What do you think?
Rate this book
Inheritocracy: It’s Time to Talk About the Bank of Mum and Dad
Forget the myth of meritorcracy.
It's no longer about what you earn, or what you learn.
We are living in an inheritocracy, where the bank of mum and dad matters more than ever.
Parental support is the secret taboo of the modern world. Whether we have it or we don't, this shapes life for all of us.
Blending award-winning research, revealing interviews and candid stories, Eliza Filby digs deep into the bank of mum and dad to reveal how it affects our dating, our careers, our children, and everything else. Fresh, captivating and honest, she reveals the surprising ways the inheritocracy controls us all.
It's no longer about what you earn, or what you learn.
We are living in an inheritocracy, where the bank of mum and dad matters more than ever.
Parental support is the secret taboo of the modern world. Whether we have it or we don't, this shapes life for all of us.
Blending award-winning research, revealing interviews and candid stories, Eliza Filby digs deep into the bank of mum and dad to reveal how it affects our dating, our careers, our children, and everything else. Fresh, captivating and honest, she reveals the surprising ways the inheritocracy controls us all.
285 pages, Kindle Edition
Published July 17, 2025
About the author
Eliza Filby
3 books16 followersEliza Filby is an English historian, author, and speaker specialising in generational change. Her work focuses on how shifting generational values are reshaping society, work, education, politics, and family life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews
October 22, 2024
I was given this book at a law firm conference and didn't plan to read it until I heard the author speak. She is funny, engaging and relatable. She raised points about generations that resonated with me, like the impact of millennials relying of the boomer bank of mum and dad. So I read the book and couldn't put it down. I fold the pages over on points I find particularly poignant and most of this book has folded pages. I spoke to my boomer dad about topics in the book, which made him mad. Sign it is a good book. Plus I have told everyone I've met in the last month about the book, including taking photos of paragraphs and sending it to my friends. I am now going to lend the book to my friend on maternity leave as she is mortgaged up to the eye balls and soon paying £4k a month on childcare, unlike her boomer parents.
October 9, 2025
This cross-theme book was a challenging read — reading it at a time as I unpack my own relationships with parents, money, and class, it was a helpful tool to reflect on how these play out in my own life, my friends' and our wider culture. From housing, education, childcare to politics, tax and social relationships - It’s a huge topic to take on, and the book does it pretty well overall - 3.5stars
At times, though, I felt the author got a bit lost in the enormity of it all. The sections where she brought things back to her own experience sometimes felt jarring and didn’t always acknowledge the nuance or breadth of experiences that exist. She tries to counter this with short snapshots of other people’s stories, but these can get a little lost and don’t always land as strongly as they could to reinforce the research.
Still, Inheritocracy opens up an important and long-overdue conversation about the “bank of mum and dad,” inequality, and what it means to build a life when financial starting points are so uneven.
At times, though, I felt the author got a bit lost in the enormity of it all. The sections where she brought things back to her own experience sometimes felt jarring and didn’t always acknowledge the nuance or breadth of experiences that exist. She tries to counter this with short snapshots of other people’s stories, but these can get a little lost and don’t always land as strongly as they could to reinforce the research.
Still, Inheritocracy opens up an important and long-overdue conversation about the “bank of mum and dad,” inequality, and what it means to build a life when financial starting points are so uneven.
June 1, 2026
Reads more like a Millennial memoir than a genuine analysis on inheritocracy. This makes it an incredibly easy read but also means the book doesn't always go into as much depth as I would have liked.
Drawing on her own experiences, the author examines how our ideal of meritocracy has actually shifted towards an inheritocracy, where family support increasingly determines life outcomes for Millennials. She explores how two people of the same age, background and salary can end up in very different situations depending on whether they have access to family support, particularly when it comes to housing and financial security. Along the way, she also discusses the infantilisation and intergenerational power dynamics that can arise from this dependency, which I found particularly interesting.
This is intertwined with social and political commentary throughout, but that is focused entirely on the UK. There is a particular emphasis on Margaret Thatcher's and Tony Blair's policies and their impact on the economy to this day.
The author's perspective is shaped by her relatively privileged background, and at times the analysis can feel somewhat London-centric. But, she is also very self aware and acknowledges that reality throughout the book.
Overall, it’s an interesting and thought-provoking read on the financial realities of being a Millennial. While the structure can feel disjointed and the key takeaways aren’t always clear, that might partly reflect how complex and interconnected these issues can be. Despite that, it still raises plenty of useful ideas worth considering.
Drawing on her own experiences, the author examines how our ideal of meritocracy has actually shifted towards an inheritocracy, where family support increasingly determines life outcomes for Millennials. She explores how two people of the same age, background and salary can end up in very different situations depending on whether they have access to family support, particularly when it comes to housing and financial security. Along the way, she also discusses the infantilisation and intergenerational power dynamics that can arise from this dependency, which I found particularly interesting.
This is intertwined with social and political commentary throughout, but that is focused entirely on the UK. There is a particular emphasis on Margaret Thatcher's and Tony Blair's policies and their impact on the economy to this day.
The author's perspective is shaped by her relatively privileged background, and at times the analysis can feel somewhat London-centric. But, she is also very self aware and acknowledges that reality throughout the book.
Overall, it’s an interesting and thought-provoking read on the financial realities of being a Millennial. While the structure can feel disjointed and the key takeaways aren’t always clear, that might partly reflect how complex and interconnected these issues can be. Despite that, it still raises plenty of useful ideas worth considering.
Read
July 22, 2025#inheritocracy by #elizafilby published in 2024. Interesting, thought provoking and reasonably well researched. Engagingly written with some entertaining anecdotes. Champagne socialist complains about the Tories (correctly) promotes Jeremy Corbyn (foolishly) warns of the dangers of far right misogyny and virtue signals immigration and diversity (🙄) and yet wonders why the majority of people cannot afford to buy a home without the BOMAD. A fair amount of blame understandably thrown at boomers and 14 years of Tory decline, some blame placed on Thatcher but very little mention of the massive damage caused by Blairite policies that have been pushed on us for almost 3 decades. One brief mention about the supply of housing and the policy failings there. Zero mention of the significant increase in demand (presumably due to fear of being labelled far right for the crime of noticing). Ultimately cowardly with no solutions offered or discussed. Proudly boasting of maintaining her juvenile lefty student politics while in her 40s as well as her millionaire multi-property owning Marxist parents. It must be difficult ideologically hating her privilege but not doing anything about it because she lacks the courage of her convictions. Ridiculous. Talks about the loser boyfriends she had and the crimes she committed without significant punishment. Takes little responsibility for her bad decisions but blames her privilege, when surely it’s the morals that need to be questioned. Interviewing people on 6 figure incomes who apparently cannot afford things and consider £100,000 to be a low salary. Laughably tragic and out of touch. No mention of the significance of poor decision making or the need to sacrifice. It seems that ‘sacrifice’ according to the people that the author interviews is not being able to have a holiday for 6 years. These wealthy people seem to have no idea that some people have never been able to afford a holiday. So sad that she is the victim of her parents wealth. It’s not entirely disingenuous but it is lacking logical reasoning and largely blinded by ideological prerequisites. But as Chomsky said to Andrew Marr “if you believed something different you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting”. And that whole conversation is often entirely lost on the privileged left. I am guilty of being slightly jealous of rich people in a normal way (“oh wouldn’t it be nice to have that”). But I don’t begrudge them if they are polite about it. Good for them and their parents. It makes perfect sense to want your children to have a nice life. But I can’t stand the privileged lefties that want to tax everyone more but don’t voluntarily pay more tax themselves. Again lacking the courage of their convictions. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the author and her friends were the type to attend Glastonbury festival and demand open borders while being surrounded by an impenetrable fence. The audacity coupled with a staggering lack of self awareness. Meritocracy is an ideal but the old adage “it’s not what you know, it’s who you know” still stands true. You shouldn’t feel guilty that your parents helped you. You should just feel grateful. Why are wages stagnant and people poor? Making people dependent on BOMAD and preventing social mobility?
Perhaps government policy over the last 3 decades has something to do with it? Perhaps flooding the country with cheap labour has something to do with it?
Perhaps if the supply of workers is so high then wages are likely to be suppressed? Businesses love an abundance of cheap labour. But no I’m sure the champagne socialists solution will be more high taxes. It is promising that she recognises the feminist brainwashing that women “can have it all” was flawed and despite that she has found a fulfilling job and family life. Good for her. And of course don’t forget the obligation to blame the patriarchy while boasting how much women outnumber men in various fields and earnings. Such an odd ideological blindness. There is a brief discussion about the female fantasy of being a tradwife but no mention of the impossibility of that for the majority of people since women entered the workforce and doubled the supply of labour starting the trend of depressed wages. No mention of the outrageous current tax burden, Government waste and mismanagement. It is no wonder people are struggling without parental support. Some of us would have loved a career in the arts but had to sacrifice dreams for practicality and get ourselves ‘proper jobs’ because we couldn’t rely on BOMAD. The author is proud of her socialist upbringing and the rebellion of her parents against the thatcher government, but she cannot understand generation z and their right wing leanings are a rebellion against the left wing Blairite paradigm of the last 3 decades. So ideologically short sighted. Despite recognising her naivety and some contradictory statements within the text the author cannot escape her feminist programming - everyone gets old: women most affected. An interesting analysis of the problem, but ultimately hollow, much like her politics/worldview.
Perhaps government policy over the last 3 decades has something to do with it? Perhaps flooding the country with cheap labour has something to do with it?
Perhaps if the supply of workers is so high then wages are likely to be suppressed? Businesses love an abundance of cheap labour. But no I’m sure the champagne socialists solution will be more high taxes. It is promising that she recognises the feminist brainwashing that women “can have it all” was flawed and despite that she has found a fulfilling job and family life. Good for her. And of course don’t forget the obligation to blame the patriarchy while boasting how much women outnumber men in various fields and earnings. Such an odd ideological blindness. There is a brief discussion about the female fantasy of being a tradwife but no mention of the impossibility of that for the majority of people since women entered the workforce and doubled the supply of labour starting the trend of depressed wages. No mention of the outrageous current tax burden, Government waste and mismanagement. It is no wonder people are struggling without parental support. Some of us would have loved a career in the arts but had to sacrifice dreams for practicality and get ourselves ‘proper jobs’ because we couldn’t rely on BOMAD. The author is proud of her socialist upbringing and the rebellion of her parents against the thatcher government, but she cannot understand generation z and their right wing leanings are a rebellion against the left wing Blairite paradigm of the last 3 decades. So ideologically short sighted. Despite recognising her naivety and some contradictory statements within the text the author cannot escape her feminist programming - everyone gets old: women most affected. An interesting analysis of the problem, but ultimately hollow, much like her politics/worldview.
August 6, 2026
Ragebait, but also consolation.
January 25, 2025
This was a great read, it’s well written, and has really interesting insights into the current situation both within and between generations.
It is very frustrating to read, but that’s more about the realities the book addresses rather than the book itself!
Would definitely recommend 💯
It is very frustrating to read, but that’s more about the realities the book addresses rather than the book itself!
Would definitely recommend 💯
April 25, 2026
Interesting considerations about boomers and millennials as well as the inequality within the millennials themselves.
February 16, 2025
An interesting book about housing crisis in the UK. Wealth in this country is no longer generated through innovation, grit and education - it is generated through property and inheritance.
This books speaks of the baby boomer who go the houses for dirt cheap and are now all millionaires. The physiological effects it has on their children - who feel entitled to an inheritance and how this changes family dynamics.
What I found most interesting was the last chapter on health care. Culturally we think there three parts to life - education - employment- retirement. The book argues that there should be a fourth a stage - the stage where our health starts to deteriorate and we have to start paying for this - and it is much more expensive than we think. The book estimates this to be around 50,000 pounds a year. This period of time can last for many years - for instance if a couple health rapidly deteriorate but they are still alive for 5 years, this can cost 500,000 pounds. This wipes out the inheritance and as people live longer lives we can expect to see more people reducing inheritance they give their children to spend on their own healthcare. Also the majority of people do not save for this fourth stage of there life - the books tells horror stories of the wealths of people children being evaporated to pay for this.
This books speaks of the baby boomer who go the houses for dirt cheap and are now all millionaires. The physiological effects it has on their children - who feel entitled to an inheritance and how this changes family dynamics.
What I found most interesting was the last chapter on health care. Culturally we think there three parts to life - education - employment- retirement. The book argues that there should be a fourth a stage - the stage where our health starts to deteriorate and we have to start paying for this - and it is much more expensive than we think. The book estimates this to be around 50,000 pounds a year. This period of time can last for many years - for instance if a couple health rapidly deteriorate but they are still alive for 5 years, this can cost 500,000 pounds. This wipes out the inheritance and as people live longer lives we can expect to see more people reducing inheritance they give their children to spend on their own healthcare. Also the majority of people do not save for this fourth stage of there life - the books tells horror stories of the wealths of people children being evaporated to pay for this.
February 5, 2025
Super interesting and thought provoking. If not a little depressing. I'm Gen X.
February 17, 2026
Interesting, but I don’t think it gave me any sense of how prevalent the bank of mum and dad is - most of the perspectives are white middle class London-centric.
3.5 stars
3.5 stars
September 5, 2025
Brilliantly written with some great insights into contemporary economics and the corresponding social impact. Inheritance is an interesting and sometimes difficult topic, and this book is well-researched and provides a wide range of topics within this niche, including focuses on class and feminism. would recommend.
June 30, 2026
In typical UK fashion I'm getting fucked over by the economy and want to know why. Sadly the only way I can read about this is through a relentless London-centric upper-middle class narrative by an author who has directly benefited from said fucking over.
This discussion is valuable, but I found it frustrating pulling out key points on the direction of the UK for the rest of us outside the upper-middle class world of this half-memoir.
The decision to mock the author's ex-boyfriends as examples on men's newfound emasculisation and frustration at the loss of agency as traditional gender roles collapse felt sour.
This discussion is valuable, but I found it frustrating pulling out key points on the direction of the UK for the rest of us outside the upper-middle class world of this half-memoir.
The decision to mock the author's ex-boyfriends as examples on men's newfound emasculisation and frustration at the loss of agency as traditional gender roles collapse felt sour.
January 22, 2026
Read this book as I had heard the author on a few podcasts. While I agree with her insights on how inheritance is shaping our lives as millennials in the UK, the narrative felt a little unfinished at times and was missing a conclusion, relying on her own experiences or stories from other individuals. The final section on old age and care costs was the most interesting.
December 28, 2024
An unapologetic and detailed analysis of the economic and social dynamics that will likely shape the post-boomer world.
Read
June 20, 2026This is a fascinating book that works on a number of levels, but has a structural issue; I will explain later.
Firstly, it is an excellent and timely review of C21st culture, family dynamics, family finance and the economy, informed by post-war and late C20th politics, social movements, and external shocks. In the very best pop-science style (is this pop-social science?) Filby is not afraid to use her own experience to illustrate, if not underpin, her thoughts and findings. And this is a problem, as each individual story and so-called generational traits and behaviours are unique; her family story in itself is interesting (Bohemian parents, large house in Tooting, women as main bread-winners etc.) but can only resonate with a limited audience, [she] is conscious of this, mentioning a few times Baby Boomer vs. Millennial differences, the Bank of Mum & Dad (‘BOMAD’), the hoped-for, if not expected, inheritance, infantilisation & delayed milestones of her and her peers, also that all the above might be seen as middle-class angst! She is disciplined enough to delay analysis of specific female-centred experiences, and later still looking after aging parents (and death), and the challenge for individuals, families, and societies with trickle-down inherited wealth, inheritance tax, and expensive and inadequate elder social care … these could be separate book(s) in their own right.
Not meaning to be controversial, but I don’t think ‘real’ science, history, economics etc. should include a disguised memoir or the author’s first person perspective … but I could be wrong? For example, my experience(!) as an older Gen-X (Filby is an older Millennial) includes some benefits of ‘boomer’ house price inflation but also social mobility through meritocracy; I don’t recognise myself in the 7 new social classes (p126); I call my children ‘kidults’ - in fun - but am pleased to say they are not entitled ‘snowflakes’ that the media loves to criticise … anyhoo, you are not interested in me and my story, but you get my point about the risks of grouping, classifying, and stereotyping.
Despite these misgivings Filby does encapsulate perfectly a point and place in time, covering a lot of generational jargon and explaining everything clearly and concisely with a smattering or real-world and real-person examples. I will take away a couple of things; the noun and associated class of people living precariously, precarity/precariat, and; the realisation that the ‘me’ generation really started with Baby Boomers. My parents and in-laws are late ‘silent generation’, but I see now what informed their behaviour and the inevitable ripple down the generations.
Firstly, it is an excellent and timely review of C21st culture, family dynamics, family finance and the economy, informed by post-war and late C20th politics, social movements, and external shocks. In the very best pop-science style (is this pop-social science?) Filby is not afraid to use her own experience to illustrate, if not underpin, her thoughts and findings. And this is a problem, as each individual story and so-called generational traits and behaviours are unique; her family story in itself is interesting (Bohemian parents, large house in Tooting, women as main bread-winners etc.) but can only resonate with a limited audience, [she] is conscious of this, mentioning a few times Baby Boomer vs. Millennial differences, the Bank of Mum & Dad (‘BOMAD’), the hoped-for, if not expected, inheritance, infantilisation & delayed milestones of her and her peers, also that all the above might be seen as middle-class angst! She is disciplined enough to delay analysis of specific female-centred experiences, and later still looking after aging parents (and death), and the challenge for individuals, families, and societies with trickle-down inherited wealth, inheritance tax, and expensive and inadequate elder social care … these could be separate book(s) in their own right.
Not meaning to be controversial, but I don’t think ‘real’ science, history, economics etc. should include a disguised memoir or the author’s first person perspective … but I could be wrong? For example, my experience(!) as an older Gen-X (Filby is an older Millennial) includes some benefits of ‘boomer’ house price inflation but also social mobility through meritocracy; I don’t recognise myself in the 7 new social classes (p126); I call my children ‘kidults’ - in fun - but am pleased to say they are not entitled ‘snowflakes’ that the media loves to criticise … anyhoo, you are not interested in me and my story, but you get my point about the risks of grouping, classifying, and stereotyping.
Despite these misgivings Filby does encapsulate perfectly a point and place in time, covering a lot of generational jargon and explaining everything clearly and concisely with a smattering or real-world and real-person examples. I will take away a couple of things; the noun and associated class of people living precariously, precarity/precariat, and; the realisation that the ‘me’ generation really started with Baby Boomers. My parents and in-laws are late ‘silent generation’, but I see now what informed their behaviour and the inevitable ripple down the generations.
May 31, 2026
3.5 stars because it is surprisingly hard to find stuff on what feels like the backbone of economic inequality. This felt particularly pertinent to British classicism, of course, because the anecdotes and the author were English. I would love to have seen more anecdotes from other countries and societies, like places with more "new money" (ex: US? Nigeria? Saudi Arabia?) or places where massive revolutions in recent years have led to a genuine belief in inheritocracy. The structure was a bit chaotic. I think what spoke to me about this book was the lack of discourse and shame that comes with this subject. No one wants to admit how much help they get from their parents. This is a good jumping point.
June 7, 2025
Really brilliantly written, I couldn’t stop reading. Filby paints a complete picture of Britain’s economic reality today (and the developed world more broadly), masterfully weaving together extensive academic research, interviews with people from all walks of life, and her own personal story.
The 21st century inheritocracy is something I think about a lot, and I’ve read shorter pieces on the topic before. While many of her ideas weren’t entirely new to me, the way she presented and explored them was fresh and engaging.
The 21st century inheritocracy is something I think about a lot, and I’ve read shorter pieces on the topic before. While many of her ideas weren’t entirely new to me, the way she presented and explored them was fresh and engaging.
January 9, 2026
Lots to think about.
January 11, 2026
An insightful review for the future.
February 3, 2026
Almost harrowing towards the end, required reading for millennials and boomers alike.
I love that it’s more interview based
I love that it’s more interview based
December 18, 2025
A very interesting and enjoyable read about a topic I find super interesting. I loved the exploration into the history of the Baby Boomers and how we, as a society, got here with so much wealth tied up in their generation.
April 2, 2026
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ … wow
This was not a book on ‘land and estates’ as I’d expected, but rather a deep dive into class and culture within England.
This book further confirmed what I have been arguing for years: the UK is not a meritocracy but an inheritocracy.
This was not a book on ‘land and estates’ as I’d expected, but rather a deep dive into class and culture within England.
This book further confirmed what I have been arguing for years: the UK is not a meritocracy but an inheritocracy.
April 10, 2026
ban inheritance!
July 21, 2026
This should be a compulsory read for anyone interested in the state of Millennial economics in the 2020s
March 24, 2026
interesting read about the struggles the different generation have and what role the inherentance plays. The stoey loses it impact by introducing too many nuances. further the story feels too much as personal story to find out how other people of her generation are coping.
May 18, 2026
3.5*
I don't remember another year I so struggled with books.
This one came as a recommendation from my friend. What he recommended, was actually listening to an interview with Eliza Filby. I started listening and then I was like - I really have to read this book.
She touches something very painful here. Britain is infamous for how incredibly expensive properties are. The market is insane. You can spend years in education, you will get a job and then you'll be stuck for years renting a room somewhere because that's all you can afford.
The argument Filby makes is that the society in Britain is divided by social inequality and that this rift is deepened by people who have wealthier families getting propelled up the ladder early on in life as their families mobilise resources such as paying off their studies, maintenance costs, building up deposits to purchase houses etc. If you don't have this - good luck. Saving up for a deposit, especially in South, is a pain. If you are single and/or with dependents and/or outsider, it's even worse.
I have to say I am really tempted to buy into this theory. Because a lot of what she writes about in this book overlaps with what I've seen.
I'm an outsider and from a family that never had much, so I was never expecting it easy.
I chose uni because it had a stipend. Because I had a friend I could share rent with. Otherwise I wouldn't have been able to afford it. While my coursemates would spend their free time cramming or drinking/partying with their friends, I worked to pay my rent. My coursemates ended up with internships because they could afford time sending a million applications, because they were born here and knew more about how the system works/could mobilise the resource of their families/friends knowing how the market works and how best to sell yourself. We all got proper jobs in the end but I was always wondering how different my path would be had I been able to afford getting more proper job experience.
I am proud I did not have to ask my parents for money while I was in uni. But it did cost me social mobility.
My coursemates could afford maintenance loans or they lived with parents, so they did not need to do that and instead of "washing dishes" to make ends meet they could apply for proper jobs. And save for their mortage deposits.
My heart bleeds every time to think how much money I spent over the years renting in the UK. Back there at home the property prices shot up too during the last few years but I would have been able to buy a flat in the capital or another larger city. I might even have just enough for a deposit in some satellite town here.
As a wise man said: life is unfair. Deal with it.
I have friends who were able to buy property in London. But they are British and they have parent support. Money for a wedding? Yes, of course. You need help with a deposit? Here it is.
And here I am. A girl that spent half of her first month's pay on coffee and sandwiches - having finally gotten an adult job (relevant to my education) for a first time in years, I could finally afford it.
Yes, I literally ate half of my first adult wage.
It would be unfair not to confess that I ended benefitting on that support too. Through luck, but still.
Nobody cares if a few students pooling resources together can afford renting a flat. The agencies want a guarantor. Or charge you several months worth if rent.
Nobody cares if you are pennyless. Nobody cares where you will get a guarantor when you're an outsider or if that's even possible.
I was lucky my friend had a boyfriend and his mom or dad stepped in.
I was so embarrassed. Here I am, an adult woman having to depend on someone else's kindness. I did not ask for it, I did not want it but I had to have it.
And what if I had not had it?
I don't know. Street. Or - in shame - I would have had to step back, go back home to my own ma and da and ask if they can accept me back on their sofa until I figure things out.
For a young person, life in the UK these days kinda sucks. You will get a job. But how will you live? Esp if you are single and have little familial support?
These are all things Filby investigates and I could so resonate.
The country is not building enough accommodation. Those few that exist - god, what the costs. Which I really don't understand. What sort of growth do they want if people can't afford the basics?
Accommodation is a basic need. Renting with several random people per house is not an option.
They want economics to grow, they complain young people don't want families.
Why should I want a family if I can't afford space for it? Damn it, I can't even afford privacy for a good shag!
I could also resonate with some thoughts in the book - e.g. that Britain is returning to Jane Austen days - the days of successful marriage and inheritance/dowry. These are exact thoughts I 've been having myself.
One criticism I had for the book, though, was that families pooling whatever resources is not a new phenomenon. People have been doing this since the dawn of time. I wish this was more strongly accentuated in the book because the tone is mostly "those lucky boomers did not have to work that hard to make a living; the boomers are sitting on tonloads of wealth; the boomers are bags of money that could be shared with the younger ones". Which is not exactly fair either - yes, they may be lucky. But they did not choose it.
I wish there was more discussion of which policies determine this. E.g. is the system rigged? Does it benefit home-owners? Is there a lobby of wealthy property owners and therefore lack of regulation of the property market? What about building more houses? Why is that not being done? Why are those prices so crazy? What about job distribution vs affordable properties? What could be done - other than pressurising the elderly downsizing the properties - in my opinion, it's a bit unfair to ask people to sell the house they've been living in for n decades just because mere kindness and pro-social behaviour. The author touches upon inheritance tax but there is more to this than that.
Filby discusses the difficulties of talking inheritance and the social care for elderly and how, in the absence of infrastructure, the sons and daughters (mostly daughters) have to burn their lives looking after their aging parents.
What she did not say was that it's the same shit or worse elsewhere - other countries lack the infrastructure even more than Britain does or it is not culturally acceptable to outsource the care of your elderly parents. My country, for instance, does not even have many elderly care homes and those that exist, cost millions of money. So women in my country too take up the burden of taking care of the parents/parents-in-law and without any hopes of inheritance at that.
My colleague who spent years working in Switzerland, says that the Swiss are happy to rent for their whole lives. So I wish she explored how things are done in other countries - there must be a reason they are less grumpy about this.
In my opinion, rent is evil and the system is rigged (I see no political will to change it), but things are more complex than that. And that "complex" stayed out of the picture.
So 3.5*. I think Filby addresses important issues and they really need addressing at the policy level at least. That being said - there should be solutions other than penalising the elderly just because they had it lucky.
I don't remember another year I so struggled with books.
This one came as a recommendation from my friend. What he recommended, was actually listening to an interview with Eliza Filby. I started listening and then I was like - I really have to read this book.
She touches something very painful here. Britain is infamous for how incredibly expensive properties are. The market is insane. You can spend years in education, you will get a job and then you'll be stuck for years renting a room somewhere because that's all you can afford.
The argument Filby makes is that the society in Britain is divided by social inequality and that this rift is deepened by people who have wealthier families getting propelled up the ladder early on in life as their families mobilise resources such as paying off their studies, maintenance costs, building up deposits to purchase houses etc. If you don't have this - good luck. Saving up for a deposit, especially in South, is a pain. If you are single and/or with dependents and/or outsider, it's even worse.
I have to say I am really tempted to buy into this theory. Because a lot of what she writes about in this book overlaps with what I've seen.
I'm an outsider and from a family that never had much, so I was never expecting it easy.
I chose uni because it had a stipend. Because I had a friend I could share rent with. Otherwise I wouldn't have been able to afford it. While my coursemates would spend their free time cramming or drinking/partying with their friends, I worked to pay my rent. My coursemates ended up with internships because they could afford time sending a million applications, because they were born here and knew more about how the system works/could mobilise the resource of their families/friends knowing how the market works and how best to sell yourself. We all got proper jobs in the end but I was always wondering how different my path would be had I been able to afford getting more proper job experience.
I am proud I did not have to ask my parents for money while I was in uni. But it did cost me social mobility.
My coursemates could afford maintenance loans or they lived with parents, so they did not need to do that and instead of "washing dishes" to make ends meet they could apply for proper jobs. And save for their mortage deposits.
My heart bleeds every time to think how much money I spent over the years renting in the UK. Back there at home the property prices shot up too during the last few years but I would have been able to buy a flat in the capital or another larger city. I might even have just enough for a deposit in some satellite town here.
As a wise man said: life is unfair. Deal with it.
I have friends who were able to buy property in London. But they are British and they have parent support. Money for a wedding? Yes, of course. You need help with a deposit? Here it is.
And here I am. A girl that spent half of her first month's pay on coffee and sandwiches - having finally gotten an adult job (relevant to my education) for a first time in years, I could finally afford it.
Yes, I literally ate half of my first adult wage.
It would be unfair not to confess that I ended benefitting on that support too. Through luck, but still.
Nobody cares if a few students pooling resources together can afford renting a flat. The agencies want a guarantor. Or charge you several months worth if rent.
Nobody cares if you are pennyless. Nobody cares where you will get a guarantor when you're an outsider or if that's even possible.
I was lucky my friend had a boyfriend and his mom or dad stepped in.
I was so embarrassed. Here I am, an adult woman having to depend on someone else's kindness. I did not ask for it, I did not want it but I had to have it.
And what if I had not had it?
I don't know. Street. Or - in shame - I would have had to step back, go back home to my own ma and da and ask if they can accept me back on their sofa until I figure things out.
For a young person, life in the UK these days kinda sucks. You will get a job. But how will you live? Esp if you are single and have little familial support?
These are all things Filby investigates and I could so resonate.
The country is not building enough accommodation. Those few that exist - god, what the costs. Which I really don't understand. What sort of growth do they want if people can't afford the basics?
Accommodation is a basic need. Renting with several random people per house is not an option.
They want economics to grow, they complain young people don't want families.
Why should I want a family if I can't afford space for it? Damn it, I can't even afford privacy for a good shag!
I could also resonate with some thoughts in the book - e.g. that Britain is returning to Jane Austen days - the days of successful marriage and inheritance/dowry. These are exact thoughts I 've been having myself.
One criticism I had for the book, though, was that families pooling whatever resources is not a new phenomenon. People have been doing this since the dawn of time. I wish this was more strongly accentuated in the book because the tone is mostly "those lucky boomers did not have to work that hard to make a living; the boomers are sitting on tonloads of wealth; the boomers are bags of money that could be shared with the younger ones". Which is not exactly fair either - yes, they may be lucky. But they did not choose it.
I wish there was more discussion of which policies determine this. E.g. is the system rigged? Does it benefit home-owners? Is there a lobby of wealthy property owners and therefore lack of regulation of the property market? What about building more houses? Why is that not being done? Why are those prices so crazy? What about job distribution vs affordable properties? What could be done - other than pressurising the elderly downsizing the properties - in my opinion, it's a bit unfair to ask people to sell the house they've been living in for n decades just because mere kindness and pro-social behaviour. The author touches upon inheritance tax but there is more to this than that.
Filby discusses the difficulties of talking inheritance and the social care for elderly and how, in the absence of infrastructure, the sons and daughters (mostly daughters) have to burn their lives looking after their aging parents.
What she did not say was that it's the same shit or worse elsewhere - other countries lack the infrastructure even more than Britain does or it is not culturally acceptable to outsource the care of your elderly parents. My country, for instance, does not even have many elderly care homes and those that exist, cost millions of money. So women in my country too take up the burden of taking care of the parents/parents-in-law and without any hopes of inheritance at that.
My colleague who spent years working in Switzerland, says that the Swiss are happy to rent for their whole lives. So I wish she explored how things are done in other countries - there must be a reason they are less grumpy about this.
In my opinion, rent is evil and the system is rigged (I see no political will to change it), but things are more complex than that. And that "complex" stayed out of the picture.
So 3.5*. I think Filby addresses important issues and they really need addressing at the policy level at least. That being said - there should be solutions other than penalising the elderly just because they had it lucky.
February 12, 2025
I have mixed feelings towards this book. It was interesting but hard to take from the author who took until the epilogue to even acknowledge her astonishing level of privedge and whilst yes she had worked hard for her academic achievements and career she had been able to live rent free for majority of her 20s but still said she struggle financial.
The quote and comment i agreed with most came from carol "you cannot guaranter the inheritance. It is not a right".
Below are the notes i made during the read
I dont know why multiple people who spoke to the author about student debt think the Labour Gov will wipe the debt off
In chapter 6 some people who were interviewed seem to contridict themselves and there was lots of privedge showing. For example, Lucy judging her friends for spending money but she got money given to her from mum to buy a house.
Shocking how particular religion laws can cause wifes or daughter to miss out on inheritance!
Chapter 7 - strange dynamic - the ceo of a company giving financial advice blaming parents not downsizing their properties and not giving the money or making houses available for their children. This links to someone complaining that "their parents are spendimg their inheritance but in reality it is the parents money and they have earnt it to spend. Why are some convinced they have a right to their parents money?
Not sure how i feel on the term "burden" when describing giving care towards parents/grandparents
The quote and comment i agreed with most came from carol "you cannot guaranter the inheritance. It is not a right".
Below are the notes i made during the read
I dont know why multiple people who spoke to the author about student debt think the Labour Gov will wipe the debt off
In chapter 6 some people who were interviewed seem to contridict themselves and there was lots of privedge showing. For example, Lucy judging her friends for spending money but she got money given to her from mum to buy a house.
Shocking how particular religion laws can cause wifes or daughter to miss out on inheritance!
Chapter 7 - strange dynamic - the ceo of a company giving financial advice blaming parents not downsizing their properties and not giving the money or making houses available for their children. This links to someone complaining that "their parents are spendimg their inheritance but in reality it is the parents money and they have earnt it to spend. Why are some convinced they have a right to their parents money?
Not sure how i feel on the term "burden" when describing giving care towards parents/grandparents
August 21, 2025
"...the major question that lies at the heart of this book: is the Bank of Mum and Dad [...] inherently good or bad?"
I wanted to like this book because I've heard the author speak articulately about the issues it covers, but unfortunately I don't think it answered its own question. For me, it didn't work for two reasons. Firstly, it felt quite unfocused and more of a general critique on the millennial generation (e.g. boomerang kids, the 'millennial condition' of constant burnout), which was not what I signed up for. Secondly, I don't think trying to weave that into a memoir worked very well and I found myself skipping over those parts.
The take home messages of the book are that people should be more cognisant and acknowledging of their privilege in the form of the (financial) support they receive from their parents, and that the amount of inherited wealth will increase in the coming years as Boomers leave their property to their kids. I think this is part of a much wider debate about social and income inequality, i.e. it's not solely about what people stand to inherit in later life, but also the social capital and networks they're able to leverage way before that point.
I wanted to like this book because I've heard the author speak articulately about the issues it covers, but unfortunately I don't think it answered its own question. For me, it didn't work for two reasons. Firstly, it felt quite unfocused and more of a general critique on the millennial generation (e.g. boomerang kids, the 'millennial condition' of constant burnout), which was not what I signed up for. Secondly, I don't think trying to weave that into a memoir worked very well and I found myself skipping over those parts.
The take home messages of the book are that people should be more cognisant and acknowledging of their privilege in the form of the (financial) support they receive from their parents, and that the amount of inherited wealth will increase in the coming years as Boomers leave their property to their kids. I think this is part of a much wider debate about social and income inequality, i.e. it's not solely about what people stand to inherit in later life, but also the social capital and networks they're able to leverage way before that point.
Read
August 9, 2026Great book about a topic that's often not talked about: the inheritance economy. Appreciated how it explored the complex relationship between millennials and their Gen X - baby boomer parents when it comes to money, which is sadly really embedded in our daily lives. Was such an easy but informative read! Wish there was a Philippine version for this though as this was focused on the UK but there are similarities :)
July 31, 2026
Highly enjoyable and accessible discussion of what generation x and the elder cohort of millennials. The author classifies herself as an elder millennial but just about the younger generation x. This is why she remains highly relatable to the older x than it would be for the younger cohort. Thus, questions like why are the millennials self centered and lacking in care to their parents? This and other questions find some answers here.
Despite being an academic book with a lot of footnotes, she inserts herself and this acts as background to her own life story, a part memoir. It gives a sense of vulnerability but at the same time connection to my life as well having enjoyed the spoils of my parents' peak work period in a time when things like school fees were relatively cheap for a fluctuating middle class family like mine. Her story is our generation's story.
I appreciate that she contextualized the scope as Britain only but this socio history can be applied to most of the anglophone world including the USA. This is why her work focuses mostly on property as the form of wealth and assets. It's nothing but the inheritance of property here (almost all chapters except one). She directly challenges the prevailing impression that the social tension is between the boomer and the rest as is prone in the media. Her argument is that there is a greater problem within the generation cohort that have parents who have and who do not. She doesn't explicitly state this or her position until you read the epilogue. So I recommend that you start with that if you find yourself unsure where she is headed.
One weakness is that other forms of assets and help are not deeply discussed here like free babysitting, rent and other intangible instances. It's understandable that data might not be available or the reality that few millennials are building families themselves due to choice, economics, or other reasons.
Now let me get down to the nitty gritty here. I am really astonished that this is even a surprise or that the author is surprised that this is happening. Welcome to the rest of the world, Britain! Having been blinded by meritocracy as a religion and ideology, this turn in economic global events now put the highly individualized West under the same conditions as the rest of the world—the reliance on family to survive and thrive. It seems elementary but also not. What we see in this book is an account of what truly a family is in the West (without discussing the emotional entanglements) or what it wants to be a family now that members have to rely on each other. (She hardly dived deep into the shape of a British family today except in separate pieces. You have to make the connections yourself.) We have always done this elsewhere except we now have the problem of individualizing Asian social economies that the questions and problems are reverse mirrors to this book. What does it mean for children to cancel their parents because of different beliefs?
It's almost shocking to hear that among peers no one talks about receiving a leg up from their parents. It is almost as if it is grating to be known as coming from someone rich. Sure we're talking about people who don't flaunt their wealth as opposed to those who announce that they have arrived. No community I know both rural and urban can perform any life ritual without any help from family and friends—baptism, weddings and most especially buying a house. The author alludes to global capitalism but missed explaining in detail why it became increasingly prohibitive to live in London or in Tooting. Remarkably, that zone 3 area in which I used to live in had drunks and drug users at the entrance of the train station. High street was just mom and pop shops where I could buy cheap household items, the first iteration of Primark and the long shuttered stationery favourite Woolworths. It's the poor sister of Clapham junction and north but a boon for a broke student. It's amazing but also sad to hear that place is now gentrified.
It makes sense to have families coalesce to buy housing and save for rituals together. How else? She emphasised that wage labour can no longer afford you a life. That is so true. I think she missed classifying interviewees according to the relationship dynamics between parents and children and that is where the real inequality comes in—people with good and bad relations as well as those with a lot to no money. She didn't look critically into her data (it's unclear what the extent of her database is).
Her final chapter is the clincher here. Once you consider it—and she did—there is no great wealth transfer to the next generation because the next transfer is towards health care and medical expense for the next generation. She basically nullified all her previous chapters. The state can no longer afford it or has plans to deal with it. So the pot of money essentially goes to health care. We know little and she didn't discuss further and it's only a chapter. We know that the parents invested in their children and it looks like new groups emerge —parents who continue to support children and ignore their own needs, people who wants to spend it all, and people who do not want to spend the inheritance at all and figure it out along the way. I'm the last one, not because I'm not a planner, but we don't have assets to decide on for health care.
Some questions remain interesting and need to be pursued.
Despite being an academic book with a lot of footnotes, she inserts herself and this acts as background to her own life story, a part memoir. It gives a sense of vulnerability but at the same time connection to my life as well having enjoyed the spoils of my parents' peak work period in a time when things like school fees were relatively cheap for a fluctuating middle class family like mine. Her story is our generation's story.
I appreciate that she contextualized the scope as Britain only but this socio history can be applied to most of the anglophone world including the USA. This is why her work focuses mostly on property as the form of wealth and assets. It's nothing but the inheritance of property here (almost all chapters except one). She directly challenges the prevailing impression that the social tension is between the boomer and the rest as is prone in the media. Her argument is that there is a greater problem within the generation cohort that have parents who have and who do not. She doesn't explicitly state this or her position until you read the epilogue. So I recommend that you start with that if you find yourself unsure where she is headed.
One weakness is that other forms of assets and help are not deeply discussed here like free babysitting, rent and other intangible instances. It's understandable that data might not be available or the reality that few millennials are building families themselves due to choice, economics, or other reasons.
Now let me get down to the nitty gritty here. I am really astonished that this is even a surprise or that the author is surprised that this is happening. Welcome to the rest of the world, Britain! Having been blinded by meritocracy as a religion and ideology, this turn in economic global events now put the highly individualized West under the same conditions as the rest of the world—the reliance on family to survive and thrive. It seems elementary but also not. What we see in this book is an account of what truly a family is in the West (without discussing the emotional entanglements) or what it wants to be a family now that members have to rely on each other. (She hardly dived deep into the shape of a British family today except in separate pieces. You have to make the connections yourself.) We have always done this elsewhere except we now have the problem of individualizing Asian social economies that the questions and problems are reverse mirrors to this book. What does it mean for children to cancel their parents because of different beliefs?
It's almost shocking to hear that among peers no one talks about receiving a leg up from their parents. It is almost as if it is grating to be known as coming from someone rich. Sure we're talking about people who don't flaunt their wealth as opposed to those who announce that they have arrived. No community I know both rural and urban can perform any life ritual without any help from family and friends—baptism, weddings and most especially buying a house. The author alludes to global capitalism but missed explaining in detail why it became increasingly prohibitive to live in London or in Tooting. Remarkably, that zone 3 area in which I used to live in had drunks and drug users at the entrance of the train station. High street was just mom and pop shops where I could buy cheap household items, the first iteration of Primark and the long shuttered stationery favourite Woolworths. It's the poor sister of Clapham junction and north but a boon for a broke student. It's amazing but also sad to hear that place is now gentrified.
It makes sense to have families coalesce to buy housing and save for rituals together. How else? She emphasised that wage labour can no longer afford you a life. That is so true. I think she missed classifying interviewees according to the relationship dynamics between parents and children and that is where the real inequality comes in—people with good and bad relations as well as those with a lot to no money. She didn't look critically into her data (it's unclear what the extent of her database is).
Her final chapter is the clincher here. Once you consider it—and she did—there is no great wealth transfer to the next generation because the next transfer is towards health care and medical expense for the next generation. She basically nullified all her previous chapters. The state can no longer afford it or has plans to deal with it. So the pot of money essentially goes to health care. We know little and she didn't discuss further and it's only a chapter. We know that the parents invested in their children and it looks like new groups emerge —parents who continue to support children and ignore their own needs, people who wants to spend it all, and people who do not want to spend the inheritance at all and figure it out along the way. I'm the last one, not because I'm not a planner, but we don't have assets to decide on for health care.
Some questions remain interesting and need to be pursued.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews