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

Growing-ups

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 80 posts

Re: Growing-ups

#41

Post by maxerickson »

randomdata wrote: post #35
maxerickson wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to look at the one time events that have happened in the last few (or several) generations. The destruction of farming/agriculture as the primary source of employment and the post war boom would be two big ones. I think the change in agriculture is interesting here because the decision making process for the child of a (relatively poor) farmer wouldn't have been very involved, they would be quite lik…

Great point about agriculture. Fortunately, telecommuting enabled me to stay on the farm, which couldn't support me by itself. Had I been born a decade earlier, moving away to a populous area would have been an almost certainty. If you have to move away from your family, the risk is already high, so what's a little more? Now, the vast majority of the population already live in urban areas, so we are back to not havin…

I didn't say much about it, but part of what I was thinking about is that someone who has had the experience of picking from many choices is probably going to give better advice to a child doing the same thing than someone who had one path that was quite clear.

(Which isn't contrary to anything you said, it's just another factor)

Re: Growing-ups

#42

Post by pnathan »

bicx wrote: post #28

This is interesting to me because my brother and I (both in our later twenties), ended up taking two different paths. I knew what I wanted to do since high school (software engineering), unwaveringly pursued my 4-year degree with solid scholarships, got a good job the day after I graduated, and bought a house at 25 with a decent down-payment. My brother, on the other hand, did not have that kind of luck. He tinkered…

N.b., I have seen very good success rates with people who put their eye on a reasonable and achievable goal, planned it out, and then worked on it. Finding yourself as a plan has a long and rough road.

Re: Growing-ups

#43

Post by mtrimpe »

diegomcfly wrote: post #19

If you are an "emerging adult" at age 30, then there is a problem. Further, the author of this article claiming that these so called "emerging adults" are not lazy or self-entitled is ridiculous. It is clearly a case of "first world problems". The mere fact that these "emerging adults" have the luxury of living "on the dole" (whether parental or governmental) while they "figure out what they want to do with their liv…

We're moving from investing ~20 years into children into investing ~30 years into children.

Makes perfect sense given how the world had been changing...

Re: Growing-ups

#44

Post by debt »

bicx wrote: post #28

This is interesting to me because my brother and I (both in our later twenties), ended up taking two different paths. I knew what I wanted to do since high school (software engineering), unwaveringly pursued my 4-year degree with solid scholarships, got a good job the day after I graduated, and bought a house at 25 with a decent down-payment. My brother, on the other hand, did not have that kind of luck. He tinkered…

I feel bad for your brother because I've been there. You should tell him to seriously consider taking the highest paying job he can get, as soon as he can get it, in whatever field he can. It's just a depressing slog, emotional/physical drain until he comes to that conclusion.

I'm not saying give up on your dreams AT ALL. I'm saying it's just too hard to do both simultaneously; that is, to see the world pass you by while you attempt to pursue your interests with little to no income.

I find it's much easier to do it with as clear a head as possible. Get a nice, decently-paying, steady job and then figure out what it is you're really interested in. I'm sorry but it's just too damn physically and emotionally exhausting to be broke and checking FB only to see how "successful" most of your friends/family. The "success" is something simple, as you say, as just having a job that pays well enough for you to forget about money(that is if you can budget appropriately).

After that you'll be able to really focus on creating that path to your passions. Or maybe I'm just a total square.

Re: Growing-ups

#45

Post by omni »

sho_hn wrote: post #36
morgante wrote: post #29

I really hate this term "emerging adults." Suddenly we're not full adults anymore, just because many people of my generation have failed to live up to the standard of adulthood? I really hope this isn't a trend/term which catches on and justifies continued ageism or the denial of rights. In general, I've always hated these "generational" descriptions. They're guaranteed to be woefully inaccurate for many people in th…

> The people who fail to do this are simply that: failures. Yup, sounds 21 to me. Quick to anger and lash out, quick to judge, moral certitude, and lack of empathy. For one, there's significant variance to how family units function across the human population. In many parts of the world, living together for far longer than 17 is the norm, and the model of how one generation financially supports the next, or families…

> The people who fail to do this are simply that: failures. (Though that failure isn't necessarily their fault.)

Did you just omit the second sentence so you could go on a little rant? Or did morgante edit his post?

Re: Growing-ups

#46

Post by king_jester »

diegomcfly wrote: post #19

If you are an "emerging adult" at age 30, then there is a problem. Further, the author of this article claiming that these so called "emerging adults" are not lazy or self-entitled is ridiculous. It is clearly a case of "first world problems". The mere fact that these "emerging adults" have the luxury of living "on the dole" (whether parental or governmental) while they "figure out what they want to do with their liv…

> If you are an "emerging adult" at age 30, then there is a problem. Further, the author of this article claiming that these so called "emerging adults" are not lazy or self-entitled is ridiculous. It is clearly a case of "first world problems". The mere fact that these "emerging adults" have the luxury of living "on the dole" (whether parental or governmental) while they "figure out what they want to do with their lives" into their late 20s and early 30s is a clear case of self-entitlement.

Did you even read the article? First of all, you dismiss this people as leeches outright. Second, you claim that these people are inherently selfish and lazy with no evidence. Finally, you view receiving assistance as self-entitled at a time when a huge portion of people of all ages use some kind of assistance, governmental or otherwise, to survive. You are essentially the dismissive person that the author of this article was writing about.

> If you don't have a place to live, food to eat, and shelter ... you "emerge" as an adult pretty quickly and figure out what you "want to do with your life" by DOING WORK you don't want to do to get said food, and shelter (i.e., to survive).

According to the article, people in the 18-29 age range working an average of 10 different jobs over that period in their lives. These people do find work that helps them to get shelter and eat. Certainly some of those people rely on additional sources, like family, for some income. However, the point is that people do pursue this work even while wanting something better.

Re: Growing-ups

#47

Post by aaronem »

chanced wrote: post #13
rayiner wrote: post #4

I don't know if this is a "new" stage of life or rather a return to an earlier way of life. The whole phenomenon of kids leaving the house at 18, moving across the country, and not coming home again is fairly recent and fairly unique to the Western world. My wife and I are "grown ups" in the sense that we both are done with grad school, have professional jobs, and have a kid. Yet, my mom lives with us during the week…

> [Millenials] take [their parents] on job interviews for support No wonder my generation can't get a damn job.

I missed that bit the first time through. That seems to me to fall well on the wrong side of the line between "strong family ties" and "just plain not equipped to cope".

Re: Growing-ups

#48

Post by dropit_sphere »

pnathan wrote: post #40
dropit_sphere wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Unfortunately, lots of jobs are both needed and full of drudgery. I get the feeling millennials are calling that bluff: "If it's so needed, why won't they hire me for it/why doesn't it pay more?'

* why won't they hire me for it Because "you" got a humanities degree and "it" is a tradesperson job which does not "make the world better". "You" chose to pursue "fun and interesting", and didn't run the numbers on "ROI", which only geeks, low-class people, and in-it-for-the-money people did. * why doesn't it pay more? Because experience counts a tremendous amount, far more than willingness to show up. /me shrug A l…

Fine---but if the jobs are being done, why all the whining about "kids these days?"

Re: Growing-ups

#49

Post by sho_hn »

omni wrote: post #45
sho_hn wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The people who fail to do this are simply that: failures. Yup, sounds 21 to me. Quick to anger and lash out, quick to judge, moral certitude, and lack of empathy. For one, there's significant variance to how family units function across the human population. In many parts of the world, living together for far longer than 17 is the norm, and the model of how one generation financially supports the next, or families…

> The people who fail to do this are simply that: failures. (Though that failure isn't necessarily their fault.) Did you just omit the second sentence so you could go on a little rant? Or did morgante edit his post?

It was there originally. I didn't feel that the second sentence did much to affect the overall thrust of the post ("not necessarily" isn't exactly very generous), and even if it did, it's still quite possible to disagree with the notion that having moved out and achieved financial independence by 21 is a requirement for "not a failure" status.

I feel it's exemplary of an arrogance and myopia many of us programmers are possessed with. Our profession is undoubtedly high-impact, but it doesn't actually require all that much knowledge to be useful at it, nor is it that difficult or time-intensive to learn. It's relatively easy to be successful at it and make money even at a young age. Many other paths are much more difficult, take a lot longer, and are no less worthy. Ones that require much more knowledge, or experience and personal growth, for example.

If you try really hard you can chose to read that parenthesis as a passionate plea for society to recognize this and support them better, I suppose, but I'm not that optimistic.

Re: Growing-ups

#50

Post by [deleted] »

omni wrote: post #45
sho_hn wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The people who fail to do this are simply that: failures. Yup, sounds 21 to me. Quick to anger and lash out, quick to judge, moral certitude, and lack of empathy. For one, there's significant variance to how family units function across the human population. In many parts of the world, living together for far longer than 17 is the norm, and the model of how one generation financially supports the next, or families…

> The people who fail to do this are simply that: failures. (Though that failure isn't necessarily their fault.) Did you just omit the second sentence so you could go on a little rant? Or did morgante edit his post?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN