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

Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#341

Post by lnwlebjel »

avs733 wrote: post #255
whiskyant wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the parents fault for coddling them. If they kicked them out at 18, the nephews would definitely need to work and may realize the importance of having a better job/career.

I deal with a lot of 18-19 year olds as my primary job is teaching first year engineering students. I will tell you it is a LOT more complicated than this. This type of single point simplification and pronouncement about 'coddling' is decidedly unhelpful. For starters, if you grow up in two working parent household, both parents can easily come home completely exhausted and unable to provide the extended engagement n…

Fully agree with this for 18-19 year olds, but at some point (25? 30?) it really does seem like coddling, or enabling at least. At some point you have to move out and support yourself.

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#342

Post by nradov »

notJim wrote: post #258
whiskyant wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But at least they would be working, probably know how to drive a car, and may consider furthering their education/career when they realize how little they make for their time.

This is maybe a ridiculous question, but why is that so much better? If someone is able to live cheaply, why is it better for them to work in some menial, low-wage job versus being supported by a relative? I think something you have to consider is that if you have low social standing and are poorly educated, your options in life are not necessarily super appealing.

If you have time to play video games then you have time to improve your education and social standing. Wealthy relatives don't live forever.

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#343

Post by rufus_foreman »

_delirium wrote: post #292
paulddraper wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Tacoma, I lived nextdoor to a guy who "hurt his back" when he was 22. As far as I can tell, he'll sit on his couch collecting disability until 65, at which point he'll switch to retirement.

I obviously don't know this person at all, but from what I know of how Social Security disability works, 22 is a really unlikely age to qualify. Are you sure it wasn't slightly earlier or later? To be eligible in your own right, you have to have paid into Social Security for a total of 40 quarters before becoming disabled. Given child labor laws, it's rare that you could accumulate enough quarters before age 26 or so…

>> To be eligible in your own right, you have to have paid into Social Security for a total of 40 quarters before becoming disabled

Looks like there are different rules for disability for young workers:

"To be eligible for disability benefits, you must meet a recent work test and a duration work test.

The number of credits necessary to meet the recent work test depends on your age. The rules are as follows:

Before age 24 - You may qualify if you have 6 credits earned in the 3-year period ending when your disability starts.

Age 24 to 31 – In general, you may qualify if you have credit for working half the time between age 21 and the time you become disabled. As a general example, if you become disabled at age 27, you would need 3 years of work (12 credits) out of the past 6 years (between ages 21 and 27).

Age 31 or older - In general, you must have at least 20 credits in the 10-year period immediately before you become disabled."

-- https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/planner/credits.html

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#344

Post by MattGaiser »

vmception wrote: post #285
grogenaut wrote: post #151

I'm trying to get my son and his girlfriend to live at home for a few years post graduation. He wants to move out into a place in seattle. She's a bit more about saving money. The math is that they'd have all loans paid off and a 200k down payment about 4 years out of college if they live with us, and they'd have loans paid off if in 4 years and Important side note: they're both major home bodies so they wouldn't tak…

false dilemma. many parents contribute to their children's first downpayment, if you can't or aren't interested then just leave the discussion. they don't have consensus on wanting to live with you while you believe they have the skillsets to save $200,000 in 4 years. who gives af if there is a theoretical savings optimization possible, that's not your problem stop acting like it is. you are going to have an empty ne…

> who gives af if there is a theoretical savings optimization possible, that's not your problem stop acting like it is.

In some families, caring and advising continues past the 18th birthday. Northern European culture is the anomaly in this regard.

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#345

Post by mywittyname »

tristor wrote: post #305

This thread is full of people talking about cultural, societal, and economic factors that may influence this outcome. I've yet to see anyone mention the factor that I wish we more thoroughly investigated: health. This has been discussed in some articles at length, but we still haven't identified primary causes, but testosterone levels are falling in men (at a given age) at a pretty steady pace year over year. This is…

Could be. But lack of exercise would also lead to low T, and I'm quite confident that middle aged man without a job who lives with parents aren't exactly staying fit.

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#346

Post by whiskyant »

avs733 wrote: post #255
whiskyant wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the parents fault for coddling them. If they kicked them out at 18, the nephews would definitely need to work and may realize the importance of having a better job/career.

I deal with a lot of 18-19 year olds as my primary job is teaching first year engineering students. I will tell you it is a LOT more complicated than this. This type of single point simplification and pronouncement about 'coddling' is decidedly unhelpful. For starters, if you grow up in two working parent household, both parents can easily come home completely exhausted and unable to provide the extended engagement n…

If the parents don't provide for them, what do you think would happen to the nephews? Do you think they would be homeless? I certainly don't.

The fact that the parents are providing a roof over their head and paying for their food/water/electricity/internet/clothes/games/etc is why they haven't had a job nor any desire for one well into their 30s.

Honestly, because the parents keep providing for them, there's no impetus for them to change, so they may as well do this into their 40s or 50s.

Minimum wage is enough to survive, and almost anyone that's not severely mentally/physically disabled can do most minimum wage work. In this case, it's not a matter of lack of ability, but lack of willingness.

That said, I have nothing against parents willing to provide housing/support if the child is working, still furthering their education, or need some help getting their feet back on the ground. But at this point, this is none of that, and just enabling their behavior.

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#347

Post by sergiomattei »

codemac wrote: post #295
grogenaut wrote: post #151

I'm trying to get my son and his girlfriend to live at home for a few years post graduation. He wants to move out into a place in seattle. She's a bit more about saving money. The math is that they'd have all loans paid off and a 200k down payment about 4 years out of college if they live with us, and they'd have loans paid off if in 4 years and Important side note: they're both major home bodies so they wouldn't tak…

PERSONAL RANT YOU DON'T NEED TO READ, BUT I NEED TO WRITE: I will add something to your son's point: being independent from my family was more important to me than saving money, especially if their loans are only 4 years away from being paid off. In fact, it bootstrapped all kinds of good behaviors around how to socialize with others, make friends, find a job, fix my own toilet, do laundry, pay taxes, find a new hair…

As someone in a similar situation as OP's son (although undergrad) and looking to move out...

Independence and personal space MATTER, please consider how your son may feel about living close to you. It may hurt, but it's important to understand the mindset behind the decision.

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#348

Post by magicsmoke »

edoceo wrote: post #335
magicsmoke wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or if you have experienced income instability, and you do not feel comfortable bringing children into the world. Yet poorer developing nations have higher birth rates than developed nations. Is it because they have lower expectations for what their children need to live a "good" life, that they just have more hope that things will work out somehow, or that they somehow don't care about these concerns?

No condoms

We've got it ladies and gentlemen. The secret to halting population decline in the developed world is banning condoms.

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#349

Post by void_mint »

flycaliguy wrote: post #340
berniemadoff69 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would your tune be any different if they were 34, staying at home all day playing video games, but somehow earning half a million dollars a year doing some "gamer" Twitch/Patreon/YouTube/influencer streaming schtick? Or, better yet, playing video games all day, but magically manage to make obscene amounts of money "trading cryptocoins" . Would their lifestyles suddenly become acceptable to you, simply because they ar…

I think if they were working from home it would, obviously, be a different story. They could stash some cash away and be able to care for their aging parents in the future.

(Off topic) Curious why you think it's on the kid to pay for the parent?

Re: Fewer young men are in the labor force, more are living at home

#350

Post by [deleted] »

_delirium wrote: post #292
paulddraper wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Tacoma, I lived nextdoor to a guy who "hurt his back" when he was 22. As far as I can tell, he'll sit on his couch collecting disability until 65, at which point he'll switch to retirement.

I obviously don't know this person at all, but from what I know of how Social Security disability works, 22 is a really unlikely age to qualify. Are you sure it wasn't slightly earlier or later? To be eligible in your own right, you have to have paid into Social Security for a total of 40 quarters before becoming disabled. Given child labor laws, it's rare that you could accumulate enough quarters before age 26 or so…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN