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

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

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 974 posts

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

#591

Post by [deleted] »

chillwaves wrote: post #496
irrational wrote: post #480

My 21 and 23 year old daughters have moved back in with us. They stay up until the wee hours of the morning watching streaming media, then wake up mid afternoon to get on social media, eat dinner with us and then repeat. I can't wait till they leave. At least when they are living on their own I don't have to know about their bad habits.

Speaking from the younger generations perspective, this is a great way to destroy the relationship with your adult children. I'm sure it doesn't feel great for them to be dependent on you and face your scorn on a daily basis. I just hope the situation will never be reversed, for your sake.

[deleted]

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

#592

Post by alextheparrot »

qes wrote: post #563
alextheparrot wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the age-in population has a 75% incidence and the age-out population has a 25% incidence it won’t cancel out. The age-in population will be adding a lot more than the age-out will be subtracting.

Wouldn't you assume the age-in and age-out are quite similar? Why would you lean towards assuming it differs by such an astounding amount over a relatively short time period?

The numbers I used are roughly derived (I rounded to the nearest quarter for simplicity of example) from the top-level poster's Pew link [0]. Splitting the 18-29 year old cohort, 18-24 year olds increase from 63 to 71%, while 25-29 year olds increased from 26 to 28%.

Pretty much, there seems to be a natural gradient pre-existing, where the age-in group seems to have a much greater natural affinity to be living with their parents even prior to the pandemic. We can all probably generate reasonable hypotheses for that, but that's the root of the mathematical assumptions.

[0] Here's a re-link of what I'm referencing: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-...

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

#594

Post by ragnese »

save_ferris wrote: post #8

I moved back into my parents house after my lease expired, primarily to have regular social interaction again. > "While moving back home during the pandemic makes sense and is seen as socially acceptable or even smart, it also means you are living with people who still see you as your 18-year-old self." One of the biggest things I’ve noticed among millennials is how many parents fail to understand the emotional and m…

> how their parents refuse to let them move back in during the pandemic, citing the “time to grow up” mentality.

My sarcastic response is that I hope they enjoy the retirement home their kids put them in in the future.

I don't actually mean that, but just to make a point...

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

#595

Post by ketzu »

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…

> (This doesn't even take into account that mortgage rates are drastically lower since then.)

Which is an important factor, too! In Germany rates seem to be around 1%, as low as 0.5% fixed for 10 years. (US seems higher though)

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

#596

Post by throwaway2048 »

zpeti wrote: post #191
messe wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is blatantly false. Income tax on higher earners in the UK has decreased since the 1970s/1980s when IIRC the highest tax bands were over 70%, if not higher.

Yet in the UK the amount of tax paid by the 1% is the highest ever (34%), 42% of adults pay NO income tax. And the tax take as a proportion of GDP is 34.4%, the highest EVER. We are living in the most taxed time in history with the rich contributing the most ever. Not the impression you get from people complaining about it. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/13/richest-bri...

Its the highest ever because the 1% are correspondingly much richer than ever.

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

#597

Post by throwawayinfo »

6510 wrote: post #478
ruste wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen this claim and associated study pop up a couple of times. The study is done year on year and it's been amusing watching the increasingly long lengths they go to to hide the fact that their comparing _average_ rent for a _two bedroom_ apartment to the _minimum_ wage. Anecdotally, this is simply not true. I lived in a fairly nice area next to my university for the better part of the past five years at well be…

2 rooms is luxury now?

Yes. You can always get a roommate and split the cost.

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

#598

Post by x87678r »

egh wrote: post #380
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…

I'm not sure what you're arguing here. The simple fact is the amount people pay for housing is up since the 1990s. You can find this data on the BLS web site: https://www.bls.gov/cex/csxmulti.htm Here is the data adjusted for constant 2020 dollars: 1992 $9,799.06 1993 $9,543.99 1994 $9,760.55 1995 $9,924.05 1996 $9,825.29 1997 $10,106.90 1998 $10,473.38 1999 $10,712.59 2000 $10,506.40 2001 $11,055.55 2002 $11,121.33…

Interesting, I've never seen that stat before. one problem is that inflation is a lot lower than before. If you borrowed a house in the 70s/80s you'd pay less each month but after 10 years that payment would be negligible, where now it still takes a big chunk out of your pay.

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

#599

Post by kyawzazaw »

fxtentacle wrote: post #505
actuator wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly in most parts of Asia(East, SE, South), living with your parents is the norm, so parents usually prefer if their kids stay with them but it does mean way less personal space and freedom.

Due to the culture, everyone will go out of their way to make you feel as independent as possible. Plus there's single day hotels if you want to have a room alone with someone who should not meet your parents yet. In the end, living with your parents then boils down to going to a restaurant with them on the weekends to honor your ancestors, but most of the time they behave more like roommates.

Which culture are you referring to?

At least to my knowledge (of S.Korea) and my experience, most will eat together, watch some shows together.

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

#600

Post by user5994461 »

Philip-J-Fry wrote: post #94

I'm my early 20s and in the UK. I earn more than my Dad who is in his 50s. He managed to get a house, have money left over for an expensive hobby, decent car, the odd holiday etc. I'm a 90th percentile earner. Will 95+ percentile earner in a few years time. Yet it feels like I am not as well off as I should be. I don't live in an expensive area either. Yet I need to save so much money to even have the opportunity to…

For reference, 95% percentile would be somewhere around £100k a year in London. (If you look at working men aged 25-55 the number should be a fair bit higher)

I don't know what you earn but if you are early 20s it might be less than that. There is a lot of money floating in London, the price of homes almost make sense when you realize what the top earners actually earn, the few percents competing for the same homes.

Post reply on HN