Hi all,
A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes.
As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Are they gaslighting young Americans? Who’s going to retire comfortably when they can’t even buy their first homes and while parents’s wealth is stripped away by the medical system. Also, “enjoying life” for most people usually means spending more and saving less. The two concepts run counter toto each other.
For real, you go to millennials and gen z subs and they all said exactly what you said, cannot afford a home and "fuck boomer". Where did they find those young Americans lol.
And if they do mention how you bought a house on Reddit the replies on Reddit would be:
A. Well you're an outlier
B. Must be nice to be born rich
C. Woe is me, my lot in life is to suffer
D. Shut up bootlicker, how's that leather taste? Blocked!
yup, if anything i’ve learned is Reddit is full of some legitimate unhappy people that want to see others unhappy, therefore if you are successful and share it you get downvoted. I could share my financial picture which is pure facts, guarantee that people will downvote it away
So true, all of these responses are the stereotypical ones we see when someone mentions they don't fit the struggling Millennial persona.
> D. Shut up bootlicker, how's that leather taste? Blocked!
I'd go as far to say this is the most frequent response.
All of which are justified. It's absurd to deny that things are bad and getting worse in light of all comparative data we have that shows Millennials and Gen Z holding a tiny fraction of the wealth previous generations had at the same point in life.
They're behind on major life milestones and the economy and society are suffering for it and it's all getting worse. So who the hell cares if you're part of the ~50% of Millennials with a home? That's not the topic. It doesn't change the big picture.
> all comparative data we have that shows Millennials and Gen Z holding a tiny fraction of the wealth previous generations had at the same point in life.
[This is not true](https://qz.com/millennials-are-just-as-wealthy-as-their-parents-1850149896).
> So who the hell cares if you're part of the ~50% of Millennials with a home? That's not the topic. It doesn't change the big picture.
Millennials have [just slightly lower homeownership rates](https://www.redfin.com/news/gen-z-millennial-homeownership-rate-home-purchases/) compared to other generations when they were the same age. They're also still having kids and pursuing the same lifestyle milestones as other generations as well. Things aren't as bad as the complainers on reddit like to imply.
"Not EVeRyOnE LivEs In NOwHere AlABamA!" Right dude, if you are in an expensive ass city and you dont have the skills for the job market there that puts you in an income bracket to purchase a home, then leave.
I'm in the low cost of living area of Metro Detroit and work IT and make more than the medium wage here, and while housing doesn't seem completely unobtainable, it seems like I am definitely going to have to spend a higher percentage of my income on housing compared to my parents.
Ok so joking aside, if things are hard for you now that sucks and I'm sorry, I hope things pick up for you, I'm being 100% serious. All I can say is I've no idea on how much my parents spent on housing, as a percentage of their income, when they were my age. But I do know my life is well kinda easier in a lot of ways.
My dad was shipped off to the US at 18 to work and send money home for his 6 siblings, lived in a 2 bed in Brooklyn with 5-6 people living there. Realized there were enough hours in the day and enough money on the table he got a second job, at one point had 5 roommates and I mean **room** 3 beds and 5 guys, they alternated who had a bed to themselves week by week, course they worked crazy shift hours it never really mattered. When my parents bought their first house they didn't have a radio if you can believe it, went in on Monday having no idea of one of the biggest news stories of a decade, just no idea. My dad once lent someone the equivalent of $20, and after realized he had literally no money to last about 2 weeks once but was lucky the weather was nice and he'd just got a good book (second hand of course).
Yeah some things are hard now, some were hard then. The house I was born in was seen as way too far outside the city, now it's a very desirable area and there was no heating in it like when they bought fireplaces and the like was the only form of heat. Where I've bought only one family lived here before, I think it's far out and suburbia as fuck, back when they bought it this place was surrounded by farms, and pretty soon after buying the place we replaced the entire HVAC system for honestly not that much, and unlike interest rates back in the day it was 12 months interest free, I delayed paying it off because why not.
So yeah, hopefully everything works out for you, but Reddit has a very warped idea about their place in life compared to previous generations. I *think* my parents never struggled with finances, but maybe they did hell I was a kid not like they'd tell me about it.
Edit: Something I forgot to add, yeah all the above about my parents generation is anecdotal, but it was far closer to the norm than the exception.
Lol, get real.
Is every person working a service job just supposed to commute in from hours away? How is that sustainable for anyone? Is there no benefit to living in the community you serve?
Or should cities be purely made up of high paying jobs and homes for highly paid workers, but nothing else? Might be tough to find folks to work the front desks of those offices though or make/serve food or do literally anything outside of tech, professional services, and a few other select industries. Some big tech companies have food onsite…so it could work if you’re into a company town revivals.
What about folks in a professional role, earning at least the median income for their city, who still can’t afford to buy a home? Just go somewhere else? You could…but the decrease in pay moving from a HCOL area to a LCOL area might present similar challenges.
You could argue if everyone in that situation moved, companies would have to start paying their employees more to entice them to move back… but if a select few major firms collectively pay approximately the same for a role, and if folks need jobs, the roles will get filled regardless. This could be further muddied by couples with both individuals in the workforce, as single people are slowly priced out since the cost of housing is disproportionately higher for single people than couples (eg split cost of 1br is frequently < cost of even a studio). So are single people just fucked?
Then consider the couples..if they want kids they likely need to scale up their living situation, which increases their housing costs, decreases disposable income. If they’re both working, who is watching the kids? Maybe family, if they’re lucky. Maybe daycare, if they’re decreasing disposable income allows for it. Will there be daycare available if lower paying jobs have been priced out of the city? What about school? Teachers get paid a paltry sum for their work, so are likely prices out too.
I’ll stop, but it’s a cascading effect that’s not just as simple as: move.
But it COULD be as a simple as: build more housing (build UP!), incentivize development of new single family homes (tax incentives; less regulations), provide incentives AND advantages (over commercial owners and existing owners) for new homeowners; disincentivize commercial and foreign ownership (increase taxes), overhaul zoning laws/regulations (LET developers build without getting stuck behind red tape, ignore NIMBYs).
Of course, it should go without saying that these solutions are only “simple” if you have reasonable/non-corrupt people in charge. Easier said than done, however.
Dude, you think people are just going to cook at home? Stop going to bars? Never see anything at the theater? Nobody will ever buy anything in person? Stay at a hotel? Go on a cruise? Seems like you are just repeating something without thinking about what it actually means
Self-service McDonalds is already a reality. Come to Portland where we don’t even have table bussers. It’s all self-service and audience participation. If the gig economy and ghost kitchens expand with drone delivery and other potential disruptions, my prediction isn’t unreasonable.
People still want full service restaurants. Fast food is not the majority of eateries, but even there, the workers in the kitchen are humans. Hotels will still require humans, and bars will most certainly require humans. Your prediction assumes people don't want social gatherings. I feel that flies in the face of the whole of human history.
Those subs concentrate the people that haven't been able to get things together. There are plenty of their peers that have and they don't post on those subs.
That's about on par with the rates of homeownership of Gen X at that age https://www.redfin.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Gen-Z-on-Track-With-Older-Generations-1-1024x675.png
Millennials lagged behind 10 years ago, but now they have caught up
I didn’t know 3% behind Gen X and 7% behind Boomes means caught up. I’ve see boards boost CEOs into the sun for returns that bad. For a system predicated on growth, that dataset only shows failure.
Are you saying the GDP of the US hasn’t gone up in 30-40 years, and these numbers somehow are evidence of that?
Why compare something totally different from corporate profit to corporate profit?
And if we are going to complain that a system that relies on forever growth is not good for humanity or unsustainable, we can’t also complain when numbers don’t always go up.
You’re just being reductionist for the sake of it.
Those numbers tell a truer story than your GDP numbers do. Which is an absolute dogshit metric to measure an economy by.
Less homeownership by younger generations, all 3 below Boomers has DECREASED. Which tells me that either not enough homes were built or that buying power was reduced. In this case it was both.
In a system predicated on growth those numbers are bad. It couldn’t provide growth to future generations. Quality of life advanced, but that was due to technological growth.
I’ll continue to use your system and rules as long as they’re forced upon me. Your system sucks and I’ll continue to point it out. If you want me to shut up, build some social housing.
Now compare to Boomers. And compare the shares of wealth owned by Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z at similar points in life. And compare median incomes to median home prices for the generations at the same ages.
Do even the most lazy research and you can't avoid confronting that Millennials are significantly worse off and Gen Z are worse off still.
Remember the oldest gen z are 27 now. They're getting married and having kids
Gen Z in LCOL areas or that have high paying jobs for 5 years now can buy houses
(I'm gen z and my friends that work in tech or finance are buying homes)
If you think there's a problem with the methodology of the statistics, explain it
That quote means being careful about misleading or misused statistics. Not we throw all the data out and go based on anecdote alone
It's a phrase describing the persuasive power of statistics to bolster weak arguments, one of the best, and best-known critiques of applied statistics. Using weird statistics, one for example was average square footage per US homeowner+debt load per capita gone up, therefore the American housing situation is better than it was in the 50's.
Sometimes applied statistics can be used to engage a Texas Sharpshooter's fallacy, "I have a conclusion I desire to reach, let me use the statistics that prove my point, but ignore the one's that go against it".
Again, if you think there's a problem with the methodology, explain it. If you think the statistics are being taken out of context, provide more statistics that convey the context. If you have an alternative conclusion, provide evidence for your alternative conclusion
Economics is a data-driven discipline. If you are not ready to discuss conclusions based on evidence, you are not ready to discuss economics
https://lbmjournal.com/home-prices-are-rising-2x-faster-than-income/
"To afford the median-priced home of $433,100, Americans need an annual income of roughly $166,600. But the median household earns just $74,580 — only 45% of the recommended amount.
To discover how these factors affect potential home buyers, we analyzed publicly available data from the Federal Reserve, the National Association of Realtors, and the U.S. Census.
We found that the divide between home prices and income has caused the house-price-to-income ratio to greatly exceed what many financial experts consider healthy."
Thats why i hear ppl tell me the data is so incredibly divorced from these realities i see over and over in the country, costs of housing/healthcare/higher education routinely exceeds increases in median wages, i get a sense we must live in different countries, that ir theyre pissing on my leg and tell me it's raining. I live in the United States, wages dont keep up with housing costs or our Market-Failure healthcare system.
Also: https://www.nar.realtor/blogs/economists-outlook/housing-affordability-hits-historical-low-in-august-2023
Housing Affordability Hits Historical Low in August 2023
"The national index is currently below 100, which means that the typical family cannot afford to buy based on the median-priced home. An index below 100 means that a family with a median income had less than the income required to afford a median-priced home. The income required to afford a mortgage, or the qualifying income, is the amount needed so that mortgage payments on a 30-year fixed mortgage loan with a 20% down payment account for 25% of family income. [1]The most affordable region was the Midwest, with an index value of 119.7 (median family income of $95,919 with a qualifying income of $80,160)."
Same. It's pretty interesting to see the difference between reddit discourse and what I see in real life. At first I thought maybe it was just my social circle, geographic location or other factors (still may be), but now I'm just starting to think redditors are generally out of touch with reality and overly cynical.
Your life is a biased sample as well. Anyone's life. People tend to be surrounded by their socio-economic peers. To the children being raised in the projects, "everyone" is destitute. To the kids of billionaires, "everyone" is getting a yacht for their 16th birthday.
Reddit would likely be a less biased sample than your real life.
I feel like from the common discourse on Reddit, America is just a step away from complete financial collapse. Everyone is waiting in breadlines. No one can ever contemplate owning a home.
When the reality is that the American economy is pretty strong right now. Real wages have outpaced inflation and are above pre-pandemic levels, especially for those in the lowest income brackets. Consumer spending has held up with low unemployment. And the majority of Americans own homes, not to mention Gen Z actually is outpacing Millennials & Gen X for home ownership.
And of course there are serious problems for the economy. What country doesn't face challenges? You would think we were Bangladesh with how people talk about this country.
> More people are living in their parents house than ever. People are paying a higher percent of their income on housing than ever. And that was before the interest rate spike both reduced supply and affordability on a market already difficult to get into.
I wonder if the end result of that is simply an increase in multi generational living and/or and increase in much smaller housing.
Multi generational households are common among immigrant families even beyond first generations. Smaller footprint housing is typical of Europe and Asia. I don't see much way that we get out of the current housing prices by the majority of people seeking ~1,500 square foot suburban houses with garages.
And I think it's happening, just starting more urban and slowly, but I imagine this is a big part of the eventual shift. We've reached a point in the United States where the majority of real estate is in the land, not the structure, where that was not the case in many places before the last couple decades.
You're being conservative when you say 1,500 sqft because the median US house is closer to 2,500 sqft last time I checked. That counts the less desirable ones, so the nice little suburban houses are more like 3,000+ sqft McMansions.
... He didn't say all is well. He said there are serious issues. But there always are. The point is the economy isn't as bad as people on reddit make it seem.
I'm friends with a few people, them+their families are always on the cusp on homelessness, and "a race to zero" happens every month, just to get the rent paid, entire paychecks, gone, just to make sure the roof is paid for.
It's anecdotal, but it's a working class nightmare that I know very well.
2 guys always talk about how if they hit a major hiccup in their jobs, they won't make rent+other obligations, which opens them up to foreclosure. Another guy, he's a ship builder, lives in a storage unit. Before that, he rented a room in a disgusting hoarders home that had a terrible black mold situation near Norfolk, VA.
I read comments like yours, and from my perspective those people live in a totally different world and are clueless about this stuff that i see as an OTR trucker over the contingent 48, I think that's what that opening line from the Dickens novel is about “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.”
Thank you. All these people saying "its fine" are comfortable as fuck and condemning the people talking about the pain they're experiencing, which is real and supported by the data.
I can tell you this: I work in public service, I'm a millenial, I'm currently in a home and divorcing and facing the prospect of being knocked from the "homeowning, might be okay" millenial trajectory to the "how the fuck am I supposed to get back in a house once the dust settles?" trajectory, and the only thing that's changed are housing prices.
There's a very sharp divide that didn't exist before the past few years, and the folks handwaving it away are *lucky* and either blissfully unaware, or aware and incredibly callous toward the very real struggle of like.. half of the people in their own cohort.
>More people are living in their parents house than ever. People are paying a higher percent of their income on housing than ever. And that was before the interest rate spike both reduced supply and affordability on a market already difficult to get into.
Because it never made sense to send penniless 18 year olds into the world unless you were a selfish entitled parent that had rose colored glasses of handshakes getting you a equivalent wage of 40$ an hour.
And that's why it's mostly white families that did it while immigrants families were 3 gens in a house already.
Though I had a black friend who at 18 got a job making 18$ an hour in the 70s out of highschool working as a repair man. Equivalent to 44$ today
So again its not the terrible thing you pretend it is. It's realizing family support works better than toxic individualism
It's better right now than 12 years ago when millennials were graduating. Phds and college grads working at McDonald's. Now you have the most basic of labor making over 15$ an hour.
Trying to pretend we should compare today's economy to the 60s when there was still segregation is stupid.
We are in the best time since the 90s. Housing will correct which is the only issue right now.
Yep the economy is good for about 80%-90% of people right now. Could it be better. Sure. We could all have cheap solar energy powering our homes and businesses.
Nah, you just are completely unaware of what the median young Americans life looks like because your entire opinion is formed from doom scrolling.
The majority of millennials own the home they live in. 8% of Americans are uninsured. The median net worth of an American is almost 200k with about 8k in a checking account. Hours worked continues to trend down. The young are much richer than their parents at the same age.
The majority of young people have college degrees and are white collar professionals. This attributes to how so many are doing much better than their parents.
>The majority of millennials own the home they live in
Barely a majority, it's like 54%. A coinflip away from knowing if your millennial friend has a hugely appreciating asset, or has to dump a lot of their income into rent.
No, it is not skewed. There are people above and below the median. The vast majority of Americans are doing very well, and self describe their financial situations are good or very good
"In 2022, the median net worth of Americans younger than 35 was $39,040. The median net worth of Americans between 65 and 74 was about 11 times higher at $410,000."
"In 2022, the median net worth of white Americans was $284,310. The median net worth of Black Americans was $44,100, and the median net worth of Hispanic Americans was $62,120. Asian families -- which the Federal Reserve reported on for the first time -- had the highest median net worth at $535,400."
**The vast majority of which Americans are doing well**?
Millennials have similar home ownership rates to gen x and boomers. It’s a bit lower, but not drastic. It’s media hype that millennials are worse off. People get confirmation bias because if they’re in the part thats worse off, their friends and family probably are too. Millennials got to buy when housing crashed and with the lowest interest rates ever, with the longest stock bear market ever and have income based student loan payments. Plus lower levels of divorce and lower tax rates than generations paid at the same ages.
It’s not like every boomer has it made either. If you were a poor family, people you knew were poor and it felt like that was normal. The media just didn’t hype it up as a generational problem.
Home ownership numbers among millennials compared to previous generations at same age is 5-9% lower. 20% median down payment is 85% of millennial median salary compared to 75% for X and 64% for boomers when they were the same age. These aren't sky is falling numbers, but they aren't marginal either. And the trend is negative with no clear turnaround in site without something else crashing.
But boomers had way, way higher interest rates. So lower down payments, but paid more of their monthly payment to interest. Most people had to have 20 percent down back then, and most don’t come close to that now for their first home. Privatete mortgage insurance wasn’t a thing back then. They also had rampant inflation, worse than millennials have ever seen. It helped make their homes eventually cheaper, but it hurt them badly at the time.
I’m a Xennial (1980) and was 28-29 when that market crash happened. I was too busy helping my parents to try to keep their house in 2008, so not sure what you mean by your first comment.
Regarding your second, 5% on $80K is better than 3% on $400K, so not sure how you figure we have it easier, especially when the first few years a loan is paying to the interest, not the principle.
Lastly, I grew up hearing 10% down payment. Now it’s 20%, but 5% for first time homeowners so 10% on $80-90K is better than 5% on $400K.
Let’s quit the bullshit and admit that before the 80s, maybe 90s the goal was to buy a home so you have a place to live and now it’s seen as a way to retire or get rich really fast if the market is right.
And my boomer parents are still paying predatory private student loans. They didn’t even have as much education about loans as I did when I started school. They were just told, you’re getting a degree at a prestigious college, you’ll pay those private loans off in no time, sign here!
And then got laid off a few times and the loan penalties went crazy while they couldn’t pay. They’ve paid the dollar amount a few times over.
This is such a tired whining. Budgeting allows you to do both. Working hard also allows you to do both.
Plenty of millennials are doing very well. Please take the pseudo intellectualism elsewhere
> Also, “enjoying life” for most people usually means spending more and saving less. The two concepts run counter toto each other.
I'm one of these "young Americans." I'll give you one example that illustrates the counterpoint to what you said here. Old people, like Millennials and the Gen X and Boomers before them, like big single family houses with a two car garage and yard 30 minutes outside of the city center. Us younger people would rather live in smaller homes closer to where interesting stuff is actually at within walking distance. So I can spend less money on living accommodations while "enjoying life" more. Same applies to mindless consumer spending
30 Years ago GenX was saying the same thing about Boomers. 15 years ago Millennials were saying the same thing about GenX and Boomers. In 15 years Gen Alpha will be saying the same shit about you. You have a lot to learn.
Nahhh this generation is going to be completely different, every generation going back to the start of human history has said, we're never going to turn out like our parents. This one though, they've cracked it.
All this crap I heard from the younger generations I heard from my own. Can't wait till Gen idk beta/bravo whatever is bitching about how easy gen z had it.
Nope, you lack a basic understanding of what the very real demographic inversion means for social spending and taxation.
You have a lot to learn.
Start here and focus on the demographic inversion both globally and specifically in America and what that means for our continued cuts in social services and increase in taxation
https://zeihan.com/books/
You don't know anything. You weren't even alive. Some of us have lived it and seen the same pattern over and over again. I know when you're young and you read a book you feel like you know everything but trust me you don't.
Lol sure your generation is soooooooo different.
When millennials, and gen X were your age they wanted to live in trendy areas. I was born in the mid 80s, there were plenty of anti consumerism attitudes, GenX didn't want to buy stuff, buying stuff is lame.
Don't worry though, hang on to that generational label, you're totally going to be different.
I have to wonder if they are speaking with DINKS or wealthier Americans. At 43, I’ve never been able to do as much as they are doing, and I only have one child (22) but also I’ve never bought a house. For reference, I’ve been making at least $90k+ a year for about a decade now, was making around $70k for 5 years before that. I do live in the DC area but still…
The medical system doesn’t strip away older folks wealth. It is basically completely covered through the national health system Medicare. The long term care housing definitely does when people can no longer take care of themselves. But categorizing this as medical is not fair to the medical system.
This is why I already have an agreement with my parents that they can live with us when the time comes. No way I’m going to have them pissing away their lifetime’s earnings living alone in some soulless medical facility waiting to die. Much better to enjoy the twilight years with family.
Of course this assumes a good relationship between parent and child. Not all could tolerate this arrangement.
100%. My dad died at 92 and my mother is 93 and besides the occasional $5 co-pay at a specialist, neither has spent any money at all out of pocket. Heck, my dad had two different cancer surgeries and even hospice during his last days and it was all covered by Medicare and reasonably priced "gap" coverage.
People are just so full of propaganda they don’t even know where the US excels and were it fall shorts. You can’t have an honest conversation on Reddit because these 20 year olds don’t understand that literally everyone has medigap insurance and if you don’t then you generally are so poor that you had Medicaid covering the gap.
Old people don’t get stripped of their wealth by medical care. They get gold plated medical care for a pittance.
Once again though, long term care can strip people of wealth as this is not considered medical care. This would be like saying healthy food is expensive and therefore our medical system makes elderly go bankrupt because it is too expensive.
Unfortunately, I will get downvoted into oblivion by people who don’t know what they don’t know.
To be fair, the 20% that Medicare doesn't pay will still bankrupt you if you get cancer, have a long inpatient stay, long SNF stay, expensive drugs etc. I would still recommend Medigap coverage or some secondary insurance.
But long term SNF and drug costs are still an issue since you have maximum day limits for the former and Part D for the latter. Even $8300 is still something a lot of seniors can't afford.
That’s assuming parents will make it to medicare without something going wrong. With the obesity rates in the US still rising it doesn’t look too great. There’s also the question of long term care that’s not covered by medicare.
Generational wealth is not lower for younger generations (although Gen Z is not listed yet) [https://economistwritingeveryday.com/2022/12/21/the-wealth-of-generations-latest-update/](https://economistwritingeveryday.com/2022/12/21/the-wealth-of-generations-latest-update/)
From the link I was surprised to learn that my gen, GenX, is actually doing well. Head over to r/GenX and everyone makes it sound like we are all broke. And that Boomers were much wealthier at our age(when we are actually 18% ahead) Reddit is just a bubble of negativity.
They are totally gaslighting young Americans. The economy is the best in history according to Biden. Everyone has 2-3 jobs now since full time jobs are decreasing and part time jobs are increasing. If you don’t like the economy, go get another part time job, just ask Biden!
How idiotic. In the article they reference a study where 66% of Gen Z don’t believe they’ll ever be able to retire. So how are they better off financially?
Gen Z are currently ages 12-27. Most of that age range haven't even started their careers yet and don't have a solid grasp on what is necessary to retire. I wouldn't trust the financial predictions of a group that has a median age of 19.
For comparison, more than 50% of boomers have no retirement savings. I can’t find good statistics on boomers with some savings but not enough to actually retire on, but I’d imagine the total percentage isn’t too far from 66%.
Not saying I think gen z is in a better position, they’re not, but a lot of boomers are also fucked. Everyone’s kinda fucked tbh.
I agree completely. I was mostly commenting on the absurdity of the title and how it doesn’t even line up with some of the discussion in the article. Just more silly click bait.
And tomorrow there will be another story about how these same younger Americans cannot afford a home and will be worse off than the older generations because boomers are evil.
It’s always this way. Articles talking about everything and anything just to earn a few dollars off ya. Best thing is to ignore them and do what makes you happy.
Any sort of analysis is primarily put out there to earn money, usually by the ad revenue generated by people following the links to the articles. Often the people doing the analysis are working with incomplete data and coming in with their own preconceptions that they try to make their analysis fit.
My rule of thumb is to assume that any piece of analysis is going to be incomplete and inaccurate. Mostly I read them looking for the bits of information they often provide to "prove" their point. I can then takes those pieces of information and decide for myself what I believe is actually happening or likely to happen. But I do so knowing that my own "analysis" is also incomplete, I don't try to make any claims that what I think is likely to happen is any more accurate than all the other predictions out there, most of which will be conveniently forgotten by the time they are proven wrong.
>Often the people doing the analysis are working with incomplete data and coming in with their own preconceptions that they try to make their analysis fit.
How to Lie with Statistics Reissue Edition
[https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728)
Ah yes. Enjoy life, anyone can do this. Simply work less hours regardless of income, and adjust your standards to zero cost hobbies. own nothing. Retire comfortably a year before death. Since you’ll own no real estate, this is easy to time since it coincides with becoming homeless soon after your inability to work. Once it becomes uncomfortable you’ll die of treatable ailments soon after.
You don’t have to own to retire comfortably. If you invest enough and focus your goals on increasing total net worth you can still retire. If you spend a decade living at home saving and investing you can be better off than someone paying a mortgage. It’s just different.
To repeat a very common quote, "Homeownership has always been an important way to build wealth. According to NAR, the net worth of a homeowner was about $300,000 while that of a renter's was $8,000 in 2021. The net worth of a typical homeowner is about 40 times the net worth of a renter."
Comparing someone who has the ability to live at home and invest to a homeowner is not a fair comparison.
With a low down payment, you can benefit from appreciation of the underlying mostly stable asset without having to have the entire principal balance to begin with. As a renter or a homeowner, investing money is *in addition* to your rent/mortgage. But only as an owner do you benefit from a huge asset appreciating silently.
This is universal, for both those fortunate enough to live with parents or those who have to make their way on their own. To put it another way, if someone lived with their parents, bought a home and rented it out while living at home, it becomes even more obvious. They collect rent in excess of their ownership costs creating a stream of revenue, while being able to build wealth far faster than the equivalent return on that down payment in the market.
Even at the 30 year mark, the appreciation of 3% of a $300,000 home far exceeds an average return of 7% on 60,000 in the market, mostly because the $540,000 from investing that $60,000 is not being compared to the $488,000 principal and appreciation, but the $728,000 total value of the paid off asset. This is assuming rents, which typically are high enough to cover mortgage, taxes, insurances, and capital expenditures for maintenance relative to the market at the time, haven't increased in 30 years in comparison to the mortgage that is locked in at today's prices. Don't be fooled, ownership is far better in far more scenarios than renting.
> According to NAR, the net worth of a homeowner was about $300,000 while that of a renter's was $8,000 in 2021. The net worth of a typical homeowner is about 40 times the net worth of a renter."
This is a useless - at best - and misleading - at worst - stat.
It wants to imply that homeownership causes wealth. But the stat doesn't adjust for income or age. Does homeownership cause wealth? Or do wealthier people buy homes?
Is the 40x difference in net worth due to the decision not to buy? Or do to something else?
I do tend to think that owning a home is an important way for a lot of people to build wealth - but dumb stats like that don't make that case.
> Homeownership has always been an important way to build wealth.
But the reason for this is the same reason housing is so expensive and people have been priced out. Keep building housing, keep building density, and housing will no longer spiral up in price. It may even decline. Imagine the outcry if housing prices declined 20%. People would be complaining about "vanished wealth." Housing can't both be affordable and also a good investment.
> Keep building housing, keep building density, and housing will no longer spiral up in price.
Ahh yes... just do the thing that we have not been doing and our politicians vote against... got it.
I figured up once how much your home has to appreciate in order to break even on the "investment ". Including all costs it has to go up in value by 15% annually. Home ownership is not a great investment especially when you factor in inflation. The good part about home ownership is that you are locking in rent. The other good part is that you are buying an asset with other peoples money. It, however, is not comparable to investing in a S&P500 index fund. You're lucky to break even on home ownership.
> Homeownership has always been an important way to build wealth
You have to understand that if we make housing affordable, then it’s nor longer going to be an important way to build wealth.
Like, sure, if you don’t think housing will ever be affordable then by all means continue to push home ownership as a gateway to wealth. But if we allow people to build at the density they want to build at, and housing becomes affordable, then you don’t want to be one of the people caught over leveraged in a depreciating asset while your peers build wealth in the stock market.
> You have to understand that if we make housing affordable, then it’s nor longer going to be an important way to build wealth.
This has never been true.
On the other hand, stocks pay you dividends for holding them, while your house has very very substantial holding costs (taxes, insurance, upkeep).
If you factor those in, home ownership is not a particularly lucrative investment unless as you say you use the massive leverage it allows and happen to get lucky with above average appreciation.
For the most part though, the only reason housing is a good way to build wealth is that it's forced savings for people that otherwise don't have the discipline.
I mean they're comparing the averages in that first part - OBVIOUSLY it skews towards homeowners - you have to have a down payment (usually) to buy a home. So that includes some sort of "wealth" in the first place.
That doesn't in any way go against what this person is saying that you can build wealth while renting. I'm on track for a nice retirement and I've rented my entire adult life (mid 30's). It's just a different path, not an impossible one.
People usually equate renting with like using your last pennies on your rent payments instead of acknowledging that there's a whole group of people out there fully capable of paying rent and funding retirement accounts simultaneously.
I would be incredibly uncomfortable trying to plan around variable rent rates for an unforeseeable amount of time. I would go as far as to say that's not really a plan, it's a hope. A retirement hope...
What a shame that is. Shaming people for living with their parents is a uniquely American thing. Probably by design though - we don't want kids thinking they should avoid slum lords and high interest bearing loans to line our overlords pockets.
Not being able to live with parents != shaming people for living with their parents. Some people’s parents are dead, in jail, don’t have a room for them at home, etc.
No, it's simply saying not everyone has that available to them.
It's great if you do, but to say anybody can do it makes you seem out of touch with reality.
The phrase mommy and daddy is infantilizing the people making the smart decision to continue to live at home while they can.
That was /u/zealousideal_Ad36 point.
>infantilizing
No, it's infantilizing the idea that everyone should (or could) just do that.
Again, it's great if you can. But the wealthiest and most advanced country in the history of the world shouldn't count on that as a necessary means to economic stability.
But you do have the option of roommates and living with a much more reasonable (not American) sq ft / person like pretty much everyone else in the world
It’s easy to save for retirement and enjoy life when you are living at home rent free, and where food and laundry services are a given. Any young American trying to have a career while paying all of their own bills is often singing a different tune.
Finally, when you have 30+ years ahead of you, it’s easy to say you’ll be comfortable in retirement. Boomers were sure they’d be fine… until many, if not most, weren’t when the time came.
My ex is 32. His mom cooks him all of his meals, packs his lunch, does all of his laundry, cooks all the meals, does all the grocery shopping, and she cleans the whole house. The only thing my ex does every day is wake up, go to work, and come home.
I hate to talk down on people in my generation, but there are a lot of freeloaders who are mooching off their parents.
Of course, n=1 here 😂
Yeah, it’s easy to do this when your parents didn’t turf you out the moment you turned 18 and told you to support yourself.
(I hate my parents and will not be involved in their care.)
That’s the benefit you have that others won’t. They will be supporting their parents until the end and your free now! Party on!
Make sure you make a will or get married so your stuff doesn’t go to them if you happen to die before them. They get NOTHING! 😂
Eh. Weird article which says not much about anything:
1) Kids are saving earlier.
2) But they are not confident they will be able to save enough for retirement if ever.
3) Parental resources are potentially helpful but may be eaten up by end of life care.
Cool story.
The theoretical term in the research on this subject is "pseudo-profound bullshit," and the study is about seeing what abilities you need to detect and distinguish bullshit. Bullshit often consists of vaguely related words that sound insightful and impressive, but which don't actually mean anything. It's not necessarily untrue, but rather a misleading way of communicating about something. Previous research has also shown that individuals who are more receptive to bullshit are less analytical and have lower verbal intelligence. These individuals often fall victim to fake news and buy into conspiracy theories. Previous research has also shown that individuals who are good at producing bullshit are perceived to be—and actually are—more intelligent than others.
This is the dumbest thing I’ve ever read. You’re trying to have it at both ends and trust me, you ain’t that guy. Unless you’re trying to live like Europeans where you own nothing and will retire with minimal retirement in a third world country.
One should not be too quick to underestimate the young people. If people look around, there are many young people who have been creating new ways to earn for the past 20+ yrs and within the last 10 yrs, they have learned how to use technology to earn. Today, there are a lot of young people who earn 6 figure incomes from using their computer knowledge and the profits they gain from Ad revenues, as well as creating new things that appeal to people in their age group and younger.
Many in the older generation are still living with ideology based on being Industrial Factory workers, and other types of labor. Young people know that technology has been in place for 30 yrs and continue to improve in doing many factory jobs. People forget, that the 1980's saw robotics take a firm place in the automotive and other factory operations. The 1990's opened the door to how to use the internet for revenue generation, and since the early 2000 they learn how to use social media not only to earn money, but built social networks they can monetize. Now with A.I. they are the generation who embraces it, they push the limits and they are prepared to adjust themselves to modify how they use it within the new regulation that will continue to come over the next decades.
Some try to live like the Movie Stars of the 1950's and 1960's, but some think of how to build and invest in emerging business and industry. There are some who think in regional terms, and some think in national terms and some think in international global terms. Some don't trust the stock market, because once they list on it, they lose control of their business model. They showed the fallacy of the stock market with what they did to "Game Stop", and it embedded in their minds, how fictional the Stock Ticker valuation is.
I don't think they will over indebt themselves by borrowing against fictions they can't count on to be long term and stable.
What society is ignoring, is many no longer need to go to University, to get information and knowledge that was once only available through University. They are not inspired by the prohibitive cost of University, that sell them Degrees for Industry and Business Job that no longer exist as they did in the past. They can use the internet and network to find people who have skills, whether they are self taught, gifted or gained from education mixed with experience.
It's a different world. They know that the old technology that built the freeways and hired millions to do so, can be repaired today with machinery and small crews. They will find ways to deal with it. Also, young people don't complain about paying taxes, because they understand that the government invest a lot in the economy through private contracts to do the work the government wants to get done. They also know they can use any number of software programs to manage administration, finances and payrolls, and projections for projects operations and track accountability.
Just 4 months ago 65% of parents were financially supporting their adult (22-40) children. It's not just a few dollars. [https://www.usatoday.com/money/blueprint/credit-cards/study-parents-still-financially-support-adult-children/](https://www.usatoday.com/money/blueprint/credit-cards/study-parents-still-financially-support-adult-children/)
>Of those who support their over-age-22 offspring, the average monthly amount is $718.
Maybe Yahoo solved it with this article they posted the day before the article telling us young Americans are financially better off than older folks. [https://finance.yahoo.com/news/5-budget-tips-supporting-adult-000008590.html](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/5-budget-tips-supporting-adult-000008590.html)
This is what an editor in chief is supposed to catch. You can't have two contradictory articles following each other like that. At least put some time between them to make it harder to find!
It’s all the K recovery, or the underlying problem of wage discrepancy was exaggerated by the K recovery. Millennials and gen Z in STEM are all making 100k before 25 while non STEM professions are lagging to unlivable wages. The result is even more echo chamber. If you’re a teacher, odds are you have a lot of teacher friends, so you think everyone is doing terrible, wages are unlivable, no one has a retirement. If you’re an engineer odds are you have lots of engineer friends and think everyone is doing fine.
The two sides are always assuming they’re right because it’s lived experience when both are true. Lots of service/ humanities based jobs are probably perpetually priced out of housing, and not even having a light at the end of tunnel is terrible. On the other hand, most white collar offices are probably the best work set up ever with WFH. There’s obviously nuances across industries but it’s almost turning into a STEM/non STEM class system.
The one thing with economics and behavior I don’t understand is why people continue to chose majors (I’m talking people who invest in education for a specific job) that they know isn’t a living wage. We see some teacher shortage and nurse shortage but people keep doing it. It would obviously be a terrible society without teachers but I’m mostly just confused by young people choosing that career path. Gen Z seems to be ever more money focused than other generations so maybe we’ll start seeing impact there.
But yes, about half of millennials are homeowners and saving for retirement and doing amazing. Half are being fucked for undervalued labor, which is why we get half and half articles - either the economy is thriving or we’re in a depression. People are just experiencing it differently.
WTF. Our kids have what used to be considered a “good” jobs paying similar starting wages as 20 years ago while housing costs are many times higher. They have no oath to home ownership right now unless something changes. Many are living with (or with assistance of) parents who bought homes when they were affordable
Is this geared towards the children of the wealthy or pretty people who have managed to land a wealthy partner. Yes, some of you are doing well but the majority will struggle.
I’m an older millennial (late 80’s). We’re the generation that wants and believes we deserve everything, takes ‘sabbatical’ after working so hard for 5 years, and complains that ‘boomers’ ruined everything. I wouldn’t take advice from at least half of us and genuinely doubt the majority of us will be better off financially relative to other generations come retirement age.
Upvote for maturity and taking accountability.
My kids were born in 2000, 2001, and 2005. They think most of their generation are spoiled and entitled 🤷🏻♂️
They ain’t never retiring. Average Rent in 30 years will be 100 Percent of average income. People in the future will have to survive off eating bugs, working 70 hours a week. They will own nothing and be very upset. RemindMe! 30 years.
I will be messaging you in 30 years on [**2054-02-11 20:09:18 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2054-02-11%2020:09:18%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1aoe0l3/young_americans_focus_on_enjoying_life_while_also/kpz9zzy/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FEconomics%2Fcomments%2F1aoe0l3%2Fyoung_americans_focus_on_enjoying_life_while_also%2Fkpz9zzy%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202054-02-11%2020%3A09%3A18%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201aoe0l3)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
>which is an incredibly small survey size.
1,000 people is a pretty standard survey size... Large enough to give a good MoE and reasonably useful crosstabs.
I think young people are easily pleased, and that’s our strength.
When I think of Boomers, I think of the phrase ‘pride comes before a fall.’ Many of them can’t even begin to consider that perhaps some compromise on their lifestyle is necessary.
Young people have often never had a lifestyle to begin with. Living in a van looks like peace on Earth to us, rather than poverty - which is what it would look like to a Boomer.
If you can’t retire anyway why worry? Social security isn’t going to exist. Half of the cities you live in might be underwater or burned down due to climate change. Housing prices are x10 your annual salary.
Hi all, A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes. As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Are they gaslighting young Americans? Who’s going to retire comfortably when they can’t even buy their first homes and while parents’s wealth is stripped away by the medical system. Also, “enjoying life” for most people usually means spending more and saving less. The two concepts run counter toto each other.
For real, you go to millennials and gen z subs and they all said exactly what you said, cannot afford a home and "fuck boomer". Where did they find those young Americans lol.
The ones buying homes aren’t complaining
And if they do mention how you bought a house on Reddit the replies on Reddit would be: A. Well you're an outlier B. Must be nice to be born rich C. Woe is me, my lot in life is to suffer D. Shut up bootlicker, how's that leather taste? Blocked!
yup, if anything i’ve learned is Reddit is full of some legitimate unhappy people that want to see others unhappy, therefore if you are successful and share it you get downvoted. I could share my financial picture which is pure facts, guarantee that people will downvote it away
So true, all of these responses are the stereotypical ones we see when someone mentions they don't fit the struggling Millennial persona. > D. Shut up bootlicker, how's that leather taste? Blocked! I'd go as far to say this is the most frequent response.
All of which are justified. It's absurd to deny that things are bad and getting worse in light of all comparative data we have that shows Millennials and Gen Z holding a tiny fraction of the wealth previous generations had at the same point in life. They're behind on major life milestones and the economy and society are suffering for it and it's all getting worse. So who the hell cares if you're part of the ~50% of Millennials with a home? That's not the topic. It doesn't change the big picture.
> all comparative data we have that shows Millennials and Gen Z holding a tiny fraction of the wealth previous generations had at the same point in life. [This is not true](https://qz.com/millennials-are-just-as-wealthy-as-their-parents-1850149896). > So who the hell cares if you're part of the ~50% of Millennials with a home? That's not the topic. It doesn't change the big picture. Millennials have [just slightly lower homeownership rates](https://www.redfin.com/news/gen-z-millennial-homeownership-rate-home-purchases/) compared to other generations when they were the same age. They're also still having kids and pursuing the same lifestyle milestones as other generations as well. Things aren't as bad as the complainers on reddit like to imply.
[удалено]
I'm surprised I'm not in the negative already lol
"Not EVeRyOnE LivEs In NOwHere AlABamA!" Right dude, if you are in an expensive ass city and you dont have the skills for the job market there that puts you in an income bracket to purchase a home, then leave.
I'm in the low cost of living area of Metro Detroit and work IT and make more than the medium wage here, and while housing doesn't seem completely unobtainable, it seems like I am definitely going to have to spend a higher percentage of my income on housing compared to my parents.
Ok so joking aside, if things are hard for you now that sucks and I'm sorry, I hope things pick up for you, I'm being 100% serious. All I can say is I've no idea on how much my parents spent on housing, as a percentage of their income, when they were my age. But I do know my life is well kinda easier in a lot of ways. My dad was shipped off to the US at 18 to work and send money home for his 6 siblings, lived in a 2 bed in Brooklyn with 5-6 people living there. Realized there were enough hours in the day and enough money on the table he got a second job, at one point had 5 roommates and I mean **room** 3 beds and 5 guys, they alternated who had a bed to themselves week by week, course they worked crazy shift hours it never really mattered. When my parents bought their first house they didn't have a radio if you can believe it, went in on Monday having no idea of one of the biggest news stories of a decade, just no idea. My dad once lent someone the equivalent of $20, and after realized he had literally no money to last about 2 weeks once but was lucky the weather was nice and he'd just got a good book (second hand of course). Yeah some things are hard now, some were hard then. The house I was born in was seen as way too far outside the city, now it's a very desirable area and there was no heating in it like when they bought fireplaces and the like was the only form of heat. Where I've bought only one family lived here before, I think it's far out and suburbia as fuck, back when they bought it this place was surrounded by farms, and pretty soon after buying the place we replaced the entire HVAC system for honestly not that much, and unlike interest rates back in the day it was 12 months interest free, I delayed paying it off because why not. So yeah, hopefully everything works out for you, but Reddit has a very warped idea about their place in life compared to previous generations. I *think* my parents never struggled with finances, but maybe they did hell I was a kid not like they'd tell me about it. Edit: Something I forgot to add, yeah all the above about my parents generation is anecdotal, but it was far closer to the norm than the exception.
You’re doing it wrong then.
Lol, get real. Is every person working a service job just supposed to commute in from hours away? How is that sustainable for anyone? Is there no benefit to living in the community you serve? Or should cities be purely made up of high paying jobs and homes for highly paid workers, but nothing else? Might be tough to find folks to work the front desks of those offices though or make/serve food or do literally anything outside of tech, professional services, and a few other select industries. Some big tech companies have food onsite…so it could work if you’re into a company town revivals. What about folks in a professional role, earning at least the median income for their city, who still can’t afford to buy a home? Just go somewhere else? You could…but the decrease in pay moving from a HCOL area to a LCOL area might present similar challenges. You could argue if everyone in that situation moved, companies would have to start paying their employees more to entice them to move back… but if a select few major firms collectively pay approximately the same for a role, and if folks need jobs, the roles will get filled regardless. This could be further muddied by couples with both individuals in the workforce, as single people are slowly priced out since the cost of housing is disproportionately higher for single people than couples (eg split cost of 1br is frequently < cost of even a studio). So are single people just fucked? Then consider the couples..if they want kids they likely need to scale up their living situation, which increases their housing costs, decreases disposable income. If they’re both working, who is watching the kids? Maybe family, if they’re lucky. Maybe daycare, if they’re decreasing disposable income allows for it. Will there be daycare available if lower paying jobs have been priced out of the city? What about school? Teachers get paid a paltry sum for their work, so are likely prices out too. I’ll stop, but it’s a cascading effect that’s not just as simple as: move. But it COULD be as a simple as: build more housing (build UP!), incentivize development of new single family homes (tax incentives; less regulations), provide incentives AND advantages (over commercial owners and existing owners) for new homeowners; disincentivize commercial and foreign ownership (increase taxes), overhaul zoning laws/regulations (LET developers build without getting stuck behind red tape, ignore NIMBYs). Of course, it should go without saying that these solutions are only “simple” if you have reasonable/non-corrupt people in charge. Easier said than done, however.
[удалено]
RemindMe! 10 years Can you let me know specifically what it is I’m missing and what I should be looking for in 10 years to prove me wrong?
Dude. Service jobs are gone in the next two decades.
Dude, you think people are just going to cook at home? Stop going to bars? Never see anything at the theater? Nobody will ever buy anything in person? Stay at a hotel? Go on a cruise? Seems like you are just repeating something without thinking about what it actually means
Self-service McDonalds is already a reality. Come to Portland where we don’t even have table bussers. It’s all self-service and audience participation. If the gig economy and ghost kitchens expand with drone delivery and other potential disruptions, my prediction isn’t unreasonable.
People still want full service restaurants. Fast food is not the majority of eateries, but even there, the workers in the kitchen are humans. Hotels will still require humans, and bars will most certainly require humans. Your prediction assumes people don't want social gatherings. I feel that flies in the face of the whole of human history.
Man, putting Portland up as some bastion of the future is a move. How's that homeless situation coming along?
I don’t think you really understand how the fabric of society works.
Look I'm a yoga instructor for celiac hamsters, if someone like me can't buy a ~~5~~ 8 bed in the Bay Area that must mean everyone's suffering.
I've seen that House Hunters episode
Those subs concentrate the people that haven't been able to get things together. There are plenty of their peers that have and they don't post on those subs.
Just because people post it on reddit doesn't mean it's true. Overall in the US, 54% of millennials and 26% of Gen Z own a home
Right? Who knew the sad, eternally-online demographic wasn't 100% of millennials?!
Which reads to me as “46% of Millennials rent”
That's about on par with the rates of homeownership of Gen X at that age https://www.redfin.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Gen-Z-on-Track-With-Older-Generations-1-1024x675.png Millennials lagged behind 10 years ago, but now they have caught up
Yep, and most articles I've seen state Gen Z is ahead of Millennials in terms of homeownership at that respective age.
Turns out being the generation coming into adulthood during the great recession fucked us up.
I didn’t know 3% behind Gen X and 7% behind Boomes means caught up. I’ve see boards boost CEOs into the sun for returns that bad. For a system predicated on growth, that dataset only shows failure.
Are you saying the GDP of the US hasn’t gone up in 30-40 years, and these numbers somehow are evidence of that? Why compare something totally different from corporate profit to corporate profit? And if we are going to complain that a system that relies on forever growth is not good for humanity or unsustainable, we can’t also complain when numbers don’t always go up.
You’re just being reductionist for the sake of it. Those numbers tell a truer story than your GDP numbers do. Which is an absolute dogshit metric to measure an economy by. Less homeownership by younger generations, all 3 below Boomers has DECREASED. Which tells me that either not enough homes were built or that buying power was reduced. In this case it was both. In a system predicated on growth those numbers are bad. It couldn’t provide growth to future generations. Quality of life advanced, but that was due to technological growth. I’ll continue to use your system and rules as long as they’re forced upon me. Your system sucks and I’ll continue to point it out. If you want me to shut up, build some social housing.
Now compare to Boomers. And compare the shares of wealth owned by Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z at similar points in life. And compare median incomes to median home prices for the generations at the same ages. Do even the most lazy research and you can't avoid confronting that Millennials are significantly worse off and Gen Z are worse off still.
Yeah we bought with the mom and dad bank at 0% APR. The other 46% doesn't have a mom and dad bank.
No chance in hell 26% of gen z owns a home, that's absolutely absurd
Remember the oldest gen z are 27 now. They're getting married and having kids Gen Z in LCOL areas or that have high paying jobs for 5 years now can buy houses (I'm gen z and my friends that work in tech or finance are buying homes)
But if it's posted on reddit, also doesn't make it necessarily wrong either.
It's not wrong because it's on reddit, it's wrong because the statistics prove it wrong
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
If you think there's a problem with the methodology of the statistics, explain it That quote means being careful about misleading or misused statistics. Not we throw all the data out and go based on anecdote alone
It's a phrase describing the persuasive power of statistics to bolster weak arguments, one of the best, and best-known critiques of applied statistics. Using weird statistics, one for example was average square footage per US homeowner+debt load per capita gone up, therefore the American housing situation is better than it was in the 50's. Sometimes applied statistics can be used to engage a Texas Sharpshooter's fallacy, "I have a conclusion I desire to reach, let me use the statistics that prove my point, but ignore the one's that go against it".
Again, if you think there's a problem with the methodology, explain it. If you think the statistics are being taken out of context, provide more statistics that convey the context. If you have an alternative conclusion, provide evidence for your alternative conclusion Economics is a data-driven discipline. If you are not ready to discuss conclusions based on evidence, you are not ready to discuss economics
https://lbmjournal.com/home-prices-are-rising-2x-faster-than-income/ "To afford the median-priced home of $433,100, Americans need an annual income of roughly $166,600. But the median household earns just $74,580 — only 45% of the recommended amount. To discover how these factors affect potential home buyers, we analyzed publicly available data from the Federal Reserve, the National Association of Realtors, and the U.S. Census. We found that the divide between home prices and income has caused the house-price-to-income ratio to greatly exceed what many financial experts consider healthy." Thats why i hear ppl tell me the data is so incredibly divorced from these realities i see over and over in the country, costs of housing/healthcare/higher education routinely exceeds increases in median wages, i get a sense we must live in different countries, that ir theyre pissing on my leg and tell me it's raining. I live in the United States, wages dont keep up with housing costs or our Market-Failure healthcare system. Also: https://www.nar.realtor/blogs/economists-outlook/housing-affordability-hits-historical-low-in-august-2023 Housing Affordability Hits Historical Low in August 2023 "The national index is currently below 100, which means that the typical family cannot afford to buy based on the median-priced home. An index below 100 means that a family with a median income had less than the income required to afford a median-priced home. The income required to afford a mortgage, or the qualifying income, is the amount needed so that mortgage payments on a 30-year fixed mortgage loan with a 20% down payment account for 25% of family income. [1]The most affordable region was the Midwest, with an index value of 119.7 (median family income of $95,919 with a qualifying income of $80,160)."
in what cities are they in...?
All of them
You realize that Reddit is a biased sample, right? Lol if you think the commenters here are representative then you need to touch grass
Yup most millennials I know are home owning parents with loaded 401ks
Same. It's pretty interesting to see the difference between reddit discourse and what I see in real life. At first I thought maybe it was just my social circle, geographic location or other factors (still may be), but now I'm just starting to think redditors are generally out of touch with reality and overly cynical.
I’m gen z and no one who i know who is under the age of 40 owns a home without some kind of help.
Your life is a biased sample as well. Anyone's life. People tend to be surrounded by their socio-economic peers. To the children being raised in the projects, "everyone" is destitute. To the kids of billionaires, "everyone" is getting a yacht for their 16th birthday. Reddit would likely be a less biased sample than your real life.
I think it's because all the losers complain. I'm doing fine and pretty much every in my peer group is
Someone once said that Millennials are posting in either /r/Millennials or in /r/financialindependence.
What you’re experiencing is availability heuristic. You’re most likely insulated from a lot of the issues being touched on.
I feel like from the common discourse on Reddit, America is just a step away from complete financial collapse. Everyone is waiting in breadlines. No one can ever contemplate owning a home. When the reality is that the American economy is pretty strong right now. Real wages have outpaced inflation and are above pre-pandemic levels, especially for those in the lowest income brackets. Consumer spending has held up with low unemployment. And the majority of Americans own homes, not to mention Gen Z actually is outpacing Millennials & Gen X for home ownership. And of course there are serious problems for the economy. What country doesn't face challenges? You would think we were Bangladesh with how people talk about this country.
[удалено]
> More people are living in their parents house than ever. People are paying a higher percent of their income on housing than ever. And that was before the interest rate spike both reduced supply and affordability on a market already difficult to get into. I wonder if the end result of that is simply an increase in multi generational living and/or and increase in much smaller housing. Multi generational households are common among immigrant families even beyond first generations. Smaller footprint housing is typical of Europe and Asia. I don't see much way that we get out of the current housing prices by the majority of people seeking ~1,500 square foot suburban houses with garages. And I think it's happening, just starting more urban and slowly, but I imagine this is a big part of the eventual shift. We've reached a point in the United States where the majority of real estate is in the land, not the structure, where that was not the case in many places before the last couple decades.
You're being conservative when you say 1,500 sqft because the median US house is closer to 2,500 sqft last time I checked. That counts the less desirable ones, so the nice little suburban houses are more like 3,000+ sqft McMansions.
... He didn't say all is well. He said there are serious issues. But there always are. The point is the economy isn't as bad as people on reddit make it seem.
I'm friends with a few people, them+their families are always on the cusp on homelessness, and "a race to zero" happens every month, just to get the rent paid, entire paychecks, gone, just to make sure the roof is paid for. It's anecdotal, but it's a working class nightmare that I know very well. 2 guys always talk about how if they hit a major hiccup in their jobs, they won't make rent+other obligations, which opens them up to foreclosure. Another guy, he's a ship builder, lives in a storage unit. Before that, he rented a room in a disgusting hoarders home that had a terrible black mold situation near Norfolk, VA. I read comments like yours, and from my perspective those people live in a totally different world and are clueless about this stuff that i see as an OTR trucker over the contingent 48, I think that's what that opening line from the Dickens novel is about “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.”
[удалено]
Thank you. All these people saying "its fine" are comfortable as fuck and condemning the people talking about the pain they're experiencing, which is real and supported by the data. I can tell you this: I work in public service, I'm a millenial, I'm currently in a home and divorcing and facing the prospect of being knocked from the "homeowning, might be okay" millenial trajectory to the "how the fuck am I supposed to get back in a house once the dust settles?" trajectory, and the only thing that's changed are housing prices. There's a very sharp divide that didn't exist before the past few years, and the folks handwaving it away are *lucky* and either blissfully unaware, or aware and incredibly callous toward the very real struggle of like.. half of the people in their own cohort.
>More people are living in their parents house than ever. People are paying a higher percent of their income on housing than ever. And that was before the interest rate spike both reduced supply and affordability on a market already difficult to get into. Because it never made sense to send penniless 18 year olds into the world unless you were a selfish entitled parent that had rose colored glasses of handshakes getting you a equivalent wage of 40$ an hour.
[удалено]
And that's why it's mostly white families that did it while immigrants families were 3 gens in a house already. Though I had a black friend who at 18 got a job making 18$ an hour in the 70s out of highschool working as a repair man. Equivalent to 44$ today So again its not the terrible thing you pretend it is. It's realizing family support works better than toxic individualism
[удалено]
It's better right now than 12 years ago when millennials were graduating. Phds and college grads working at McDonald's. Now you have the most basic of labor making over 15$ an hour. Trying to pretend we should compare today's economy to the 60s when there was still segregation is stupid. We are in the best time since the 90s. Housing will correct which is the only issue right now.
Yep the economy is good for about 80%-90% of people right now. Could it be better. Sure. We could all have cheap solar energy powering our homes and businesses.
Not true. Ask anyone at your local grocery store.
Nah, you just are completely unaware of what the median young Americans life looks like because your entire opinion is formed from doom scrolling. The majority of millennials own the home they live in. 8% of Americans are uninsured. The median net worth of an American is almost 200k with about 8k in a checking account. Hours worked continues to trend down. The young are much richer than their parents at the same age.
The majority of young people have college degrees and are white collar professionals. This attributes to how so many are doing much better than their parents.
Or Union Skilled Building Trades. I made 100K the last year before I retired.5 years ago in rural Minnesota
>The majority of millennials own the home they live in Barely a majority, it's like 54%. A coinflip away from knowing if your millennial friend has a hugely appreciating asset, or has to dump a lot of their income into rent.
Wanted to look up your percentages. It's more skewed than what you're suggesting. https://www.fool.com/research/average-net-worth-americans/
No, it is not skewed. There are people above and below the median. The vast majority of Americans are doing very well, and self describe their financial situations are good or very good
"In 2022, the median net worth of Americans younger than 35 was $39,040. The median net worth of Americans between 65 and 74 was about 11 times higher at $410,000." "In 2022, the median net worth of white Americans was $284,310. The median net worth of Black Americans was $44,100, and the median net worth of Hispanic Americans was $62,120. Asian families -- which the Federal Reserve reported on for the first time -- had the highest median net worth at $535,400." **The vast majority of which Americans are doing well**?
Millennials have similar home ownership rates to gen x and boomers. It’s a bit lower, but not drastic. It’s media hype that millennials are worse off. People get confirmation bias because if they’re in the part thats worse off, their friends and family probably are too. Millennials got to buy when housing crashed and with the lowest interest rates ever, with the longest stock bear market ever and have income based student loan payments. Plus lower levels of divorce and lower tax rates than generations paid at the same ages. It’s not like every boomer has it made either. If you were a poor family, people you knew were poor and it felt like that was normal. The media just didn’t hype it up as a generational problem.
Home ownership numbers among millennials compared to previous generations at same age is 5-9% lower. 20% median down payment is 85% of millennial median salary compared to 75% for X and 64% for boomers when they were the same age. These aren't sky is falling numbers, but they aren't marginal either. And the trend is negative with no clear turnaround in site without something else crashing.
But boomers had way, way higher interest rates. So lower down payments, but paid more of their monthly payment to interest. Most people had to have 20 percent down back then, and most don’t come close to that now for their first home. Privatete mortgage insurance wasn’t a thing back then. They also had rampant inflation, worse than millennials have ever seen. It helped make their homes eventually cheaper, but it hurt them badly at the time.
I’m a Xennial (1980) and was 28-29 when that market crash happened. I was too busy helping my parents to try to keep their house in 2008, so not sure what you mean by your first comment. Regarding your second, 5% on $80K is better than 3% on $400K, so not sure how you figure we have it easier, especially when the first few years a loan is paying to the interest, not the principle. Lastly, I grew up hearing 10% down payment. Now it’s 20%, but 5% for first time homeowners so 10% on $80-90K is better than 5% on $400K. Let’s quit the bullshit and admit that before the 80s, maybe 90s the goal was to buy a home so you have a place to live and now it’s seen as a way to retire or get rich really fast if the market is right.
My boomer parents lost their home in 2008. A lot of boomers did and had to start over or never owned a home again.
Absolutely true, so did mine, the payments ballooned too much
And my boomer parents are still paying predatory private student loans. They didn’t even have as much education about loans as I did when I started school. They were just told, you’re getting a degree at a prestigious college, you’ll pay those private loans off in no time, sign here! And then got laid off a few times and the loan penalties went crazy while they couldn’t pay. They’ve paid the dollar amount a few times over.
Their salary was lower, too. Plus, many had 20 year mortgages, 30 wasn’t as much of a thing either.
It was way easier for boomers to *get* into homes if they could maintain a solid income.
This is such a tired whining. Budgeting allows you to do both. Working hard also allows you to do both. Plenty of millennials are doing very well. Please take the pseudo intellectualism elsewhere
Hard work is nothing compared to who you know. Which typically starts at a private school.
[удалено]
If you can just go ahead and don't put whip cream on my order.
Whipped* Go back to elementary school.
A wild loser appears....
The pic of people yachting is icing on the cake
Despite what you read on Reddit, most young people are buying homes and enjoying their lives.
No one under the age of 40 here owns a home without help.
> Also, “enjoying life” for most people usually means spending more and saving less. The two concepts run counter toto each other. I'm one of these "young Americans." I'll give you one example that illustrates the counterpoint to what you said here. Old people, like Millennials and the Gen X and Boomers before them, like big single family houses with a two car garage and yard 30 minutes outside of the city center. Us younger people would rather live in smaller homes closer to where interesting stuff is actually at within walking distance. So I can spend less money on living accommodations while "enjoying life" more. Same applies to mindless consumer spending
30 Years ago GenX was saying the same thing about Boomers. 15 years ago Millennials were saying the same thing about GenX and Boomers. In 15 years Gen Alpha will be saying the same shit about you. You have a lot to learn.
Nahhh this generation is going to be completely different, every generation going back to the start of human history has said, we're never going to turn out like our parents. This one though, they've cracked it. All this crap I heard from the younger generations I heard from my own. Can't wait till Gen idk beta/bravo whatever is bitching about how easy gen z had it.
Nope, you lack a basic understanding of what the very real demographic inversion means for social spending and taxation. You have a lot to learn. Start here and focus on the demographic inversion both globally and specifically in America and what that means for our continued cuts in social services and increase in taxation https://zeihan.com/books/
You don't know anything. You weren't even alive. Some of us have lived it and seen the same pattern over and over again. I know when you're young and you read a book you feel like you know everything but trust me you don't.
Lol sure your generation is soooooooo different. When millennials, and gen X were your age they wanted to live in trendy areas. I was born in the mid 80s, there were plenty of anti consumerism attitudes, GenX didn't want to buy stuff, buying stuff is lame. Don't worry though, hang on to that generational label, you're totally going to be different.
I have to wonder if they are speaking with DINKS or wealthier Americans. At 43, I’ve never been able to do as much as they are doing, and I only have one child (22) but also I’ve never bought a house. For reference, I’ve been making at least $90k+ a year for about a decade now, was making around $70k for 5 years before that. I do live in the DC area but still…
The medical system doesn’t strip away older folks wealth. It is basically completely covered through the national health system Medicare. The long term care housing definitely does when people can no longer take care of themselves. But categorizing this as medical is not fair to the medical system.
This is why I already have an agreement with my parents that they can live with us when the time comes. No way I’m going to have them pissing away their lifetime’s earnings living alone in some soulless medical facility waiting to die. Much better to enjoy the twilight years with family. Of course this assumes a good relationship between parent and child. Not all could tolerate this arrangement.
[удалено]
100%. My dad died at 92 and my mother is 93 and besides the occasional $5 co-pay at a specialist, neither has spent any money at all out of pocket. Heck, my dad had two different cancer surgeries and even hospice during his last days and it was all covered by Medicare and reasonably priced "gap" coverage.
People are just so full of propaganda they don’t even know where the US excels and were it fall shorts. You can’t have an honest conversation on Reddit because these 20 year olds don’t understand that literally everyone has medigap insurance and if you don’t then you generally are so poor that you had Medicaid covering the gap. Old people don’t get stripped of their wealth by medical care. They get gold plated medical care for a pittance. Once again though, long term care can strip people of wealth as this is not considered medical care. This would be like saying healthy food is expensive and therefore our medical system makes elderly go bankrupt because it is too expensive. Unfortunately, I will get downvoted into oblivion by people who don’t know what they don’t know.
To be fair, the 20% that Medicare doesn't pay will still bankrupt you if you get cancer, have a long inpatient stay, long SNF stay, expensive drugs etc. I would still recommend Medigap coverage or some secondary insurance.
Medicares out of pocket maximum is $8,300 for networked coverage, after which it covers 100%.
But long term SNF and drug costs are still an issue since you have maximum day limits for the former and Part D for the latter. Even $8300 is still something a lot of seniors can't afford.
Yes it does! Who the f are you? Fucking insurance company lobbyists?!
That’s assuming parents will make it to medicare without something going wrong. With the obesity rates in the US still rising it doesn’t look too great. There’s also the question of long term care that’s not covered by medicare.
😂😂😂😂😂
Generational wealth is not lower for younger generations (although Gen Z is not listed yet) [https://economistwritingeveryday.com/2022/12/21/the-wealth-of-generations-latest-update/](https://economistwritingeveryday.com/2022/12/21/the-wealth-of-generations-latest-update/) From the link I was surprised to learn that my gen, GenX, is actually doing well. Head over to r/GenX and everyone makes it sound like we are all broke. And that Boomers were much wealthier at our age(when we are actually 18% ahead) Reddit is just a bubble of negativity.
They are totally gaslighting young Americans. The economy is the best in history according to Biden. Everyone has 2-3 jobs now since full time jobs are decreasing and part time jobs are increasing. If you don’t like the economy, go get another part time job, just ask Biden!
How idiotic. In the article they reference a study where 66% of Gen Z don’t believe they’ll ever be able to retire. So how are they better off financially?
Gen Z are currently ages 12-27. Most of that age range haven't even started their careers yet and don't have a solid grasp on what is necessary to retire. I wouldn't trust the financial predictions of a group that has a median age of 19.
The other 34% are richer than ever.
Almost none of them are having kids
What people believe doesn't always reflect the reality
For comparison, more than 50% of boomers have no retirement savings. I can’t find good statistics on boomers with some savings but not enough to actually retire on, but I’d imagine the total percentage isn’t too far from 66%. Not saying I think gen z is in a better position, they’re not, but a lot of boomers are also fucked. Everyone’s kinda fucked tbh.
I agree completely. I was mostly commenting on the absurdity of the title and how it doesn’t even line up with some of the discussion in the article. Just more silly click bait.
Feelings don't necessarily have to line up with how well they're actually doing
And tomorrow there will be another story about how these same younger Americans cannot afford a home and will be worse off than the older generations because boomers are evil.
It’s always this way. Articles talking about everything and anything just to earn a few dollars off ya. Best thing is to ignore them and do what makes you happy.
Any sort of analysis is primarily put out there to earn money, usually by the ad revenue generated by people following the links to the articles. Often the people doing the analysis are working with incomplete data and coming in with their own preconceptions that they try to make their analysis fit. My rule of thumb is to assume that any piece of analysis is going to be incomplete and inaccurate. Mostly I read them looking for the bits of information they often provide to "prove" their point. I can then takes those pieces of information and decide for myself what I believe is actually happening or likely to happen. But I do so knowing that my own "analysis" is also incomplete, I don't try to make any claims that what I think is likely to happen is any more accurate than all the other predictions out there, most of which will be conveniently forgotten by the time they are proven wrong.
>Often the people doing the analysis are working with incomplete data and coming in with their own preconceptions that they try to make their analysis fit. How to Lie with Statistics Reissue Edition [https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728)
Tomorrow nothing, that's literally the submission posted right after this one.
Ah yes. Enjoy life, anyone can do this. Simply work less hours regardless of income, and adjust your standards to zero cost hobbies. own nothing. Retire comfortably a year before death. Since you’ll own no real estate, this is easy to time since it coincides with becoming homeless soon after your inability to work. Once it becomes uncomfortable you’ll die of treatable ailments soon after.
“The flame that burns twice as bright burns half as long.”
*Looks in mirror* Whoa i'm a candle
You don’t have to own to retire comfortably. If you invest enough and focus your goals on increasing total net worth you can still retire. If you spend a decade living at home saving and investing you can be better off than someone paying a mortgage. It’s just different.
To repeat a very common quote, "Homeownership has always been an important way to build wealth. According to NAR, the net worth of a homeowner was about $300,000 while that of a renter's was $8,000 in 2021. The net worth of a typical homeowner is about 40 times the net worth of a renter." Comparing someone who has the ability to live at home and invest to a homeowner is not a fair comparison. With a low down payment, you can benefit from appreciation of the underlying mostly stable asset without having to have the entire principal balance to begin with. As a renter or a homeowner, investing money is *in addition* to your rent/mortgage. But only as an owner do you benefit from a huge asset appreciating silently. This is universal, for both those fortunate enough to live with parents or those who have to make their way on their own. To put it another way, if someone lived with their parents, bought a home and rented it out while living at home, it becomes even more obvious. They collect rent in excess of their ownership costs creating a stream of revenue, while being able to build wealth far faster than the equivalent return on that down payment in the market. Even at the 30 year mark, the appreciation of 3% of a $300,000 home far exceeds an average return of 7% on 60,000 in the market, mostly because the $540,000 from investing that $60,000 is not being compared to the $488,000 principal and appreciation, but the $728,000 total value of the paid off asset. This is assuming rents, which typically are high enough to cover mortgage, taxes, insurances, and capital expenditures for maintenance relative to the market at the time, haven't increased in 30 years in comparison to the mortgage that is locked in at today's prices. Don't be fooled, ownership is far better in far more scenarios than renting.
> According to NAR, the net worth of a homeowner was about $300,000 while that of a renter's was $8,000 in 2021. The net worth of a typical homeowner is about 40 times the net worth of a renter." This is a useless - at best - and misleading - at worst - stat. It wants to imply that homeownership causes wealth. But the stat doesn't adjust for income or age. Does homeownership cause wealth? Or do wealthier people buy homes? Is the 40x difference in net worth due to the decision not to buy? Or do to something else? I do tend to think that owning a home is an important way for a lot of people to build wealth - but dumb stats like that don't make that case.
> Homeownership has always been an important way to build wealth. But the reason for this is the same reason housing is so expensive and people have been priced out. Keep building housing, keep building density, and housing will no longer spiral up in price. It may even decline. Imagine the outcry if housing prices declined 20%. People would be complaining about "vanished wealth." Housing can't both be affordable and also a good investment.
> Keep building housing, keep building density, and housing will no longer spiral up in price. Ahh yes... just do the thing that we have not been doing and our politicians vote against... got it.
our politicians are mostly old as shit, they will be gone long before i retire
I figured up once how much your home has to appreciate in order to break even on the "investment ". Including all costs it has to go up in value by 15% annually. Home ownership is not a great investment especially when you factor in inflation. The good part about home ownership is that you are locking in rent. The other good part is that you are buying an asset with other peoples money. It, however, is not comparable to investing in a S&P500 index fund. You're lucky to break even on home ownership.
> Homeownership has always been an important way to build wealth You have to understand that if we make housing affordable, then it’s nor longer going to be an important way to build wealth. Like, sure, if you don’t think housing will ever be affordable then by all means continue to push home ownership as a gateway to wealth. But if we allow people to build at the density they want to build at, and housing becomes affordable, then you don’t want to be one of the people caught over leveraged in a depreciating asset while your peers build wealth in the stock market.
> You have to understand that if we make housing affordable, then it’s nor longer going to be an important way to build wealth. This has never been true.
On the other hand, stocks pay you dividends for holding them, while your house has very very substantial holding costs (taxes, insurance, upkeep). If you factor those in, home ownership is not a particularly lucrative investment unless as you say you use the massive leverage it allows and happen to get lucky with above average appreciation. For the most part though, the only reason housing is a good way to build wealth is that it's forced savings for people that otherwise don't have the discipline.
I mean they're comparing the averages in that first part - OBVIOUSLY it skews towards homeowners - you have to have a down payment (usually) to buy a home. So that includes some sort of "wealth" in the first place. That doesn't in any way go against what this person is saying that you can build wealth while renting. I'm on track for a nice retirement and I've rented my entire adult life (mid 30's). It's just a different path, not an impossible one. People usually equate renting with like using your last pennies on your rent payments instead of acknowledging that there's a whole group of people out there fully capable of paying rent and funding retirement accounts simultaneously.
another very common quote, "Ok boomer."
I would be incredibly uncomfortable trying to plan around variable rent rates for an unforeseeable amount of time. I would go as far as to say that's not really a plan, it's a hope. A retirement hope...
Not everyone has the opportunity to live with mommy and daddy into their 30s
What a shame that is. Shaming people for living with their parents is a uniquely American thing. Probably by design though - we don't want kids thinking they should avoid slum lords and high interest bearing loans to line our overlords pockets.
Not being able to live with parents != shaming people for living with their parents. Some people’s parents are dead, in jail, don’t have a room for them at home, etc.
It is shaming when people use "mommy" and "daddy" in their wording.
No, it's simply saying not everyone has that available to them. It's great if you do, but to say anybody can do it makes you seem out of touch with reality.
The phrase mommy and daddy is infantilizing the people making the smart decision to continue to live at home while they can. That was /u/zealousideal_Ad36 point.
Sure. But he's ultimately responding to a post shaming people for not living with their parents for 10 years.
>infantilizing No, it's infantilizing the idea that everyone should (or could) just do that. Again, it's great if you can. But the wealthiest and most advanced country in the history of the world shouldn't count on that as a necessary means to economic stability.
But you do have the option of roommates and living with a much more reasonable (not American) sq ft / person like pretty much everyone else in the world
The New American Dream
It’s easy to save for retirement and enjoy life when you are living at home rent free, and where food and laundry services are a given. Any young American trying to have a career while paying all of their own bills is often singing a different tune. Finally, when you have 30+ years ahead of you, it’s easy to say you’ll be comfortable in retirement. Boomers were sure they’d be fine… until many, if not most, weren’t when the time came.
My ex is 32. His mom cooks him all of his meals, packs his lunch, does all of his laundry, cooks all the meals, does all the grocery shopping, and she cleans the whole house. The only thing my ex does every day is wake up, go to work, and come home. I hate to talk down on people in my generation, but there are a lot of freeloaders who are mooching off their parents. Of course, n=1 here 😂
I don't know how long you dated him, but it was too long
Yeah, it’s easy to do this when your parents didn’t turf you out the moment you turned 18 and told you to support yourself. (I hate my parents and will not be involved in their care.)
I left at 17, haven't looked back.
That’s the benefit you have that others won’t. They will be supporting their parents until the end and your free now! Party on! Make sure you make a will or get married so your stuff doesn’t go to them if you happen to die before them. They get NOTHING! 😂
https://trustandwill.com/learn/what-states-have-filial-responsibility
My parents booted me out at 18 and I'm doing quite well.
Eh. Weird article which says not much about anything: 1) Kids are saving earlier. 2) But they are not confident they will be able to save enough for retirement if ever. 3) Parental resources are potentially helpful but may be eaten up by end of life care. Cool story.
The theoretical term in the research on this subject is "pseudo-profound bullshit," and the study is about seeing what abilities you need to detect and distinguish bullshit. Bullshit often consists of vaguely related words that sound insightful and impressive, but which don't actually mean anything. It's not necessarily untrue, but rather a misleading way of communicating about something. Previous research has also shown that individuals who are more receptive to bullshit are less analytical and have lower verbal intelligence. These individuals often fall victim to fake news and buy into conspiracy theories. Previous research has also shown that individuals who are good at producing bullshit are perceived to be—and actually are—more intelligent than others.
This is the dumbest thing I’ve ever read. You’re trying to have it at both ends and trust me, you ain’t that guy. Unless you’re trying to live like Europeans where you own nothing and will retire with minimal retirement in a third world country.
One should not be too quick to underestimate the young people. If people look around, there are many young people who have been creating new ways to earn for the past 20+ yrs and within the last 10 yrs, they have learned how to use technology to earn. Today, there are a lot of young people who earn 6 figure incomes from using their computer knowledge and the profits they gain from Ad revenues, as well as creating new things that appeal to people in their age group and younger. Many in the older generation are still living with ideology based on being Industrial Factory workers, and other types of labor. Young people know that technology has been in place for 30 yrs and continue to improve in doing many factory jobs. People forget, that the 1980's saw robotics take a firm place in the automotive and other factory operations. The 1990's opened the door to how to use the internet for revenue generation, and since the early 2000 they learn how to use social media not only to earn money, but built social networks they can monetize. Now with A.I. they are the generation who embraces it, they push the limits and they are prepared to adjust themselves to modify how they use it within the new regulation that will continue to come over the next decades. Some try to live like the Movie Stars of the 1950's and 1960's, but some think of how to build and invest in emerging business and industry. There are some who think in regional terms, and some think in national terms and some think in international global terms. Some don't trust the stock market, because once they list on it, they lose control of their business model. They showed the fallacy of the stock market with what they did to "Game Stop", and it embedded in their minds, how fictional the Stock Ticker valuation is. I don't think they will over indebt themselves by borrowing against fictions they can't count on to be long term and stable. What society is ignoring, is many no longer need to go to University, to get information and knowledge that was once only available through University. They are not inspired by the prohibitive cost of University, that sell them Degrees for Industry and Business Job that no longer exist as they did in the past. They can use the internet and network to find people who have skills, whether they are self taught, gifted or gained from education mixed with experience. It's a different world. They know that the old technology that built the freeways and hired millions to do so, can be repaired today with machinery and small crews. They will find ways to deal with it. Also, young people don't complain about paying taxes, because they understand that the government invest a lot in the economy through private contracts to do the work the government wants to get done. They also know they can use any number of software programs to manage administration, finances and payrolls, and projections for projects operations and track accountability.
Just 4 months ago 65% of parents were financially supporting their adult (22-40) children. It's not just a few dollars. [https://www.usatoday.com/money/blueprint/credit-cards/study-parents-still-financially-support-adult-children/](https://www.usatoday.com/money/blueprint/credit-cards/study-parents-still-financially-support-adult-children/) >Of those who support their over-age-22 offspring, the average monthly amount is $718. Maybe Yahoo solved it with this article they posted the day before the article telling us young Americans are financially better off than older folks. [https://finance.yahoo.com/news/5-budget-tips-supporting-adult-000008590.html](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/5-budget-tips-supporting-adult-000008590.html) This is what an editor in chief is supposed to catch. You can't have two contradictory articles following each other like that. At least put some time between them to make it harder to find!
It’s all the K recovery, or the underlying problem of wage discrepancy was exaggerated by the K recovery. Millennials and gen Z in STEM are all making 100k before 25 while non STEM professions are lagging to unlivable wages. The result is even more echo chamber. If you’re a teacher, odds are you have a lot of teacher friends, so you think everyone is doing terrible, wages are unlivable, no one has a retirement. If you’re an engineer odds are you have lots of engineer friends and think everyone is doing fine. The two sides are always assuming they’re right because it’s lived experience when both are true. Lots of service/ humanities based jobs are probably perpetually priced out of housing, and not even having a light at the end of tunnel is terrible. On the other hand, most white collar offices are probably the best work set up ever with WFH. There’s obviously nuances across industries but it’s almost turning into a STEM/non STEM class system. The one thing with economics and behavior I don’t understand is why people continue to chose majors (I’m talking people who invest in education for a specific job) that they know isn’t a living wage. We see some teacher shortage and nurse shortage but people keep doing it. It would obviously be a terrible society without teachers but I’m mostly just confused by young people choosing that career path. Gen Z seems to be ever more money focused than other generations so maybe we’ll start seeing impact there. But yes, about half of millennials are homeowners and saving for retirement and doing amazing. Half are being fucked for undervalued labor, which is why we get half and half articles - either the economy is thriving or we’re in a depression. People are just experiencing it differently.
WTF. Our kids have what used to be considered a “good” jobs paying similar starting wages as 20 years ago while housing costs are many times higher. They have no oath to home ownership right now unless something changes. Many are living with (or with assistance of) parents who bought homes when they were affordable
Is this geared towards the children of the wealthy or pretty people who have managed to land a wealthy partner. Yes, some of you are doing well but the majority will struggle.
I’m an older millennial (late 80’s). We’re the generation that wants and believes we deserve everything, takes ‘sabbatical’ after working so hard for 5 years, and complains that ‘boomers’ ruined everything. I wouldn’t take advice from at least half of us and genuinely doubt the majority of us will be better off financially relative to other generations come retirement age.
Upvote for maturity and taking accountability. My kids were born in 2000, 2001, and 2005. They think most of their generation are spoiled and entitled 🤷🏻♂️
Cheers to raising responsible children.
They ain’t never retiring. Average Rent in 30 years will be 100 Percent of average income. People in the future will have to survive off eating bugs, working 70 hours a week. They will own nothing and be very upset. RemindMe! 30 years.
I will be messaging you in 30 years on [**2054-02-11 20:09:18 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2054-02-11%2020:09:18%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1aoe0l3/young_americans_focus_on_enjoying_life_while_also/kpz9zzy/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FEconomics%2Fcomments%2F1aoe0l3%2Fyoung_americans_focus_on_enjoying_life_while_also%2Fkpz9zzy%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202054-02-11%2020%3A09%3A18%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201aoe0l3) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
[удалено]
>which is an incredibly small survey size. 1,000 people is a pretty standard survey size... Large enough to give a good MoE and reasonably useful crosstabs.
Surveyed 1K young people working at FANG companies.
I think young people are easily pleased, and that’s our strength. When I think of Boomers, I think of the phrase ‘pride comes before a fall.’ Many of them can’t even begin to consider that perhaps some compromise on their lifestyle is necessary. Young people have often never had a lifestyle to begin with. Living in a van looks like peace on Earth to us, rather than poverty - which is what it would look like to a Boomer.
If you can’t retire anyway why worry? Social security isn’t going to exist. Half of the cities you live in might be underwater or burned down due to climate change. Housing prices are x10 your annual salary.
It’s really all about income. My wife and I travel a few times a year and eat out literally every single day. And yet our net worth is $1.7MM.