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

801–810 of 974 posts

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

#801

Post by throwaway0a5e »

vertbhrtn wrote: post #441
PaulStatezny wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. It was about [REDACTED FOR PRIVACY - but much much less than parent's 48k medium income per person for college grads] before taxes, both with college degrees. I'm sorry lapcatsoftware if it sounded like I was making light of poverty. Poverty is terrible. But at least in the US, there is _so much_ opportunity to not be stuck on a minimum wage salary. Resigning to the idea that, "Well, I guess I just have…

What opportunities? Tell me how an average cashier can land an average 150k/year job in a metro area? Don't forget that the said cashier has mediocre intelligence, so-so appearance, zero charisma and little talking skills. He might swap grocery store for an oil change shop, but that's about it. Our society is mostly stratified now, with a little upward mobility left for high-tech workers.

> mediocre intelligence, so-so appearance, zero charisma and little talking skills

That person is never going to move up the economic ladder no matter what rung they start on or what decade they are born in.

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

#802

Post by howlgarnish »

artur_makly wrote: post #740
chrisseaton wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it work in practice in other societies? How do you have a grown up, likely physical, relationship with your partner... when your parents are sharing the same rooms? Do you just hide in your bedroom the whole time? How do you develop your own relationships and life and way of doing things and way of raising your children, inside someone else's house? I can't understand that but I'm open to hearing about how.

Argentina solves this with "telos" https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telo

How is this different from the Asian-style "love hotel"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_hotel

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

#803

Post by throwaway0a5e »

ryangittins wrote: post #233
onion2k wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

House prices will never fall significantly. As soon as a house enters the market at anything below the going rate it's bought by a landlord or a rental company. This will keep house prices high forever.

This is demonstrably false. Why don't landlords own all of Detroit, where housing prices have cratered? Housing is a market like any other. The going rate can change.

>Why don't landlords own all of Detroit,

The same reason the used car lots don't own all the rust free classics in California, an exceptionally asinine regulatory environment that would put them on the hook for an obscene amount of back taxes.

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

#805

Post by throwaway0a5e »

ncallaway wrote: post #211
qwerty1234599 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High tax rates are what causes this. You are effectively giving away half your wage to sustain a completely unknown person leeching off the government.

This statement is flat out false. Tax rates are significantly lower than they were in the past.

Rates and effective rates are too different things.

Some states have zero income tax but the effective tax rate is often similiar because pretty much every interaction with government is self-funded with fees so the effective tax rate is much higher than the on paper tax rate. Conversely you can have a tax rate and then let people deduct everything under the sun getting a lower effective rate. Kind of like how if you income is below the EIC amount (which is definitively not ideal) in the US federal income tax exists on paper (I forget what the rate is) but the effective rate is zero, possibly negative even)

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

#806

Post by Havoc »

novok wrote: post #778
Havoc wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. London. In the land of limp pay cheques (compared to US). Financial sector means being in a financial hub though so not much choice. I'll probably end up moving further out and accepting a long commute eventually.

Why not move to SF or NYC if your in tech or finance?

> SF or NYC

That solves my property too expensive problem how?

More seriously...not super keen on living in the US to be honest. Could probably do it practically, but given my life circumstances it would be a net loss.

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

#807

Post by jlokier »

iso1631 wrote: post #176
jlokier wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where I live, most property agents will do a credit and income check, and would turn you away for not meeting the "minimum income level" for renting those places. Even if you feel you can afford spending 50% of your income, it doesn't follow that you can easily find a landlord who allows it. If you have a bad credit rating, as many people do these days, it will be even more difficult as more landlords check that than…

But that's no different to 2003 (you could have a guarantor - typically a parent - who would be on the hook for your rent if you didn't pay it) Before I started looking I was under the impression things were harder now then they were in 2003, but it seems not, at least in this one case (tiny studio/bedsits in a dodgy part of west london) -- unless asking prices on rent are massively depressed due to covid. In 2006/7…

Things seem to have become more difficult to obtain in some cases. Back in 2003, nobody asked me for proof of income for renting. Just basic credit checks (which don't directly know about income or bank balances). Proof of income is more recent.

(And difficult if you're self-employed with highly irregular income, I found.)

If using a guarantor, a guarantor has to pass similar checks.

Guarantor works a lot better for a young person starting out in a cheap-ass room in a shared place, whose parents expect this. For a flat and an older adult with retired parents on a low pension, or their own housing costs, not so much.

Good like finding a guarantor if your parents or friends:

- don't have enough spare income to cover your rent in addition to their own expenses

- don't pass the credit check themselves

- can't pass the proof-of-income check themselves

- don't have enough assets to use as security

- are not happy using their assets as security for you (e.g. their limited life savings or their one and only home)

Some people don't have parents, and these days, quite a lot of parents rent precariously too. They would be turned down as guarantors.

More parents renting is a factor which has changed in recent years.

I imagine most people don't have friends who would be willing to be long term rent guarantors, even if they could be.

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

#808

Post by thatfrenchguy »

mywittyname wrote: post #296
tidepod12 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>One is because homes today are substantially larger and have more amenities than they did in previous generations. I have noticed that most of my fellow millennials seem to have completely forgotten the concept of "starter home" and assume that as soon as you turn 25 you should be entitled to a 4 bedroom house with a pool, huge yard, wonderful neighborhood, three-car garage, etc. Among my friends that have bought ho…

> I have noticed that most millenials seem to have completely forgotten the concept of "starter home" and assume that as soon as you turn 25 you should be entitled to a 4 bedroom house with a pool, huge yard, wonderful neighborhood, three-car garage, etc. "Starter homes" for young people is the stuff that was built 30-40 years ago that hasn't been updated. So they are buying those mcmansions because that's what was b…

50 meters from the city center sounds like the dream !

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

#809

Post by csomar »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #113
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 in my mid fifties and I have never had a company pension, defined benefit or contribution. I saw my first house decline in value by 25%. We had interest rates peaking at 15%. I didn’t have student loans but only because I didn’t go to university, just like 90% of my peer group. Unemployment was much higher than it is now and schools were teaching subjects for obsolete careers. It wasn’t as rosey as it is often po…

> I saw my first house decline in value by 25%.

This rarely matters unless you are looking to sell or borrow against.

> We had interest rates peaking at 15%.

But inflation was higher at the time. Also rates are 0% now at the Fed level, but if you are a consumer you are going to pay a bit depending on your credit score.

> I didn’t have student loans but only because I didn’t go to university, just like 90% of my peer group.

The governments (it's really a global phenomena) pushed the general public into universities. It's hard to blame the students when you take that decision at a very early age 17-19 and most of these youth doesn't have any life experience.

> Unemployment was much higher than it is now

I highly suspect the current unemployment rate is meaningful. To be counted as jobless, you need to register with the local employment office. It's possible today's youth no longer rely on that and use modern alternatives instead.

> schools were teaching subjects for obsolete careers

They still are.

> It wasn’t as rosey as it is often portrayed.

It was not. The only difference really is land and housing which was significantly more affordable and did matter less where you lived. Now you need to live next to a "jobs-hub" that have insanely high rent and purchase prices.

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

#810

Post by thatfrenchguy »

tidepod12 wrote: post #738
chasd00 wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in DFW as well (Oak Cliff), one thing to keep in mind about home prices are schools. In East Dallas, on the border of Lakewood schools, there's literally a $100k difference between one side of the street and the other. A good public school in DISD is rare and so home prices around it are very high. I think the quality of the local school drive home prices considerably.

I notice and acknowledge this as well, but it's the same conversation about starter homes: if you are currently childless and you were to become pregnant today, you would not start using or benefiting from a school district at all for another 5-6 years. Why pay the premium for a nicer school district that you aren't even using? You're essentially just throwing away that money for half a decade, and who's to say if th…

"Not a good school district" is usually a proxy for "not my social class / ethnicity" ;-)
Post reply on HN