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

741–750 of 974 posts

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

#741

Post by swyx »

rileyteige wrote: post #404
halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious as well but in the opposite. People are spending more time at home together, could there be a birth boom in Q1/Q2 of next year?

Anecdotally where I live several OB/GYNs (my wife is a resident) have told me they will be delivering a ton of babies over this upcoming winter, and that they are busier than ever - with obstetric cases. Also anecdotally, we're expecting our first - we were waiting for the right time, had it all planned out.. then COVID pulled the rug out from under everything so we said screw it and just went for it. I suspect we're…

> screw it

heh heh heh you sure did. congrats on becoming a parent soon!

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

#742

Post by medium_burrito »

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…

The other critical factor is instability in the sense that we can lose our jobs at any time. It makes it very difficult to plan long term if you expect your industry to get offshored, or automated, or generally collapse somehow. Even if these calamities don't happen to you, you'll still switch jobs way more than the previous generation.

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

#743

Post by MuffinFlavored »

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…

> I'm a 90th percentile earner. Will 95+ percentile earner in a few years time.

How much is that in the UK?

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

#744

Post by swyx »

saagarjha wrote: post #207
halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious as well but in the opposite. People are spending more time at home together, could there be a birth boom in Q1/Q2 of next year?

Birth rates generally decline in times of uncertainty; most people are aware of and practice family planning. For many, having a child right now would be fiscally irresponsible.

not just fiscally - if you have a choice, why would you choose to go to the hospital for a traumatic process, tying up valuable doctors but also potentially exposing yourself to covid...

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

#745

Post by charlesu »

beiller wrote: post #407
wonderwonder wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"millennials shouldn't be arguing for more government intervention, but less" Your argument that government intervention is bad for millennials is flawed. Without government intervention such as eviction moratoriums, unemployment benefits and federal government stimulus checks there would have been massive homelessness. Prior to the pandemic 40% of americans could not cover a $400 emergency, all of these people would…

I don't really agree with that assessment. If there is mass layoffs for example, and renters can't pay rent, why would a landlord evict the tenant? Who is going to take their place? I think many landlords would prefer a potential to pay (owing rent) than full eviction and being forced to lower rent and uncertainty wouldn't they? I'm not saying there would be no evictions, but everyone homeless doesn't seem like a ful…

> I think many landlords would prefer a potential to pay (owing rent) than full eviction and being forced to lower rent and uncertainty wouldn't they

Every land lord thinks they'll be able to rent their apartment, hence the need for the eviction moratorium. Their view is: if I leave in a tenant who won't pay, definitely won't make money, but if I evict them I can find someone else.

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

#746

Post by medium_burrito »

c-rhodes wrote: post #698
Havoc wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing how pervasive & broad the issues are these days. You mentioned you had a house. I'm fast approach the top 1-2% by income and think I can maybe swing a 1 bed apartment. It'll be borderline. Not house...apartment. ...no idea what the other 98% of my peers are doing but they sure as hell aren't buying houses. Meanwhile all the landlords I've rented from thus far where a generation older and had en…

Then you must be living in a really expensive city.

It's a combination of good jobs being in expensive cities, purchasing power dropping and epic (god I hate word) asset inflation.

That said remote work makes middle american and rest of the world post wuflu much more possible.

I wonder what will happen to big expensive cities after all the young people leave for the midwest and south?

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

#747

Post by shados »

tuna-piano wrote: post #632
kelnos wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also useful to note that the "nuclear family" is a very Western thing, and the US takes it to an extreme. In other parts of the world it's abnormal for adults in their 20s to be living anywhere but with their parents, often even with a fiance or new spouse in the mix. The idea that having a multi-generational household means that the younger members haven't "grown up" and need to "learn to live on their own" is…

While it's true this seems like a strong US thing, I haven't heard many happy long-term stories of folks living intergenerationally. In my experience (talking to people from a variety of countries), most couples in their 20s/30s want their own place (even in the countries where it's not common). It seems it can even lead to happier intergenerational relationships when the roomate-type fights don't need to happen. It…

> It would seem to me that it's most common in the US to move out because they can afford to...

In the context of the "housing affordability crisis", it makes that part of the context that much more interesting.

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

#748

Post by scarmig »

xyzzyz wrote: post #614
scarmig wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true. Sweden experienced a spike in unemployment, despite not having a lockdown. "People are too afraid about getting sick and dying to go outside" is pretty much directly attributable to the pandemic.

Sweden experienced a spike from ~7% to ~9%. US has experienced a spike from ~3% to ~14%. Sure, some of it might be attributable to social attitudes, but I don't think that such a big discrepancy can be explained by this. I think it's mostly lockdown policies causing this. Sweden: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LRHUTTTTSEM156S US: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE

I do agree that lockdowns increase unemployment compared to not, holding all things being equal (which is almost the point).

For comparison, two countries more culturally similar to Sweden who did institute lockdown measures:

Norway: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LMUNRRTTNOM156S

Denmark: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LRHUTTTTDKM156N

Norway went from ~2% to ~9.5% and is now back to ~4.5%. And you can barely see a blip in Denmark from 5% to 6%.

This leads us to the obvious conclusion ???.

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

#749

Post by Dylan16807 »

compiler-guy wrote: post #616
watwut wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But people can not buy theoretical smaller cheaper house with no AC if that one is not on sale.

But given the choice between smaller and cheaper houses and larger and more expensive ones, they almost always choose the larger, more expensive ones. The university in town is over a hundred years old, and many of the dorms are that old too. Most have no air conditioning, and have insufficient power for a resident to add a window air conditioner without special approval. And the parents and students describe them as…

AC doesn't cost that much. Especially for a dorm situation, it should be less than $10 per person per month.

Almost nothing else needs to be upgraded.

And being too hot definitely impacts the ability to focus.

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

#750

Post by rjkennedy98 »

triceratops wrote: post #721
rjkennedy98 wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that you skip over the most important provisions. Do you think that insurance for a 60 year old is 3x as expensive as a 30 year old for health care? The government MANDATES that to be the case. Who do you think pays for that? Obamacare mandates that a 64 year old get charged no more that 3x a 27 year old.

> Who do you think pays for that? Employers. Or the government - via subsidies. And the insureds themselves. Have you considered that many millennials are OK with paying more if it means everyone is taken care of? People don't always vote for policies that benefit solely themselves.

> Have you considered that many millennials are OK with paying more if it means everyone is taken care of? People don't always vote for policies that benefit solely themselves.

So that's why they vote for policies that exclusively benefit Boomers. Gotcha!

Have you considered that maybe Millenials just don't understand how money and taxes work?

I was talking to my friend the other day that lives in California and didn't know what Prop 13 was. He was a state champion debater in California but didn't know how property taxes worked in the state. I was shocked. If that's the slightest indication - most millennials have absolutely no idea how money and taxes work.

I've talked to friends about zoning, depreciation laws, capital gains taxes, backdoor Roth laws ect. They don't even have a clue.

Post reply on HN