The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents • Hacker News Board

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#321

Post by fourzs » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

dghughes wrote: post #72

yardie wrote: post #7

I live downtown in a coastal city. What I’m seeing is a lot of young men living in the streets. This is the other side of this story some young adults don’t have a home to go back to after job loss and eviction. We’re seeing just the tip of the iceberg. I expect a lot more social upheaval in the coming years. Social services are going to get severely strained.

I've seen a documentary about San Francisco it's crazy how middle income people are being pushed farther from the city. One teacher had several bus transfers and then a long walk to get to her job. Even bus stops where "poor" people (less than $100,000/year) are being crowded by private buses like Google forcing city buses to wait which adds to the wait down the line. Nuts!

Does anyone happen to know the name of this doc?

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#322

Post by 0xB31B1B » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:01 PM UTC

Gunax wrote: post #268

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m in my mid fifties and I have never had a company pension, defined benefit or contribution. I saw my first house decline in value by 25%. We had interest rates peaking at 15%. I didn’t have student loans but only because I didn’t go to university, just like 90% of my peer group. Unemployment was much higher than it is now and schools were teaching subjects for obsolete careers. It wasn’t as rosey as it is often po…

Everyone will argue with their own statistics, but I think your general sentiment is correct. Everyone seems to think the oldies had it easy in the good ol' days and the youngens are a bunch of lazy good-for-nothins. There are probably certain a ways it has gotten easier and others in which it is worse... But I think this is more about generational sentiment than actual facts.

thats not really true though, we have the numbers. In real terms, education, healthcare, and housing costs have grown at a much higher rate than inflation. It is more expensive to go to college, pay rent, and stay healthy now than it was 30/40/50 years ago.

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#323

Post by names_are_hard » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:02 PM UTC

ARandumGuy wrote: post #301

saagarjha wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps I don’t understand why there should be a penalty to pay off a loan too early? I’ve given the bank back their money; isn’t that exactly why I was paying interest in the first place?

Because paying off a loan early means that loan has had less time to generate interest, which means the bank gets less money. On an extreme example, imagine taking out a loan, then you pay it all back the next day. The loan has earned no interest, but the bank had to spend a bunch of time and money to get the loan set up. Of course, early payment penalties are still pretty scummy. However, it does make sense why a ba…

I don't know if they're scummy. When I buy a typical corporate bond I expect that the company will pay until maturity. If I buy a callable bond wouldn't I expect to be compensated for the one sided exposure to interest rate risk I'm exposing myself to (rates go up I lose, rates go down I lose)?

With consumer debt we have different expectations of what's fair, but consider the bank's risk profile here - if interest rates go up those outstanding mortgages are taking them for a ride, and if they go down the customers refi... seems natural they'd want to minimize prepayments.

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#324

Post by Barrin92 » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:02 PM UTC

wonderwonder wrote: post #11

Millennials face a very real risk of being a lost generation financially. They have endured 2 major, years long recessions, and now the Covid pandemic coupled with social isolation and massive unemployment that does not appear to have an end date in sight. Housing is more expensive for them than prior generations, wages are stagnant, school is expensive and social conflict is also currently on deck. WW2 was of course…

I think this is only really true if Millennials continue to attempt to live like their parents.

First thing people need to do is stop fetishizing home ownership. It's not a magical object, instead of buying a home put your money in an index fund, you'll be better off financially anyway in 20 years. Owning a home is just a status symbol people are obsessed with for your quality of life it doesn't matter if you own or rent. Even better would be to share a space with peers. Not only does it make housing cheaper, it makes everything cheaper. Nobody in their 20s or 30s needs to be isolated in some giant house.

Education is predominantly getting much more expensive at elite institutions, but good public universities in-state are still affordable, or go and move abroad and get a degree in Europe if you're American. If you don't like to go to university, pick up a vocation, a lot of them pay well. In general be ready to move to improve your circumstances. Physical mobility in the US has fallen to extreme lows, it's one of the easiest way to improve your situation.

Being a millenial myself I'm actually not pessimistic about the generation at all, or at least not fatalistic. This isn't an economy any more where you get a job at 23 and then you're set for life and then live in a suburb with your labradoodle. To me that's a positive.

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#325

Post by yelloweyes » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

HorizonXP wrote: post #71

kayodelycaon wrote: post #55

A lot of my friends (and myself) have abusive parents. I seriously consider suicide to be a better option than going home.

I no longer feel like this about my parents now that I live independently and have my own child. They’re wonderful grandparents. But yeah, when I was living with them in my 20s for my Masters? I felt just like you did.

yeah so what, douche?

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#326

Post by Shivetya » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:05 PM UTC

tidepod12 wrote: post #284

dcolkitt wrote: post #246

> Housing is more expensive for them than prior generations I harp on this constantly. But housing is not more expensive in the majority of American metros. Adjusted for inflation the median cost per square foot of new housing is almost exactly the same as it was in 1990. (This doesn't even take into account that mortgage rates are drastically lower since then.) We get skewed on this for two reasons. One is because h…

>One is because homes today are substantially larger and have more amenities than they did in previous generations. I have noticed that most of my fellow millennials seem to have completely forgotten the concept of "starter home" and assume that as soon as you turn 25 you should be entitled to a 4 bedroom house with a pool, huge yard, wonderful neighborhood, three-car garage, etc. Among my friends that have bought ho…

it isn't just homes. there is no starter car, no starter tv, no started anything. I regularly work with tech support persons who are spending more than I am on a wide range of goods and services. It is mind boggling to me.

Yes some have trade offs but that seems to be either they are house poor or car poor but mostly the latter. What catches them as with those who do have the money is all those monthly bills can add up really quickly. Adding twenty to thirty to your monthly phone bill for a new phone doesn't sound bad until they add in other similar arrangements.

Sadly far too many seem to think they are just free this or free that away from having it all. (as in if healthcare were only free or college was only free they would not have such problems - welcome to the poison of politicians and mass merchandise marketing combined)

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#327

Post by geofft » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:05 PM UTC

sologoub wrote: post #212

geofft wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that it's impossible to make good decisions doesn't change the fact that a decision has to be made, nonetheless. This isn't a computer game where there's an answer to the puzzle from the designer, where the COVID-19 monster shows up but it has a weak spot on the back of its tail where you can land a critical hit. There is no good solution. Our job is to find the least-bad one. I think there's a good argument…

The reason retired people can’t live off of cash is simple - inflation. In many countries, governments provide and guarantee retirement. US has largely shifted to saved retirements in the form of IRA/401Ks. These are investment accounts, which means your principle is not protected, but you earn interest to, hopefully, protect you from inflation and build returns. In practice, those retired end up bearing the same mar…

Oh hm, I guess there's a natural experiment there - are countries that have government-backed pensions more willing to do rent cancellations than the US is? (There are a lot of confounding factors, to be fair.)

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#328

Post by Retric » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:05 PM UTC

tidepod12 wrote: post #284

dcolkitt wrote: post #246

> Housing is more expensive for them than prior generations I harp on this constantly. But housing is not more expensive in the majority of American metros. Adjusted for inflation the median cost per square foot of new housing is almost exactly the same as it was in 1990. (This doesn't even take into account that mortgage rates are drastically lower since then.) We get skewed on this for two reasons. One is because h…

>One is because homes today are substantially larger and have more amenities than they did in previous generations. I have noticed that most of my fellow millennials seem to have completely forgotten the concept of "starter home" and assume that as soon as you turn 25 you should be entitled to a 4 bedroom house with a pool, huge yard, wonderful neighborhood, three-car garage, etc. Among my friends that have bought ho…

Have you ever actually look for small living spaces in the US? I would be perfectly fine with a 450sf apartment in northern VA, but their almost impossible to find in desirable locations. A large reason for this is the actual cost to construct a building doesn’t increase linearly with apartment square footage. Simply having a smaller apartment doesn’t reduce the amount of space needed for hallways, elevators, or parking spaces. Kitchen’s and bathrooms similarly cost a lot more than large carpeted areas.

This ends up being reflected in renal prices. My building has a 578 sf studio @ 1515$/month where a 751 sf 1br is running $1,625/month. Add in parking and your talking 30% more space for 7% more rent.

It’s not that the actual cost per SF is equivalent, it’s that housing got upsized without much input from consumers.

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#329

Post by Shalle135 » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:06 PM UTC

tidepod12 wrote: post #284

dcolkitt wrote: post #246

> Housing is more expensive for them than prior generations I harp on this constantly. But housing is not more expensive in the majority of American metros. Adjusted for inflation the median cost per square foot of new housing is almost exactly the same as it was in 1990. (This doesn't even take into account that mortgage rates are drastically lower since then.) We get skewed on this for two reasons. One is because h…

>One is because homes today are substantially larger and have more amenities than they did in previous generations. I have noticed that most of my fellow millennials seem to have completely forgotten the concept of "starter home" and assume that as soon as you turn 25 you should be entitled to a 4 bedroom house with a pool, huge yard, wonderful neighborhood, three-car garage, etc. Among my friends that have bought ho…

Fact is though, it doesn’t matter much where in the world you’re looking to buy. If it’s a capital you’re expected to pay close to $1m or more for a house, even in places like Beirut where the houses don’t have central water, electricity/internet infrastructure is extremely poor. Prices are the same. This in a moment in time when the majority of people barely can afford food due to the pandemic and financial meltdown that has occurred.

The main reason behind it all is the low costs of taking on debt, which in some scenarios is totally insane. Italy for example that has been bailed out several times can get rates around 1%. What kind of entity would accept the risk of default when the profit is close to none after inflation?

The world is obviously in a debt bubble - the question is only when it will pop & how dramatically it will happen.

Re: The majority of 18- to 29-year-olds in the US are now living with their parents

#330

Post by leetcrew » Wed, Sep 16, 2020, 5:07 PM UTC

Gunax wrote: post #294

leetcrew wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a variation of the "avocado toast" argument. if you go crazy and subscribe to amazon prime, a music streaming service, and several video streaming services, you're paying somewhere around $100/month. if instead you invested the $100 every month, you could expect to have an extra ~$200k (inflation adjusted) after forty years. that's not nothing, but it doesn't add a whole lot to your safe withdrawal rate in re…

We might be talking about different budget levels, but to normal people (people who don't have the word 'software' in their job title), 200k in retirement is a lot. Actually the median 401k balance at retirement is only around 60k, so that alone would quadruple their retirement savings.

yeah, I'm assuming most of the people on this forum have upper-middle salaries or will likely have them in the future. I mostly wrote the post with this audience in mind, though I think the bit about analyzing spending in relation to your savings rate is relevant to everyone. I am very fortunate to have the opposite "problem": I tend to be very stingy and waste a lot of time and energy trying to save amounts of money that just aren't very meaningful compared with my savings trend. unless you're unable to save anything at all, I think it is very important to strike a balance between saving for retirement and spending on stuff you enjoy in the moment.

also minor addendum: someone with the median 401k savings might receive something close to the median social security payout of ~$15,500/year. since this is a guaranteed payment until end of life, this is like having >$375k in a retirement account at age 67. $200k is a meaningful amount to add to a $60k retirement account + social security payments, but it doesn't do anything close to quadrupling the person's safe spending capability. it's more like a 45% increase, which is still nothing to shake a stick at!