Millenials living at home epidemic

Status
Not open for further replies.
Housing and medical had to be cheaper back then. Otherwise we wouldn't complain about how expensive they are today.

There was a newspaper article a couple months ago that stated in 1950 the median house price was 2x median income. Today it's 5x. I don't know what healthcare costs have done but wouldn't be surprised if the costs had also 5x'd.

But if things cost less back then, then what did they spend money on that we don't today? Their savings rate could not have been that high--higher than us, but double digit percentage of their incomes? Different subject though.
 
I'm surprised no one has brought up the fact that they had to walk 10 miles, through the snow, uphill both ways, every morning to get what they wanted back in their day.

Come on people get with it already. Life was clearly so difficult back in the good ole days and so easy today. This current generation is clearly the worst and the ones previously definitely did not receive the same disdain from the ones who came before them.

Evidence that no generation in history ever thought the youth of their time was terrible.

This is clearly a new thing that has never occurred in recorded history.

And those -insert your generation here-. I'm sure we can all agree they are just one superbly flawless group of people who never had a complaint levied against them.
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
I'm the original poster of 'greedy' and I stand by what I said.
While I understand the 'business' part...I've seen people whose mortgage was paid off long ago illegally renting their basements for exorbitant prices...because they can...I've seen people take Section 8 tenants because the 'government'
check is never late (so they bring druggies, welfare recipients etc...into a neighborhood of people who WORKED to buy their homes....that's going to cause resentment....PS Why isn't there any of this 'low income housing' in Chappaqua NY or Hyannisport, Ma???)
There are very few working class ethnic neighborhoods left in NYC....the desireable areas are too expensive for a family to rent so they rent to 4 or 5 (unrelated) millenials who can't afford the rent on their own...The undesireable areas are basically ghettos and even they are expensive (although usually 'subsidized')...

The United States of America has become the Divided States of America ....Instead of encouraging people to be 'American' we are being balkanized by identity politics which encourage division...I'm not very optimistic..


It's just the way section 8 works. They only pay a certain amount, usually some max for the area which is probably the low and mid range. What's the alternative? Give them unlimited vouchers so if the average rent is $1000, they can have a $2000 apartment? Then there will be more outrage over them wasting money. They just pay for a place for someone to live, they don't pay luxury rates. I'm also not certain if you're right to blame the government or the landlord for bringing in undesirables. It's still up to the landlord to screen tenants even if they're section 8. And even if you screen them, people turn into alcoholics, druggies, get sick, get divorced, die, lose their job, etc. Life happens.

As for your greedy basement landlord, if the unit is illegal, call the city inspectional services and get it shut down. Not all basement apartments are illegal. And I'm not sure what bearing whether the mortgage is paid off or not makes them greedy. I think you'd probably have it the other way around. The ones with mortgages could be the greedy ones because with just 25% down, you can control a property so instead of having a paid off property, they could have 4 mortgages on 4 properties. So now what does that mean?
 
Originally Posted By: ArcticDriver
Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveodland/2012/03/24/college-costs-are-soaring/#60c5edb81f86

College is expensive. Ask any family with post-secondary students and they will tell you just how outrageous are the costs of college education today. And yes, gas, food, and life in general are expensive. But college costs have risen much faster than average inflation for decades so this isn’t a short-term phenomenon. College costs are soaring, seemingly all on their own.

CNBC: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/16/why-college-costs-are-so-high-and-rising.html

At public, four-year schools, tuition and fees cost about $9,139 this year. In the 1971 school year, they added up to less than $500 in current dollars, according to the College Board.

There is ample proof that college costs have far exceeded the inflation rate over the past 40-50 years but old guys heads are like concrete...facts don't make any difference.
grin.gif



Yes. I'm going to quote this post before reading the rest of the thread.

Gen X'er here.

I went to UT-Austin from 1992 to 1995. My tuition was always between $600-$700 per semester. Housing was cheap. It was realistic to work a menial job full time and be able to pay your way through school. You would have to live near campus and not have a car, but you could make it work.

Now a days, UT-Austin costs $7000 per semester, and housing costs have soared. There's no way you can pay your way through just by working full time. You pretty much have to take out loans, or have someone else pay your way.

Yes, there are cheaper college educations available, but they also don't carry the esteem and extensive alumni networks that UT-Austin does. In this state, a degree on the wall from UT-Austin means something.

How can this level of tuition inflation possibly be justified? Why is it so many of the "pull yourself up by the bootstrap" crowd can't see this?
 
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: ArcticDriver

I have no responsibility to stop contributing to the workplace or society for your benefit. My responsibility is to my family and to myself and even to my employer.
You are not on the list any more than I should be on your list of daily concerns.

What you are basically saying is that jobs should be given to those most in need (a difficult thing to measure) rather than those most qualified for the job.

Perhaps you should look for work in the public sector where madatory age for retirement sometimes exists.


This x100,000. You have no idea why that person stays working. Maybe they need the medical insurance for a spouse. Maybe they have no spouse and the only thing keeping them going is work? Maybe they have a sick kid that has some condition and they want to provide for their care? Maybe their retirement savings darn near vanished in the crash of 2008? Maybe they just enjoy working!

The thought that someone should stop doing something for your benefit is an extremely selfish thing. You don't like it? Find a new career or employer.

It's like the people complaining about the rich and want their $$ for doing, essentially nothing. Don't hate them! Figure out how to be like them. Figure out what it takes to become wealthy and do it. Start a business, work an internship, figure out how to legally make the dough.


I hope I'm not selfish for saying this, but, Yep.
 
Originally Posted By: Brons2
How can this level of tuition inflation possibly be justified? Why is it so many of the "pull yourself up by the bootstrap" crowd can't see this?

It can't, but it's worse up here. What you have to do is get your undergraduate degree somewhere really cheap, and work like a madman for good marks, and find the prestige in grad school with some funding.
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Maybe their retirement savings darn near vanished in the crash of 2008?
Do you smell burnt toast? Are you seeing double? Facial droop?
Ataxia?

The markets have more than recovered since then.
 
Originally Posted By: Silk
Originally Posted By: Kibitoshin
In my area we call it multi-generational living.


Over here we call it Whanau, a Maori word meaning extended family. The extended family is very important - brothers and sisters, uncles and aunties, parents and grandparents, grandchildren. It's how I was brought up, and it's how I want my children to live - that they are welcome to come here anytime, and that at some time in the future, I may need to live with them.

When my wife was younger, she lived in the garage at her grandparents place, while her parents put together money for a house, and then built it. For a couple of years we lived in a caravan with 2 young boys in the backyard of the mother in laws place, using a corner of the garage for kitchen and office. Later my 2 daughters arrived with a caravan each. One daughter was back there a few years later, with daughter living in a single room sleepout. Now the sister in law is living in the backyard in a similar sleepout, while the bro in law sleeps in a van. When building our new garage, we put a sleepout on the end for my daughter and granddaughter.

I have no problem with helping out, or being helped...it's what you do for family.


The best post in this thread! Sounds like you have a wonderful family Silk
thumbsup2.gif
 
Generation X'er here too. I only went through junior college. This was back in the late 80s-early 90s. I remember it was $16 a semester hour. I wonder how much it is now?
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Generation X'er here too. I only went through junior college. This was back in the late 80s-early 90s. I remember it was $16 a semester hour. I wonder how much it is now?
More than $330 per credit hour undergrad at a local school that used to be affordable before tuition started rising 20 percent per year, year over year for the past decade and a half.
 
Yeah that's a great post by Silk. Many cultures lived like this in the past- it's an honourable way to live. Westernization, specifically capitalism, selfishness and general secularism, surely destroys that dynamic. Old folks homes are big business for a reason. Life insurance is more prolific than ever. What a world we live in.
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Originally Posted By: Silk
Originally Posted By: Kibitoshin
In my area we call it multi-generational living.


Over here we call it Whanau, a Maori word meaning extended family. The extended family is very important - brothers and sisters, uncles and aunties, parents and grandparents, grandchildren. It's how I was brought up, and it's how I want my children to live - that they are welcome to come here anytime, and that at some time in the future, I may need to live with them.

When my wife was younger, she lived in the garage at her grandparents place, while her parents put together money for a house, and then built it. For a couple of years we lived in a caravan with 2 young boys in the backyard of the mother in laws place, using a corner of the garage for kitchen and office. Later my 2 daughters arrived with a caravan each. One daughter was back there a few years later, with daughter living in a single room sleepout. Now the sister in law is living in the backyard in a similar sleepout, while the bro in law sleeps in a van. When building our new garage, we put a sleepout on the end for my daughter and granddaughter.

I have no problem with helping out, or being helped...it's what you do for family.


The best post in this thread! Sounds like you have a wonderful family Silk
thumbsup2.gif


Hey!

I put a lot of effort into my posts. Somebody give me a trophy already!
thankyou2.gif


You are missing the point though....Everyone should be living exactly as the generation before them thinks they should. That way they too can mature into properly bitter individuals with the inclination to whine about the the current youth and how they are ruining everything. Family living arrangements through economically difficult times? Who ever heard of such a thing!!

But seriously, I do agree with that sentiment. I may not live in my parent's home anymore but my wife/kids, my parents, and my in-laws spend enough time at each other's homes we might as well all live under one roof. A good family is not something that should be taken for granted no matter if times are good or bad.
 
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Maybe their retirement savings darn near vanished in the crash of 2008?
Do you smell burnt toast? Are you seeing double? Facial droop?
Ataxia?

The markets have more than recovered since then.


Yes, but if you were nearing retirement in 2008, if you had to start drawing from those funds, you would be selling at reduced values. Therefore, many decided to keep working.

The loss or gain is only on paper. You only lock it in when you sell. So I suspect many chose to keep working.

And as I and others have said, there are OTHER factors to consider as well.

It's not as simple as get on the treadmill at 21 and get off at 65 or 66 or 67 (full Social Security age has been creeping up thanks to changes by Congress.)

Sometimes, life has another plan.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Maybe their retirement savings darn near vanished in the crash of 2008?
Do you smell burnt toast? Are you seeing double? Facial droop?
Ataxia?

The markets have more than recovered since then.


Yes, but if you were nearing retirement in 2008, if you had to start drawing from those funds, you would be selling at reduced values. Therefore, many decided to keep working.

The loss or gain is only on paper. You only lock it in when you sell. So I suspect many chose to keep working.

And as I and others have said, there are OTHER factors to consider as well.

It's not as simple as get on the treadmill at 21 and get off at 65 or 66 or 67 (full Social Security age has been creeping up thanks to changes by Congress.)

Sometimes, life has another plan.

Those who sold at a loss have a nice capital loss carry forward tax deduction that they can use for years and years.

Everyone wants to give the boomer the benefit of the doubt, but still dump on the millennial that got shut out of industry as a college graduate when the markets tanked and the boomers delayed retirement.
 
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Maybe their retirement savings darn near vanished in the crash of 2008?
Do you smell burnt toast? Are you seeing double? Facial droop?
Ataxia?

The markets have more than recovered since then.


Yes, but if you were nearing retirement in 2008, if you had to start drawing from those funds, you would be selling at reduced values. Therefore, many decided to keep working.

The loss or gain is only on paper. You only lock it in when you sell. So I suspect many chose to keep working.

And as I and others have said, there are OTHER factors to consider as well.

It's not as simple as get on the treadmill at 21 and get off at 65 or 66 or 67 (full Social Security age has been creeping up thanks to changes by Congress.)

Sometimes, life has another plan.

Those who sold at a loss have a nice capital loss carry forward tax deduction that they can use for years and years.

Everyone wants to give the boomer the benefit of the doubt, but still dump on the millennial that got shut out of industry as a college graduate when the markets tanked and the boomers delayed retirement.


What good is a loss if you are in the 10 or 15 percent tax bracket? It's not like you get a one for one dollar back by declaring the loss. You avoid paying that 10 or 15 percent on any future gains.

Not exactly the same thing. That's getting $1 to 1.50 for every $10 you lost. Not really going to help. They are better off to keep working, buy more shares at the lower prices and wait for the market to recover.
 
Don't quote me on this one but didn't the market fully recover and then some by the end of 2009? I remember hearing that from an investment adviser not too long ago, but I never looked into its validity. The problem was people who sold their "losing" shares in a panic rather than waiting out the storm.
 
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
Don't quote me on this one but didn't the market fully recover and then some by the end of 2009? I remember hearing that from an investment adviser not too long ago, but I never looked into its validity. The problem was people who sold their "losing" shares in a panic rather than waiting out the storm.
The market hit low mid April 2009. Somewhere near 6500 for the ^DJI index. Back then a lot of people thought it would go to 3000 or even 1500.

Was the buying opportunity of a lifetime.
 
Originally Posted By: Brons2

Now a days, UT-Austin costs $7000 per semester, and housing costs have soared.
Yes, there are cheaper college educations available, but they also don't carry the esteem and extensive alumni networks that UT-Austin does. In this state, a degree on the wall from UT-Austin means something.

Oh scheesch...Its called adapting.

Go to a community college and live at home during that time. Then transfer to the cheapest college that has an Engineering course...that's what I did.

And "gulp" you might actually have to leave Texas (yes Virginia there is a world outside of Texas). An Engineering Degree from UT is no better than a degree from any other college. Sure..in "some" cases it might get you a job quicker (in Texas) but ultimately its what you do with your degree and your skills...not where your degree comes from.

One of the best Engineers I ever knew had en Engineering Technology degree from a Branch Campus of Penn State (never went to University Park.)
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
The real epidemic is the proportion of people over 65 who are still in the workforce, occupying management positions, and constipating the upward mobility of career progression. Most of them can retire and not work a day again, they just choose to keep working for selfish reasons.


My 66 year old boss retired a year ago. Was replaced by a 49 year old. Breath of fresh air. I liked my old boss as a person a lot, but the technology had passed him by and he was holding us back trying to understand it. The new boss came up in IT in the 90s and understands the current environment much better what all with outsourcing, cloud services, federated identity management, IaaS/PaaS etc, etc, etc.

Like it or not the old guys from the mainframe era are not that valued anymore, even as managers unless you can find an employer with a mainframe. It's just a completely different mentality today. In this case the older boomer was holding us back as an organization.
 
Originally Posted By: ArcticDriver
[/quote]

Its true that in the automated and highly regulated workplaces of today, the need for employees with critical thinking skills is no longer valued as much as it once was.



Not in my field (IT). Someone has to know how to apply the automation to business problems. Automation doesn't auto-configure, and people overseas don't always understand. Critical thinking skills from stateside employees are more in demand than ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top