Stop projecting. What I have said is that people shouldn’t give gifts with terms. If they need terms, they should reconsider if giving money is the best option…I, that’s me, wouldn’t, I would buy the item directly…regardless of the difficulty. It’s more important to ME, that the job gets done, than making people give me promises they can’t keep or blow money that they can’t afford to blow. I don’t need to control money that isn’t mine anymore…what I do need to do is make sure the job is done.
What IS your point? You have your promise, she blows the money…right? She’s splurged on china dolls and back issues of TV guide…despite telling you she wouldn’t. What’s next?
or are you saying BECAUSE you told her she can have the money, only if spends it on a dog, will prevent her from buying old TV Guides? Is that point of all this?
Okay, she promises not to blow the money on TV Guides and does it anyway. Now what do you?
I’m not projecting. I’m reflecting your statements back to you. You have consistently claimed that cash gifts should have no strings attached. In other words, the recipient should indeed feel free to spend the money as he or she damned well pleases, regardless of the donor’s intent.
Use some common sense. Of course this won’t necessarily prevent her from violating her word. However, if she does violate her promise, then she has proven herself to be untrustworthy. She can expect no more favors in the future.
Is that truly so difficult to grasp? Even a child can understand it.
Each year my father gives my children cash, specifically for their college funds, for their birthday and Christmas. It isn’t a lot of cash, not enough for him to open up a seperate account for each of them (I have accounts for each of them). If I understand your argument, you are claiming he is wrong to specify where the money goes and should instead give “no strings attached” cash (which my six year old would spend on Gameboy games). Furthermore, if what he wants to do is contribute to the college education, he should open up an account, put money in it, and then pay their tuition bills directly himself?
And yes, money is certainly fungible. The check for both kids is written to me. I put it in my account. I transfer it (and usually some more) into my children’s accounts. Is it the same money? Well, it was all virtual cash anyway. Does it make any difference if I put the money towards buying a new fridge now as long as the kids have money in their college funds 12 years from now? Personally, I think it does.
No is not what I have said. I have CONSISTENTLY said, if cash gift REQUIRE strings, they should not be given and if they are given, they SHOULDN’T need any strings, because you can be trusted to do what’s best for you. Don’t in other words, me. That is what I have said. Don’t interpret what I write, don’t project your opinions into my words.
Common sense tells me, that if I’m worried about someone destroying their family business, i make sure that I do all can do ensure that doesn’t happen. That means, I don’t give cash to people I suspect are untrustworthy as the risk is too great. If I need to have a promise that they won’t buy TV Guides, clearly they can’t be trusted with the money…can they?
It’s not difficult to grasp at all. You consider your gift, a favour, a burden, something that they have to prove they deserve; after all it’s YOUR money.
No, maybe this is where we’re off track. There’s nothing wrong with specifiying where money goes, it becomes “wrong” when your dad, tells you if you don’t put the money in the college fund, regardless of your family’s needs; you can’t have the money. That’s what I mean by “strings”…your Dad, should trust you enough to give you the money, let you know it’s for the kids college fund…without you having to promise that you’ll put it there. If he can’t trust you, then why give you the money? What’s he trying to prove, that you’re a fuck-up; that you’re a liar? If the money’s for the kids, then make sure the kids get the money. If that means opening a special account that HE controls, and you can’t touch, then so be it.
I shouldn’t have to make you promise to spent the money in certain way.
Of course it does, it’s NOT your money…it’s your kids.
As the actual intended recipient of this now infamous honeymoon offer I’d like to make a little contribution of my own. Please pardon me if I violate protocol here in any way. This is my first posting. In fact, I was introduced to this site just recently under rather suboptimal circumstances which I will explain a bit later:
Firstly, I find the issues some of you raise regarding trust, control and abuse of funds rather bizarre. Here are my thoughts on the issue:
This point of a gift is often precisely to give someone something extravagant which they may not actually ‘need’ and would therefore never obtain for themselves. That is what sometimes makes gifts so wonderful – that they represent resources spent ‘frivolously’ for the pure pleasure – not need – of the recipient.
For the record, my ‘prospective donor’ is the kindest, most generous and gentle person I know. He is utterly simple and unconditional in his love and generosity. We used to be in the same business, where we both earned a pretty high income. My circumstances changed and I am now happily pursuing other goals in life which offer substantially less short term remuneration. He continued in the business and is now very successful and wealthy. Recently, I fell in love and am to be married. I cannot afford to give my bride an extravagant honeymoon at this point in my life – we are in fact saving our pennies for a house. My friend strongly believes in the importance of a memorable honeymoon. His was fantastic and he has subsequently found that the shared memories of that adventure have strengthened the bonds of his marriage. He wants to give us this gift. There is nothing controlling about this. It is simply a wonderfully generous and loving gesture.
I am sure that my friend would give us cash or help us with a house if we asked. But that’s not what he WANTS to gift us with, and I would never dream of reducing his offer to such materialistic terms. He wants to give us an Experience, not money. [And Mr. Holmes, the reason he doesn’t just go out and ‘buy us a tranny’ is because he has the sensitivity to realize that a honeymoon is a rather personal experience and perhaps we’d like to arrange our own details.]
I would now like to return to the issue of how I discovered this website, …
[remainder of message has been removed by Moderator without prejudice to the author].
Vtwin, you are clearly able to accept the gift of your friend in the spirit in which it was given, knowing where he was coming from and why it would mean so much to him that you and your bride enjoy this experience. As it appears that it would bring you pleasure to accept the gift as it was offered to you, rather than to ‘reduce his offer to such materialistic terms’ [as to convert part or all of the gift to use for the downpayment of your house], clearly you two are on the same wavelength.
I admit that I personally would have a hard time accepting the very generous gift as it was offered to you, if there was a downpayment in the wings (a pitfall of my overly pragmatic nature, I daresay), and would’ve discussed with him using some of the gift towards the downpayment before accepting the gift, if I thought I could have this discussion with this friend without offending him or making him feel like he had to give a honeymoon gift and a downpayment gift. If he was not willing to see me spend a penny of it on anything other than the honeymoon, then I would either have to agree to spend it as he wished or politely refuse it - I personally don’t think at that point it would be ethical to spend the gift in a way that he did not wish me to spend it, seeing as the point of the gift to him was that I have a wonderful experience that he had found his own life to be enhanced by. The gift of an (enjoyable) experience that you would not have otherwise had is obviously not to be scorned, but some people in your situation would be less able to enjoy the experience under the circumstances you describe. Being able to improve one’s situation materially as the result of a generous gift by a friend is also a wonderful experience, and I do not think that those people who would have preferred that gift can be faulted.
I think gifts of this sort are absolutely fine and reasonable, and sometimes the best option. I also think that among people who know and trust each other, there would be an emergency exemption that wouldn’t hurt people’s feelings… ie, if Vtwin’s car was suddenly stolen, any true friend wouldn’t object to the last-minute redirection of funds.
If you offer money to someone, you can certainly specify what you want them to do with it.
At that moment, however, you instantly forfeit your right to call it a “gift”. It is now a transaction. You are trying to purchase a certain outcome or behavior and requiring the receiver’s cooperation to secure what you want. The transaction may be in the receiver’s best interest, it may be that your heart is pure and noble and selfless, it may be that your suggested use of the money is demonstrably better for you, the receiver, their children and the afflicted masses of humanity and their pets than any other possible use to which it might be put. By imposing conditions that satisfy you, however, you transform your “gift” into an informal business deal. This does not obtain when you give a non-monetary present, be it airline tickets or Hummel figurines or a purebred bitch or a shiny new transmission, because that does not require anything of the recipient. Unless of course you start attaching conditions again: “You can have this only if you engage not to return it or sell it or let the kids play with it or let it gather dust in the attic, etc.” Then you’re outside the realm of giving again.
That said, you’re not necessarily wrong to engage in this sort of transaction, provided you understand where it fits in the relationship between you and the receiver. You are paying them, essentially, to do something that you want them to do. Employers do that. Customers do that. Granted that you know what’s best for them and they don’t, the bottom line is that you’re paying for the privilege of telling them what to do.
Oh boy. Did I ever screw up the formatting on that one! Sorry folks. How do you do those groovy replies where you can respond to multiple bits of a quote separately? Can someone direct me to a users guide?
Is there room to distinguish between a gift qua gift and a situation in which someone is asking you specifically for money? It seems to me that these are very different situations.
No, it isn’t. A transaction is where you get something in return. Specifying how you want the gift to be spent is not a transaction, except in a ridiculously broad sense.
If someone asks me for money , then it is (IMHO) reasonable for me to put conditions on how it would be spent, should I decide to give the money. Typically, this scenario involves people who are poor at managing their money, and while I may want to help them out of a bad spot, I really would not want to have the money go to support their vices (alcohol, illicit drugs, gambling, out-of-control spending, etc.) .
If I decide to give an unsolicited gift of money, unless I make it clear to the recipient that I would like to see it spent in a certain way before the gift is given, then the recipient has the right to choose how it is spent.
Or alternatively - in the broadest sense - all gifts are transactions.
You annouce you are getting married. I like you. I buy you a gift to celebrate the occation. I expect that in return, you will reciprocate with - at the very least - continued friendship, a thank you note. When I get married the following year, I’ll be disappointed if you don’t give me some token of your affection to celebrate the occation. If you are broke, it could be as little as a note. But gifts are reciprocated.
Gifts are seldom given without expecting anything in return. Even if it is just a sense of self satisfaction or greater reward - karma, heaven, what have you (as in the case of anonymous donations). Which is why, in some cultures, gift giving is such a loaded transaction with as much ettiquite around it as there is.
My ex was given $1500 with which to install a toilet in his home (he had no plumbing). He used the money to “invest” in pot, and ended up smoking his “pot” as it were. Sure they were pissed that he was so stupid. But it was a gift and he was free to squander it in whatever way he wanted.
However, if someone comes begging for money for whatever reason, they are bound by decency to use the money for that purpose. If you borrow rent money, you need to spend it on rent; not clothes or something.