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

42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 289 posts

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#131

Post by antinomicus »

slibhb wrote: post #80

Downward mobility is almost entirely caused by housing costs, which are a self-inflicted problem. We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. I live in an expensive area and I'm always shocked by how many of my friends who cannot afford to buy a home (or even a condo) are NIMBYs. These are people in their 20s through 40s who have been earning since college, can't afford to buy, yet get annoyed…

I may or may not meet your definition as a nimby 28 year old. I am all for housing, just not the type being built in my area. Dozens of “luxury” units built cheaply, selling for 4,000$ for a 1 bedroom. They get subsidized by the local government for including maybe 5 units that are “low income” and probably still cost 2k - and those low income units go away as soon as the building gets sold to another corporation.

I want lots of high quality, dignified housing for myself and my community, not wealth extraction pods. I want real public housing. Housing should be a human right. As it stands now the land is being squatted by mega corporations seeking to extract as much profit from the community as possible.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#132

Post by antinomicus »

LastTrain wrote: post #102
slibhb wrote: post #80

Downward mobility is almost entirely caused by housing costs, which are a self-inflicted problem. We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. I live in an expensive area and I'm always shocked by how many of my friends who cannot afford to buy a home (or even a condo) are NIMBYs. These are people in their 20s through 40s who have been earning since college, can't afford to buy, yet get annoyed…

I really hate this “we don’t build enough housing” narrative these days, because it implies this is a simple supply and demand problem, which it is not. I see so many progressives repeating this line, apparently not understanding that they are suggesting unfettered capitalism (up zoning…) is the solution. The fundamental problem is we simultaneously want our housing to be affordable and good investment. It can’t be b…

Public housing is the answer to this.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#133

Post by alphawhisky »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #120
Animats wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. If actual number of houses was the problem, house prices would not be increasing in areas of population decline. It's existing houses being repriced upward by speculation that makes them unaffordable.

How do you separate speculation from legitimate price increases? If the houses are overpriced due to speculation, why isn't someone building Alternatives and undercutting them? This implies that there is either a real increase in value, a manufactur bottleneck, or both

Civil Engineer/City Planner here. The bottleneck is legislative. NIMBY's are all over in US politics right now, local and larger. These folks put together legislation that makes it extremely hard to build without City/County/Township permission, unless the project benefits them in some way. So, most places will disincentivize new construction unless they get a grant for it, because they feel obligated to help their citizens by keeping taxes low and house values high. New construction does the opposite of these things.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#134

Post by Legend2440 »

dybber wrote: post #84
exiguus wrote: post #52

The question that was ask in the survey was: How financially independent you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed) I understand that YC is questioning the results of the survey. The YC community is very privileged; and i bet, if we do the same survey in this community, 20% or less of adults rely on their parents.

The hacker news crowd is also more than just Americans. Some of us live in welfare states and/or societies with strong trade unions, which we know we can rely on instead, if we ever come to a situation where we need it.

I think you will find that worldwide, family support is more common, not less.

In many cultures multigenerational households are the norm. You may never move out; you raise your kids in the same house your parents raised you.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#135

Post by reticulates »

exiguus wrote: post #52

The question that was ask in the survey was: How financially independent you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed) I understand that YC is questioning the results of the survey. The YC community is very privileged; and i bet, if we do the same survey in this community, 20% or less of adults rely on their parents.

I think you have it backwards. Poor people cannot rely on their parents because their parents are poor too. Every person I know who grew up rich relied on their parents until… well, forever. Privilege is being able to rely on your family.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#136

Post by ironman1478 »

Animats wrote: post #88
slibhb wrote: post #80

Downward mobility is almost entirely caused by housing costs, which are a self-inflicted problem. We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. I live in an expensive area and I'm always shocked by how many of my friends who cannot afford to buy a home (or even a condo) are NIMBYs. These are people in their 20s through 40s who have been earning since college, can't afford to buy, yet get annoyed…

> We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. If actual number of houses was the problem, house prices would not be increasing in areas of population decline. It's existing houses being repriced upward by speculation that makes them unaffordable.

You can't look at the cost of a house out of context. If you look at Flint, Michigan it's actually one of the most expensive places in the country if you account for average income in that area. Absolute cost needs to be normalized by income in the area. The housing is actually very expensive if you do this type of calculation. We saw an example of under supply during COVID. Housing prices in "underpriced" areas increased during COVID because regions with no real economy saw people moving there with the high out of state salaries. Those areas didn't have enough supply. Now that remote work is less prevalent, those places are having their costs go down but the Bay Area is seeing skyrocketing costs. We are able to measure the effects of supply and demand pretty clearly due to COVID.

Speculation is known to have an effect, but not nearly as much as an effect as under supply. Blackrock THEMSELVES published a paper that the reason their investments are working is due to the low development of housing. Their whole strategy is reliant on NIMBYism and people's lack of understanding of the housing market.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#137

Post by heroiccocoa »

LastTrain wrote: post #102
slibhb wrote: post #80

Downward mobility is almost entirely caused by housing costs, which are a self-inflicted problem. We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. I live in an expensive area and I'm always shocked by how many of my friends who cannot afford to buy a home (or even a condo) are NIMBYs. These are people in their 20s through 40s who have been earning since college, can't afford to buy, yet get annoyed…

I really hate this “we don’t build enough housing” narrative these days, because it implies this is a simple supply and demand problem, which it is not. I see so many progressives repeating this line, apparently not understanding that they are suggesting unfettered capitalism (up zoning…) is the solution. The fundamental problem is we simultaneously want our housing to be affordable and good investment. It can’t be b…

I can't think of a good reason as to why people would want housing to be a good investment except if their own wealth depends on it or they want to preserve the wealthy character of their own neighborhood. It takes away investment from local enterprise, local government, which would spur innovation, salary growth, better infrastructure, municipal services, etc.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#138

Post by michaelt »

cliglot wrote: post #42

How you define “rely”. I’ve certainly seen trust fund kids who’s success is anchored on “daddy gave me a sweet job at his company” and others who’d be dead or in prison if it wasn’t for the constant money poured into the legal system by their parents.

According to the more detailed report [1] the questions and answers were:

Q2630. Do you currently consider yourself financially independent?

Yes: 72% No: 28%

Q2634. How financially independent do you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed)?

Fully independent: 44% Mostly independent: 17% Somewhat dependent: 17% Fully dependent: 8% Not applicable: 14%

Then they report 17+17+8=42 = "42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support"

[1] https://news.northwesternmutual.com/download/2026+P%26P+Mark...

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#139

Post by hgoel »

pllbnk wrote: post #79
PaulHoule wrote: post #60

My 20-something son is living with us but he does pay (some) rent. I half expect to have to apologize for this, like when I was growing up people would think you are a loser if you were in this situation. Today people think we are really smart and the people who are paying more rent than they can afford to live alone that are losing.

I can’t understand morally or financially how can parents charge anything of their children. Not judging it, just honestly can’t understand it. Isn’t it the parents’ responsibility to build the foundation for their children and keep building it until it’s there? I am viewing it from a moral angle where it’s the parents’ selfish choice to have a child so they must take full responsibility until a child is or feels tha…

Agreed. I think it's wild that such a position seems relatively common in the US (though at a surface level I understand that it's just a cultural difference).

The only situation in which I would consider charging my kids 'rent' is, if as adults, they were being irresponsible with their life, e.g. being a NEET and not helping out around the house. Even then I would hold the money in a separate account to gift back to them later.

I think it's parents' role to always be a source of almost unconditional comfort and security for their kids. Though I also think that this is unsustainable unless kids also do their best to maintain and respect that relationship.

Re: 42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

#140

Post by slibhb »

paytonjjones wrote: post #112
slibhb wrote: post #80

Downward mobility is almost entirely caused by housing costs, which are a self-inflicted problem. We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. I live in an expensive area and I'm always shocked by how many of my friends who cannot afford to buy a home (or even a condo) are NIMBYs. These are people in their 20s through 40s who have been earning since college, can't afford to buy, yet get annoyed…

A big political problem with YIMBYism is that almost by definition it will take years to see the effects. If you champion it as a politician, there's a very large chance you get all the flack for new developments, but the next guy gets all the credit for affordable housing. Texas seems to be the only place that actually does it, and I honestly have no explanation for why.

Yes, this is a real problem. Also, in high-demand areas, building more will lower prices compared to the counterfactual but that doesn't mean prices will actually go down. This makes it a harder sell.
Post reply on HN