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

Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 284 posts

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#271

Post by asdff »

rootusrootus wrote: post #263
asdff wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Housing prices has risen more in some areas than others for sure, but the trend of housing rapidly outpacing wages still holds when looking at much larger data sets.

The last time this topic came up on HN, I recall someone bringing up numbers that show that if you control for house features, in particular size, the price actually hasn't gone up that dramatically. Average house used to be about 1600sf houses 40 years ago, now the average is 2600+.

That just shows profit margins on builds haven't changed. It doesn't matter if you are technically getting the same price per square foot on the house if you can't afford the homes available on the market.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#272

Post by jopsen »

eppsilon wrote: post #177
jopsen wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's often lost on us how much more you can buy for a dollar today vs. 40 years ago (when corrected for inflation).

Excluding healthcare and higher education, unfortunately.

Probably also housing.

But if you look at healthcare you simply couldn't buy an insurance that offered 75% survival rate for cancer 40 years ago, today most insurances do..

I am not saying health insurance isn't too expensive and shouldn't be public. I'm saying product is better.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#273

Post by jopsen »

drankula3 wrote: post #192
jopsen wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's often lost on us how much more you can buy for a dollar today vs. 40 years ago (when corrected for inflation).

When corrected for inflation,I make 30% less than my father did right out of college.

And yet, you are having a conversation with a European who haven't had breakfast yet -- and it's costing you next to nothing :)

I'm not saying everything is fine and dandy. It's not.

I'm saying we often underestimate what we take for granted today, that wasn't possible 40 years ago.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#274

Post by malvosenior »

brokenmachine wrote: post #262
malvosenior wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's worth noting that having a family is a "life experience" and a home is a "material possession". Many would argue that travel, dining out, bars... are shallow and hedonistic experiences while cultivating a family and community are enriching and rewarding.

It's not very enticing to start a family when you're renting and have no stability though. When it seems like owning a home is completely unachievable, there's no point in saving so you might as well have those experiences. Also I'd separate travel from those other things. Witnessing other cultures through travel is a very valuable experience IMO. Community? What's that?

That’s sort of my point. If you can’t afford those things are you really living a life of “incredible luxury”.

As for travel, it depends. I have a lot of friends doing “Instagram travel”. Literally deciding where to go based on where they can snap the best shot. There are also a lot of people doing very touristy things that don’t provide any sort of insight or deep meaning.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#275

Post by stevewodil »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #228
stevewodil wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Current life expectancy data is plagued by the recent increase in drug overdoses and suicides. Not saying that there isn't a problem or that we don't need to fix those issues, but aside from those life expectancy is doing fine

I wouldn't say that. Per TFA on the subject that also reached the front page the decrease is 0.3yr. I wouldn't call that "plagued".

> life expectancy I see is down again

Is the part I was responding to.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#276

Post by eppsilon »

dbatten wrote: post #201
eppsilon wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US' national debt was 89% of GDP in 1950. Now it is 104%. [1] I somewhat agree with you (there was a long period in between when the debt-GDP % was much lower), but the current situation isn't as dire as you suggest. 1. https://www.thebalance.com/national-debt-by-year-compared-to...

Weren't there some expensive wars around that time? I think I'm recalling that correctly. Seriously, though, a fairer point of comparison might be the late '60s and early '70s - right when Boomers were entering adulthood. National debt as a percentage of GDP was in the 30s around then. Still, your response to the parent comment is still somewhat justified - yes, national debt is higher now, but it's not like it's ord…

Yeah, it's not an unprecedented situation. What's concerning is that we have this level of debt after a period of relative peace and stability. (Though I vaguely recall there being some expensive wars recently too.)

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#277

Post by eppsilon »

will_brown wrote: post #224
eppsilon wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US' national debt was 89% of GDP in 1950. Now it is 104%. [1] I somewhat agree with you (there was a long period in between when the debt-GDP % was much lower), but the current situation isn't as dire as you suggest. 1. https://www.thebalance.com/national-debt-by-year-compared-to...

>but the current situation isn't as dire as you suggest. But I didn’t say it was dire, that’s you reading “dire” into facts and numbers, which should be telling.

You implied that millennials are screwed because boomers incurred too much debt. Sounds pretty dire to me.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#278

Post by jandrese »

dragonwriter wrote: post #255
jandrese wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some reason the Gen Y label never stuck. It was the thing back in the 90s and early 2000s, but then just faded away for no reason in particular.

Because Millennial was catchier; Gen Y only made any kind of sense in relation to Gen X, not independently.

But Gen Y wasn't the millenials. Millenials came after them. Gen Y is the kids who grew up with computers and early Internet/BBSes, but not the pervasive information brokers that millenials know. Back when the internet was pseudononymous by default and nobody really knew how anybody was going to make money with it. Theme song: Smells Like Teen Spirit.

Maybe they should have been called the grunge generation.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#279

Post by garfieldnate »

iagooar wrote: post #6

It's funny how this "generation" thing only quite exists (as far as I know) in the English-speaking world. There is no such idea of generations of people where I come from. It's hard for me to even grasp the idea of it. Who draws a line between generations and why? People do not stop being born, nor do they magically change because they supposedly belong to an imaginary generation. Am I missing something?

I think I've only heard generations specifically named in our North American English-speaking culture, but I think it is a very useful idea anywhere in the modern world where everything is completely different every 20 years. One very obvious generational divide that applies to much of the world is between those that remember WWII and those that don't. Those involved in the Vietnam War (or the American War, as it is known in Vietnam) also share a (horrifying but bonding) experience that they do not share with later generations.

Re: Fed Says Millennials Are Just Like Their Parents, Only Poorer

#280

Post by rootusrootus »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #212
rootusrootus wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There could be lots of reasons for that, however. Since you have not provided enough information to make speculation possible, I will mention my own to illustrate my point: My parents bought their house in 1970, when my dad was making about 15K. The house was about 30K. To buy that same house today you would need to make about 150K. Inflation adjusted, my dad's income then would only be about 100K now or maybe a litt…

Which town is this? Real estate is so much tied to location, its almost pointless to discuss a house's value without location.

It is about five miles outside the urban growth boundary of Portland, Oregon, in unincorporated Clackamas County.
Post reply on HN