of parents in this case is to support children so that they can achieve the ideals they dream of.

Motivation and the role of parents in providing support are very important because this is the spirit needed by children in achieving their dreams.
Money is also important and raising children responsibly and being able to provide worldly and afterlife education is something that is quite important.

Parents should give their children the most important thing that they will not receive at school, this is the basics of financial literacy, because in life this is one of the most important things, when they become independent they will have to learn how to handle money and earn money, if their parents do not teach them this, then they will not receive this knowledge at school, and most likely they will not be taught this at university either, although I believe that such lessons should be mandatory in every school. but apparently no one needs rich people, it is more difficult to manage them.

I still don't understand why financial literacy is not yet included in the mainstream education curriculum when its importance is no less than other knowledge. Therefore, parents need to equip their children with basic financial knowledge as well as teach them about the value of money. But I don't think the reason they don't put finance into education is because they don't want too many rich people. Because a country cannot be rich if its people are poor, "rich people, strong nation", governments are aware of that.

As far as I know, even in leading investment countries like the US, Europe,...only a few schools include financial knowledge in the curriculum, but only as an elective subject, not a compulsory subject. So, that's not really the reason, IMO.

Parents are the biggest part of education. Children receive the most important information and education from their parents. They are directed to areas they are interested in or they are provided with information about many areas and help them shape their future.

Financial literacy needs to be included in the education system. Children should access this information early and use it throughout their lives. The point you touched on is very important because financial literacy should be taught as a main course, not an elective course. The importance of education on this subject is very great so that people can act more consciously in financial matters.