Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 94 posts

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#81

Post by snowwrestler »

tinalumfoil wrote: post #19

> When you're in your twenties you should be spending that time really exploring and thinking about the things that give you meaning. Once you start growing up and living a life more you won't be able to do that again. -Digit CEO (from video) I hate the idea that once you leave college and get a job your life of having fun is over. As though fiscal irresponsibility is necessary for finding your life's "meaning" and y…

I think you got this backward. "Having fun" is not the same thing as "exploring and thinking about the things that give you meaning." In fact those thoughts are opposite.

The point is to start living intentionally. If you know what you value and want in life, it's easier to set goals and meet them--whether it's your education, your job, where you live, your finances, what experiences you have, etc.

People who don't start thinking about this when they're young might find later on in life that they've drifted into a situation that's hard to get out of. Like it or not, a lot of barriers are lower when you're 20--physical, cultural, financial. Once you're a lot older, there is no way to go back.

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#82

Post by krisdol »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #55
fapjacks wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have nothing approaching basic income or housing that anybody could live off reasonably. Either these kids are living with parents, living off parent's money, or are living out of their cars. There is no in between here. I suspect that it's the former, which is really giving an awful impression about what is possible in the States. The vast majority of Americans need to work their asses off just to make rent. If y…

>We have nothing approaching basic income or housing that anybody could live off reasonably. State welfare programs, section 8, food stamps, "earned income credit", medicaid, SSI, TANF, SNAP, etc. There's lots of aid in the US. Over 100m people nationally are on some level of means tested welfare. That's pushing one third of this nation. National spending accounts for $1T in welfare spending. That's slightly less tha…

I really don't think that cato is in the ballpark of being an objective source on welfare, though I don't have a reason to disagree with the number you mentioned. I'm having trouble calculating a max SNAP/food stamps benefit that would exceed $194/month for an individual in urban NYC. Is that modest? Sure, I bet there are some people who are satisfied living off of public welfare alone. They exist in every country, and probably in greater numbers in more-socialized countries. I'm unconvinced that the problem is big enough to warrant cutting any public-welfare programs. Some level of "mooching" is expected.

For me, when I was growing up on food stamps and welfare as a refugee, I know that it wasn't a level of living my family wanted to settle at. Evidently, neither does most of the country. The assistance helped us get settled and avoid a situation that surely would have resulted in us being thrown to the streets.

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#83

Post by sp332 »

CountSessine wrote: post #78
sp332 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And with no guarantee of upward mobility, why would someone put up with it?

Switching companies every 3 or 4 years is the new normal - you can't expect to ever get promoted within the same company. There's still upward mobility - its just that it's within an industry, not an individual company.

But I'm still a lot less likely to accept crap work just to hope that I get promoted later. The expected value of the upside is smaller, so should the downside be.

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#84

Post by CountSessine »

Fewer people willing or able to take a job might eventually cause a shortage of workers, leading to surge in wages and longer-term inflationary pressures, according to Princeton University economist Alan Blinder, a former Fed vice chairman.

"We're going to be running out of labor as we go through time,'' Blinder said on Bloomberg Television Dec. 31.

Oh, my. I hadn't even thought of that. I guess we'll need to expand the availability of slave-labour employer-controlled visas and guest worker programs, won't we? Let's forward this to our lobbyist.

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#85

Post by CountSessine »

sp332 wrote: post #83
CountSessine wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switching companies every 3 or 4 years is the new normal - you can't expect to ever get promoted within the same company. There's still upward mobility - its just that it's within an industry, not an individual company.

But I'm still a lot less likely to accept crap work just to hope that I get promoted later. The expected value of the upside is smaller, so should the downside be.

Agreed, but is that necessarily a bad thing?

If your labour has market value and you're taking crap from your employer, shop around for a new job. The other way of saying that we don't have lifetime employment anymore is that we don't have to suffer through lifetime employment anymore.

You don't have to tolerate stultifying bureaucracy. You don't have to suffer nitwit bosses. You don't have to deal with impossible coworkers. With an open labour market, you can work where you like.

A couple of days ago someone posted patio11's blog article on his experience working in Japan as a salaryman. The other side of the security of lifetime employment over there is that you have to tolerate horrible working conditions at your lifetime employer, and the labour market is so rigid that if you ever leave your employer, no one else will ever hire you.

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#86

Post by jophde »

DINKDINK wrote: post #18
jophde wrote: post #8

Yea, I am sure the percentage of 20-somethings who are actually financially independent is less than .0001%. Everyone else inherited money or gave up all hope of finding a real job.

300e6*.0001/100 = 300 people in the USA. There's probably more than 300, 20 year olds who are living off private incomes.

Seems about right. Wow this site is full of people with delusions of grandeur. It's hilarious how people wonder why others hate techies.

News flash, not everyone is in software. If you are I still doubt you are actually independently wealthy. Again, unless you were born that way.

Sorry for not doing a mathematical proof for those of you that think having $50k in the bank by the time you are 30 is independently wealthy when you haven't even put a down payment on a house in SF yet.

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#87

Post by jophde »

Spooky23 wrote: post #38
jophde wrote: post #8

Yea, I am sure the percentage of 20-somethings who are actually financially independent is less than .0001%. Everyone else inherited money or gave up all hope of finding a real job.

In the early 20's? Plenty. I lived through my first two years of college with roommates, savings, part-time/off-book bartending/bouncing and changing my long distance service.

Do you need to work again before you die?

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#88

Post by jophde »

cobaltblue wrote: post #44
DINKDINK wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

300e6*.0001/100 = 300 people in the USA. There's probably more than 300, 20 year olds who are living off private incomes.

Even worse, he said of 20-somethings (not out of the whole population, and not just 20 year olds) which leaves a start number around 45 million, or a mere 45 people in the USA. It's actually pretty easy to become financially independent before you hit 30 if you finish college on time (while you're 23) and get a 6-figure job out of college, and work for a few years with a small (sub-25k/yr) annual cost of living.

$25k a year covers about half the rent in a place where you will get paid six figures after school. I am not sure you know what financially independent means.

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#89

Post by jophde »

cobaltblue wrote: post #63
pc86 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also "actually pretty easy to become financially independent" if you hit the lottery. Both our examples aren't really conducive to an actual discussion. 1. The number of fields allowing a new grad to get a six-figure job are very small. 2. The number of places offering the above while also allowing the new grad to live in an area where they can have a sub-$2k/mo footprint are incredibly limited. 3. Of the people…

It's far easier to do a CS degree and get hired as a software developer (while not blowing your income on insanely high rent in San Francisco city-proper -- yeah you'll have to suck up a commute, live with roommates, or live almost anywhere else with a tech scene) than it is to win a lottery sum over $500k-600k. And there are more options than software -- just because the number of fields is small doesn't necessarily…

You must be CS Undergraduate

Re: Why Are 20-Somethings Retiring?

#90

Post by DickingAround »

DickingAround wrote: post #35

They're not retired. They're probably selling drugs. Not kidding. We have a lot of drug selling inmates (0.5% of Americans are in jail for drugs). It's also an industry people can get jobs in without experience and that booms in a recession. These retired kids are probably being honest in saying they're not just 'staying at home'. They're probably selling drugs. It's a job. Just not one they want to list on a survey.

I think this is a possible/probable explanation? Anyone who downvoted it want to explain why the downvote?
Post reply on HN