Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High • Hacker News Board

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#221

Post by ChicagoBoy11 » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 2:50 PM UTC

As a foreigner living in the U.S., I have to admit this obsession with leaving your parents house kinda baffles me.

I'm from Brazil, and despite nearing my thirties, back home the majority of my friends live with their parents and it is hardly seen as a big deal. I think a big driver of this shift is the fact that in the U.S. it is extremely common for one to leave for college, whereas in Brazil literally 100% of my friends who went to school in the country resided with their parents while they were in school.

One of the things that most attract me about the U.S. is the fact that opportunity and mobility is so rampant, and you have people crossing the country for jobs and a different life. That is a superb thing. But what I never, ever understood is seeing young friends of mine who get jobs in their hometowns but who stubbornly "move out" even if they are barely making enough to survive. In terms of lifetime earnings, those few thousand dollars a month that go to a stranger for rent are so, so valuable.

Another point this statistic does not take into account is that the current generation of "parents" are also on average better off than their parents were. The prospect of "living with the parents" would have seemed worse for my father than it did for me. I get that there are economic forces "forcing" kids to stay home, but I'm sure there is also a genuine shift in preference as well.

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#222

Post by 6DM » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 2:52 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #218

epalmer wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a little more complicated and it is not as bad as it sounds for her. Undergraduate degree in sociology and a minor in anthropology. BA in sociology is not very employable but is the most common undergraduate degree for librarians. Once the affordable care act (ObamaCare) was made into law the library (local public library) started making most non-librarian jobs part time so they don't have to provide health ins…

Why do people even spend $200,000 on a degree if they're not rich? I went to community college for my associates degree in IT (about $5000 total), and then went to university for a bachelor's of science in IT (roughly $15,000 all in). Since you work at a university, what does that extra $180,000 buy? What's the sales pitch you'll give to students to get them to pay so much?

As a past student, I can tell you that they definitely sell you a much lower number. They also get you to focus on "tuition" and not overall costs. Costs rises a lot due to books they try to force you to buy, food, and housing. Your first year is required to be on campus if you're from out of state. It's a crazy world out there.

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#223

Post by epalmer » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 2:55 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #218

epalmer wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a little more complicated and it is not as bad as it sounds for her. Undergraduate degree in sociology and a minor in anthropology. BA in sociology is not very employable but is the most common undergraduate degree for librarians. Once the affordable care act (ObamaCare) was made into law the library (local public library) started making most non-librarian jobs part time so they don't have to provide health ins…

Why do people even spend $200,000 on a degree if they're not rich? I went to community college for my associates degree in IT (about $5000 total), and then went to university for a bachelor's of science in IT (roughly $15,000 all in). Since you work at a university, what does that extra $180,000 buy? What's the sales pitch you'll give to students to get them to pay so much?

My Opinion Only: If you are going to an Ivy League school you are paying for the network / brand. If you are going to a lesser tier selective school you are paying for outcomes. But the outcomes, I believe, are starting to lag the price. At the school I work for about 65% of the students get some financial aid and we are need blind and meet 100% of demonstrated need. They meet need with grants (think scholarships) and a tiny amount of student debt. We do limit student loan debt to a small cap but many schools don't.

I'm not the best at selling the points because I went to a technical public university and got a BS and a MS in Chemistry and Environmental Engineers. Today I am a self taught CS guy.

I guess what I am saying is I don't fully buy into the Liberal Arts education selling points. My eldest doesn't buy into it as well. Of course the free education makes all the difference.

Typical selling points go like: http://www.forbes.com/sites/work-in-progress/2014/04/28/why-...

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#224

Post by icebraining » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 2:59 PM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #209

icebraining wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful about generalizing from your own experience. Only 0.4% of Brits own a second house, let several large holiday homes. While there were certainly some years of rapidly increasing consumer welfare, most of their gains were in stuff we take for granted today, not luxuries.

I'm not generalising - as I say in my comment I know I'm exceptionally fortunate.

No, I'm talking about the lavish lifestyles of our ancestors.

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#225

Post by saint_fiasco » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 3:02 PM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #54

white-flame wrote: post #13

I'm not a millennial, but it makes a heck of a lot of financial sense to live with family. I'm glad that with these shifts, the stigma is falling away. My immediate family has lived through rough times, with lots of "creative" living arrangements. Of course, we should still train general life autonomy, and not promote being able-but-incapable shut-ins, but being able to venture into housing (or back out of it if thin…

>The family unit as a reciprocating life cushion I'm not sure about that. Parents siphoning their children's (or children's spouses') "excess" income as a substitute for emergency and retirement savings seems pretty destructive. Rather than a self-perpetuating cycle of wealth transfer forward (i.e. paying for college), children start out less advantaged and, once they have earning power later in life, are expected to…

As opposed to some literal rent-seeker siphoning your excess income as literal rent, caring for your parents doesn't seem so bad.

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#226

Post by hyperliner » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 3:20 PM UTC

epalmer wrote: post #198

FussyZeus wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this situation with your daughter: - Wanted to be a librarian - Studied to be a librarian - Graduated school to be a librarian - Got a job as a librarian - Doesn't make enough to live on her own and pay the cost of her education to be a librarian And this isn't isolated to librarians, it's just a very instructive example. How is it we now have entire classes of jobs where the education they require…

It is a little more complicated and it is not as bad as it sounds for her. Undergraduate degree in sociology and a minor in anthropology. BA in sociology is not very employable but is the most common undergraduate degree for librarians. Once the affordable care act (ObamaCare) was made into law the library (local public library) started making most non-librarian jobs part time so they don't have to provide health ins…

Hey, one recommendation (assuming she wants something different; I hope I am not coming across as pretentious):

Get an MBA.

It worked for a relative of mine: she went from Liberal Arts to Director of Marketing for a tech firm.

Depending on where you live, an MBA may take her into a completely different direction.

Good luck but it does not seem like any of you all in your family need it.

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#227

Post by ebbv » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 3:27 PM UTC

The plural of anecdote is not data but just to give my own experience here; my youngest brother is of this age group and still lives with my parents for no reason other than laziness. He just has no ambition or interest in getting a steady job and moving out to his own place. No interest in finding a romantic partner. He just sits at home and plays video games as he has for his entire life. He has friends doing the same thing.

I don't know if this is a real trend or just something I'm seeing but someone should probably study this phenomenon.

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#228

Post by m23khan » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 3:29 PM UTC

What I would like to see happen is for young people to stay with their aging parents even after becoming financially settled and even after marriage.

The whole concept of 'moving out' is barbaric to say the least. Old folks who can't fend for themselves in many situations and their old bodies fail them in most basic of tasks such as cleaning house and cooking are then simply shoved into 'old folks house' till they breathe their last.

Best if this generation can break this sh!tty concept about 'moving out' - after all, they themselves would become old one day...

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#229

Post by ebbv » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 3:31 PM UTC

ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #221

As a foreigner living in the U.S., I have to admit this obsession with leaving your parents house kinda baffles me. I'm from Brazil, and despite nearing my thirties, back home the majority of my friends live with their parents and it is hardly seen as a big deal. I think a big driver of this shift is the fact that in the U.S. it is extremely common for one to leave for college, whereas in Brazil literally 100% of my…

Speaking for myself, growing up in the US I couldn't wait to move out of my parents' house and live on my own. My friends were the same way. The reasons having my own place was appealing to me really boil down to independence.

Being able to choose where I live, being able to decide my own priorities, not dealing with them being around and pestering me, having peace and quiet when I want it and being able to blast my music that they don't like without being asked to turn it down. Being able to have my friends over. Being able to have girls over. Being able to move in with a girlfriend (which is what I did when I moved out.)

I love my parents but I cannot live with them. They annoy me within a few hours of being around them. We don't like the same things. We don't like the same music, the same TV shows, we don't hold similar politics, they are religious and I am an atheist. We just aren't compatible.

Re: Percentage of Young Americans Living with Parents Rises to 75-Year High

#230

Post by Clubber » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 3:31 PM UTC

linkregister wrote: post #95

Clubber wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The broad, rapid American growth has a lot to do with the fact that Europe and the Far East was in complete ruins after WWII and the US was in the immediate position to rebuild Europe. Remember, right before the mid century prosperity, we were in a massive depression caused by the "Roaring 20s" which was fueled by another smoldering Europe. The time period before WWI; the late 1800s and early 1900s were pretty bleak.…

The time period from 1890 to 1929 experienced steady growth in the U.S. [1] The Roaring 20s was not the cause of the Great Depression. The Great Depression was caused by a variety of factors, primarily unsustainable debt issuance and overproduction in the agricultural sector. Other important factors include crushing wartime debts owed by European nations to American creditors (vastly harming exports), a liquidity cru…

Let me clarify. The primary debt issuance was debt taken by people doing stock market speculation. The joke at the time was that if your shoe shine boy was asking you about stocks, something weird is about to happen.

The agriultural overproduction was a result of the drop in market prices for goods, so the farmers ramped up production to make up for it, ignoring good farming practices, notably proper tilling and crop / land rotation which resulted in the deterioration of the top soil (dust bowl).

All of this happened in the Roaring 20s.

As far as before the 20s, you had WWI and the industry kings manipulating the markets. They were doing fine, but the people working under them weren't. This was the era of industrialization, child labor and The Jungle. It was wonderful if you were an industry titan, but bleak for most everyone else.

Anyway, my point being, the great prosperity we experienced after WWII was more of an anomaly that anything else. I believe it was sustainable through smart regulation and government investment among other things, but interests have been working hard to bring us back to where we were before.