PDA

View Full Version : Going on 30, Living With Parents



Pages : [1] 2

Melonie
02-06-2014, 02:05 PM
for what it's worth ... from


(snip)"According to a Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data, 36 percent of the country’s 18- to 31-year-olds were living in their parents' homes in 2012 -- the highest proportion in at least 40 years. That number is inflated because college students residing in dorms were counted as living at home (in addition to those actually living at home while going to school). Still, 16 percent of 25- to 31-year-olds were crashing with mom and pop -- up from about 14 percent in 2007 and 10 percent in 1968.1 In a Pew survey conducted in December 2011, 34 percent of adults aged 25 to 29 said that due to economic conditions they’d moved back home in recent years after having lived on their own.

Pew’s analysis of the 2012 data cites lower levels of employment, an increase in college enrollment and a decrease in young people getting married as factors in the increase of millennials living at home. Of course, tying the knot might not be the best option when you don’t have a job. Which brings us to the big unknown both for millennials and those trying to sell products and services to us: Has adulthood been delayed or wholly upended?

We're not getting married as young as those in previous generations did. We're not buying as many houses or cars. But maybe we will do these things in time -- just in more time than our parents.

Or maybe we won't. Perhaps a chunk of millennials will never catch up, our lives channeled by the deep grooves of an economic calamity forced upon us by the timing of our births and graduations.

It could be a long struggle. "Lisa Kahn, a labor economist at the Yale School of Management, studied the earnings of men who left college and joined the work force during the deep recession of the early 1980s,” the New York Times’s Annie Lowrey wrote last March. “Unsurprisingly, she found that the higher the unemployment rate upon graduation, the less graduates earned right out of school. But those workers never really caught up. 'The effects were still present 15 or 20 years later,' she said. 'They never made that money back.'" Citing additional research, Lowrey noted, “For the first time in modern memory, a whole generation might not prove wealthier than the one that preceded it."

In April, Sarah Ayres of the liberal Center for American Progress attached numbers to the phenomenon: “We estimate that the nearly 1 million young Americans who experienced long-term unemployment during the worst of the recession will lose more than $20 billion in earnings over the next 10 years.” But as Weissmann and Derek Thompson noted in the Atlantic in August 2012, while the recession is partly to blame for a decrease in home and car purchases, “It’s highly possible that a perfect storm of economic and demographic factors -- from high gas prices, to re-urbanization, to stagnating wages, to new technologies enabling a different kind of consumption -- has fundamentally changed the game for Millennials.”

A lack of wealth -- combined with cultural change and technological advancements -- is bound to affect life-courses and may well narrow, or re-route, the options of many. Data offers hints about where millennials may end up, but only time -- and who knows how much of it? -- will tell. Until then, it might not be a bad idea to stay in mom and dad’s good graces."(snip)

Sabihah
02-06-2014, 04:11 PM
I know so many people my age who did everything they were told would be best for them - went to college, majored in something they thought would get them their "dream" jobs, got good grades, graduated - and then worked in restaurants and coffee shops. They're trying to pay off their loans with a minimum wage job. It's no wonder they go back home.

I've got two brothers currently majoring in low-demand fields. I really wish our parents had encouraged us to look at post-graduation employment stats for various degree programs, but we were actually discouraged from basing our career choices on earning potential rather than "doing what we love." You know what I love? Being able to afford food. :P

Selina M
02-06-2014, 05:21 PM
I am curious if any of this is "family culture" related... By that I mean, I am the only kid in my family that moved out early; I had an apartment at 19 and was working and paying for school with loans in my name. But my numerous cousins all lived with their parents pretty much until they got married (one set of which even stayed home, my uncle just built a whole new suite onto his house for them)... the only un-married ones are 25 and 19 and are still in their parents house. Both could afford to move out, but their upbringing was very family oriented, seeing grandparents/cousins/aunts daily, and their parents also had the "why waste money" viewpoint and encouraged them to stay. Sooo, I have wondered if this new trend of living at home is partially because of parents *wanting* the kids to stay home, whether for familial reasons or if they are trying to shelter them from spending any more money than necessary in the economy... seeing as they all thought I was completely loony for "wasting" money on an apartment.

But yeah, I am surrounded by this with my friends. I have several who are 21-23, with babies, so they stay home because they can't afford to leave (and grandparents are built-in babysitters).
Even more, there is an odd pattern of those friends who went to college that ended up either moving back in with their parents, or else getting married young and leaning on a spouse to support them while they go to school... while the ones who have worked menial jobs since high school are living on their own without help. I find that odd, especially since they haven't even graduated and aren't being hit with the loans yet. I'm almost wondering if the non-college-going ones have a better grasp on independence...

hellkitty
02-07-2014, 01:35 AM
I feel like part of the problem with my generation is too much idealism (doing "what you love for a living"). There are plenty of jobs out there that need to be filled, but people are so fixated on the idea of a glamorous/fun/exciting job that they miss out on opportunities in front of them.

I personally never dreamed of stripping growing up, but if it helps me pay for my bills and whatnot, then so be it.

GlamourRouge
02-07-2014, 03:01 AM
This is the result of people not thinking outside the box. I'm not saying it is everyone's fault (sometimes it is just life circumstance). But at the same time, with enough effort in the right areas (which requires thinking outside the box), I would assume things would generally pay off? If people spent time interning rather than getting more and more formal education, wouldn't that be more beneficial?




I know so many people my age who did everything they were told would be best for them - went to college, majored in something they thought would get them their "dream" jobs, got good grades, graduated - and then worked in restaurants and coffee shops. They're trying to pay off their loans with a minimum wage job. It's no wonder they go back home.

IMO, that was NOT what is best for them. That is what the media tells them is best for them, because the media is a tool of the government to get us to to do what they want us to do. Education is a business. Their goal is to make huge profits. Even public schools.

I see so many people being like "In this economy, its NECESSARY to get a degree or I won't get a job!" which makes no sense because its just not true. I mean, maybe if you major in a STEM major, but isn't that like 2% of all majors? Wouldn't people be better off networking into their chosen career path than getting something that everyone already has? Everyone I know who has a good job (who is in their 20s/early 30s) got it because they knew someone who worked there.



I'm almost wondering if the non-college-going ones have a better grasp on independence...

Bingo! They are thinking outside the box! Not listening to authority or media. Those are the ones who are always ahead IMO.

And I also think, if you weren't born into a wealthy family and you get yourself in debt, you're kind of fucked. I think a lot of "poor" families who stick together (where one family member cooks, one babysits, etc) have it a lot better than young working or middle class people on their own. There are only so many hours in the day to accomplish your obligations.



There are plenty of jobs out there that need to be filled, but people are so fixated on the idea of a glamorous/fun/exciting job that they miss out on opportunities in front of them.

I'm not sure about that. I know a lot of people scrambling to take any job possible no matter what it is. Aren't people with graduate degrees working minimum wage jobs? Isn't the unemployment rate at one of the highest levels?

Another issue is that a lot of jobs that need to be filled, pay UNDER minimum wage (and under the table) and are filled by illegal immigrants. So that is not really possible for someone who did not move to U.S. desperate for any job. Immigrants live with family members, and thus have no expenses. They have a system where some of them work, one of them cooks meals, another babysits... so they don't really have many obligations other than working if they work? Many illegal immigrants fill up 2 or 3 bedroom houses with like 10, 15 immigrants (family members), so they don't really have bills. I say this because I grew up in an area where that occurred so I saw it firsthand.

GlamourRouge
02-07-2014, 03:25 AM
I really wish our parents had encouraged us to look at post-graduation employment stats for various degree programs, but we were actually discouraged from basing our career choices on earning potential rather than "doing what we love." You know what I love? Being able to afford food. :P

But I mean, what really pays well? Even engineers start at like 50-60k, and those jobs are located in expensive areas. 60k per year salary is ~$810/week after taxes. Is that livable in say... San Francisco? Not really. The things that pay the best are always the shadiest, or the most societally taboo. And they are not as they appear to be most of the time.

This is the REAL world:

- It takes money to make money. Like starting a business. That is where the real money is. Many people's family members secretly give them a huge sum of money to start a successful business. And you would not know that unless they told you. But why would they ever tell you this??? If you knew they had money, you would be trying to leech off them. So they pretend to be poor or middle class to scare you away, OR:

- Living in LA, I have noticed something really... disturbing? Many wealthy people do the following: They own a brick-and-mortar business so they look legit. It looks like their brick-and-mortar business is really successful because the owner has nice things. Only the owner would know if the brick-and-mortar business is successful or not, despite what it APPEARS to be. However, if you get close to the owner, you may find out things that make you go o_O O_O. There are a lot of people selling drugs, selling sex, doing insurance scams (especially if they own a healthcare business!), and all sorts of shady shit and they are just funneling the money through their brick-and-mortar business which is an LLC. If its an LLC, they cannot be sued so their assets are protected. The brick-and-mortar business is barely making a profit or breaking even, but because they claim the shady money as profit for it, it appears to be doing well. They don't give a shit if it does well or fails though- they NEED it to funnel cash through.

I can sniff them out now, its scary. They are usually the ones that ask if I am a sexworker without me giving any hints at all because shady knows shady. They are even easier to spot if you have no idea what their job is, because if they were an entrepreneur, they would be promoting their business left and right. And that is why the smart ones or the ones bringing in MAJOR cash from shady shit end up opening some random brick-and-mortar business. Its kind of genius actually.

Melonie
02-07-2014, 04:33 AM
I know a lot of people scrambling to take any job possible no matter what it is. Aren't people with graduate degrees working minimum wage jobs? Isn't the unemployment rate at one of the highest levels?

Technically speaking, the 'labor participation rate' ... meaning the percentage of total working age population that actually have a job ... is at record lows. The 'unemployment rate' ... meaning the percentage of population who WANTS a job but is unable to find one ... has declined considerably. The implication of course is that some number of people are now 'comfortable' with the idea of collecting welfare benefits, unemployment benefits, food stamp benefits, disability benefits, housing assistance, utility assistance etc. as opposed to taking a relatively low paying job.



Another issue is that a lot of jobs that need to be filled, pay UNDER minimum wage (and under the table) and are filled by illegal immigrants

Economically speaking this is perfectly understandable, since Americans who are eligible for social welfare benefits have little financial 'incentive' to take minimum wage jobs which could reduce those benefits ... whereas ( with certain exceptions ) illegal immigrants are NOT eligible for social welfare benefits thus taking such jobs means the difference between eating or not ! And once illegal immigrants 'officially' replace domestic labor in certain business models, it's a small additional step for the illegal immigrant employer to also violate minimum wage laws, worker safety laws etc.

However the recent trend in the present low interest rate environment is for employers to invest in automation etc. which permanently eliminates the need for minimum wage workers, thus legally side-stepping minimum wage laws, worker safety laws, mandatory benefit laws etc. The latest release along these lines is Robot Security Guards for museums, shopping malls etc. ... where a single human 'operator' can direct a dozen patrolling robots.


However, my original thinking when posting this thread was driven by the snippet ""Which brings us to the big unknown both for millennials and those trying to sell products and services to us: Has adulthood been delayed or wholly upended?"" . Dancers and camgirls are obviously attempting to sell goods and services ... and milennials comprise a growing share of our customer demographic with each passing day. As the article also points out, millennials now facing poor job opportunities and depressed starting pay rates are not likely to ever 'catch up' on reduced earnings. In financial terms, this not only means fewer dollars being available for millennials to spend on 'non-essential' items like lap dances or paid webcam right now, but also fewer dollars over the course of the coming decades.

Also, as SelinaM alludes to, millennials who are unable to 'cut the cord' with family and live independently most likely face specific additional 'pressures' against spending money in strip clubs or paid webcam ... 'pressures' which are 'lack of opportunity' related as much as related to constrained finances.



However, if you get close to the owner, you may find out things that make you go o_O O_O. There are a lot of people selling drugs, selling sex, ***, and all sorts of shady shit and they are just funneling the money through their brick-and-mortar business which is an LLC. If its an LLC, they cannot be sued so their assets are protected. The brick-and-mortar business is barely making a profit or breaking even, but because they claim the shady money as profit for it, it appears to be doing well. They don't give a shit if it does well or fails though- they NEED it to funnel cash through.

Ahem, it makes you wonder how many brick and mortar strip clubs are actually profitable 'on their own' ???

DonaDiabla
02-07-2014, 04:50 AM
Hmmmm... I moved out at the age of 18 and loved living by myself plus paying my own bills. However, I had to move back home to take care of my sick mother at the ages of 19 and 27 due to her several illnesses. I thought it was distasteful for me to live my mother after the age of 18...so I never got why anyone would want to live with their parents while being an adult. I would try to get out as soon as possible from my mother's house because I love being independent. To be honest, living alone made me feel much better about being a woman because I can live my life own my terms. I do not understand people in my age group gleefully moving back home or being proud about living with their parents. Unless, someone is taking care of their sick parents, that is apart of their culture, or saving up money to get their own place.....there is no reason to live with their parents. Even though, I moved back home to take of my sick mother twice....I felt it was an shameful act for me to go home. But I was one who thought I should buy my own house at 30 :) Hell, I am hard on myself for not making 100,000 every year....but that is just me.

hellkitty
02-07-2014, 11:33 AM
I'm not sure about that. I know a lot of people scrambling to take any job possible no matter what it is. Aren't people with graduate degrees working minimum wage jobs? Isn't the unemployment rate at one of the highest levels?

What I meant to say is that people are going to school to get degrees for jobs that they'll "love", not considering all of the risks and outcomes, instead of going for occupations that need more workers (STEM, nursing/hospitals, etc). Thus, once they graduate, they realize that their dream jobs are taken and have to settle for the bottom of the barrel because they don't qualify for much else.

Intrigued_Dancer
02-07-2014, 11:39 AM
The education system in the USA is the biggest cartel on earth! You basically go to college to then be stuck with a whole bunch of debt which is going to take you years to pay back. Therefore we are all slaves to the system. WELCOME TO THE USA, THE LAND OF OPPORTUNITIES GUYS!!! ::::sarcasm::

Tarasaurusrex
02-07-2014, 01:02 PM
However, my original thinking when posting this thread was driven by the snippet ""Which brings us to the big unknown both for millennials and those trying to sell products and services to us: Has adulthood been delayed or wholly upended?"" . Dancers and camgirls are obviously attempting to sell goods and services ... and milennials comprise a growing share of our customer demographic with each passing day. As the article also points out, millennials now facing poor job opportunities and depressed starting pay rates are not likely to ever 'catch up' on reduced earnings. In financial terms, this not only means fewer dollars being available for millennials to spend on 'non-essential' items like lap dances or paid webcam right now, but also fewer dollars over the course of the coming decades.

Also, as SelinaM alludes to, millennials who are unable to 'cut the cord' with family and live independently most likely face specific additional 'pressures' against spending money in strip clubs or paid webcam ... 'pressures' which are 'lack of opportunity' related as much as related to constrained finances.

From various related articles and just in daily observations regarding those in my age bracket - Millenials - I have observed spend money "frivolously". Instead of saving up for investing in a mortgage or new car we want to have the latest gadgets and bargain styles. It seems as if our generation spends beyond our limit, but not on materials that will be around forever, on experiences and life-enriching items. These acute monetary investments may not stand the test of time, but they are of the "I want to be happy now" mind-frame where in such an unstable economy one asks "why save up for a house when you want to go to Spain? Or why buy a new car when you can recycle through buying used ones?" Also the cost of car insurance, homeowners insurance, registering a vehicle, financing, etc. has perhaps made it more of a chore than a treat to purchase these once sought-after items. Additionally it seems as if even if you get 50% of the total cost, actually owning it is so far in the future, it's not even foreseeable.

By 2020 Millenials will comprise 30% of all retail sales and 50% of all purchases related to travel: airlines, hotels, and leisure spending. Partially to blame is the "instant-gratification" mindset, where the latest and greatest comes out too soon to save up for it, but also as a generation Millenials are valuing experiences over material items. Perhaps because many of Millenials' guardians were baby boomers who focused on material acquisitions and through their childhood and young adulthood observations of that lifestyle Millenials have seen that items don't equate to happiness, so we are trying something different.

Since Millenials spend on acute purchases I actually think that entertainment won't be knocked to the wayside; in fact as the year 2020 approaches (when earnings potentials for Millenials allegedly peaks) there may be a large resurgence of enjoyment spending; what previous generations may think of as "wasteful spending", but each generation defines themselves, usually trying to rectify what are perceived mistakes they think the previous generation made. Industries will suffer, but those directed towards experiencing adventure and entertainment won't be the first to sink. This follows the trend that Millenials have a tendency to be almost commitment-phobic, in relationships and purchases.

LAChloe
02-07-2014, 10:19 PM
I wish I still lived with my parents. It is rough out here.

GlamourRouge
02-08-2014, 12:49 AM
Instead of saving up for investing in a mortgage or new car we want to have the latest gadgets and bargain styles. It seems as if our generation spends beyond our limit, but not on materials that will be around forever, on experiences and life-enriching items.

Or why buy a new car when you can recycle through buying used ones?"

Also the cost of car insurance, homeowners insurance, registering a vehicle, financing, etc. has perhaps made it more of a chore than a treat to purchase these once sought-after items.

I think this is what the media tells us we are doing, but not what we actually are doing.

We HAVE to own devices like smart phones. They aren't expensive though. Like $200 for an iphone and a $100 kindle. How is that expensive? I don't know ANYONE who goes out and always buying the newest laptop (unless theirs broke or they are a cam girl and it is a business-related tax deduction expense). Smart phones are NECESSARY. GPS anyone?

I also know absolutely no young people who have purchased a new car unless it was purchased for them by someone else. However, I will say that I did read that now the demand for used cars is higher than it has ever been, therefore sometimes it is actually better to buy new rather than used (the older the car the higher the interest rate).

Most insurances weren't even required until the 90s. Car insurance used to be optional. Now there is insurance for EVERYTHING which is slowly becoming required (Obamacare, anyone?), and older generations never had to deal with that. Basically our generation is forced to pay expensive insurance (we're young afterall, so its very expensive due to our age) with high deductibles so we can't even reap the benefits of having to pay monthly for expensive insurances. Our parents generation saved hundreds of dollars in savings each month not having to pay these fees.

Financing a car isn't even expensive honestly. I have a recentl bankruptcy and my rate was 2-3% for a 2011-2013. That's like, nothing.

Older generations also received cheap education they could pay for with a summer job. A summer job won't even pay for community college fees these days!


By 2020 Millenials will comprise 30% of all retail sales and 50% of all purchases related to travel: airlines, hotels, and leisure spending. Partially to blame is the "instant-gratification" mindset, where the latest and greatest comes out too soon to save up for it, but also as a generation Millenials are valuing experiences over material items. Perhaps because many of Millenials' guardians were baby boomers who focused on material acquisitions and through their childhood and young adulthood observations of that lifestyle Millenials have seen that items don't equate to happiness, so we are trying something different.

lol, this is all I have to say about that ^^^:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4IjTUxZORE

Almost Jaded
02-19-2014, 07:23 PM
Where to even start... How about at the end? Skip the long drawn out part and just go for the conclusion?

There won't be an economy for the millennials to sink or swim in. The gross assets of our entire nation are being systematically funneled up and/or out. Current economic models will no longer apply in the very near future.

Melonie
02-20-2014, 01:38 PM
There won't be an economy for the millennials to sink or swim in. The gross assets of our entire nation are being systematically funneled up and/or out. Current economic models will no longer apply in the very near future.

That's a somewhat pessimistic assessment, but you're certainly not alone in making it !!!

For a fact, the globalization of agricultural and industrial production has now created a situation where unskilled and semi-skilled labor pools must compete with each other regardless of where they are located in the world. While the US has more or less failed to reduce unskilled and semi-skilled pay rates, the effect has been to both hold US pay rates steady and to eliminate US jobs. In an environment where the US dollar denominated prices of necessities like food and energy continue to rise, stagnant paychecks ( or shrinking paychecks net of higher taxes ) virtually guarantee a declining US standard of living.

For the past few years, the growing 'gap' between stagant / declining after-tax earnings and the rising costs associated with the 'average' standard of living has been bridged via Americans going even deeper into debt, and by Americans liquidating assets / equity ( 2nd mortgages, retirement funds etc.) However, at this point, the ability of 'average' Americans to gain approval for additional debt is declining, the ability of 'average' Americans to service their existing debt is declining as well, and there aren't a whole lot of assets / equity remaining to liquidate ( a large percentage of home mortgages are underwater, retirement accounts have been emptied prematurely etc.)

http://stawealth.com/images/stories/1dailyxchange/Household-Debt-Deleveraging-021914.PNG

In some cases, notably somewhat recent college graduates, the debt service costs of student loans, and the levels of after-tax earnings actually available, point to a standard of living which necessarily involves living in their parents' basement !!! But the scariest part arguably comes into play when those parents reach retirement age ... thus no longer financially able to continue 'subsidizing' their 30 year old child with a 'free' place to live. At the same time, in many ways those parents will be forced to start depending on their own and everyone else's 30 year old CHILDREN to help finance their own social security retirement / health care costs etc. !!! At that point, the S#!t will seriously hit the proverbial fan. And based on baby boomer demographics, the leading edge of this trend is already here !

Melonie
02-24-2014, 09:48 AM
another interesting tidbit ... from


(snip)"the American Community Survey, which has a much larger sample, shows the headship rate dipping and then flatlining in 2012. “The decline has either slowed or reversed,” Kolko says. This could be attributable to survey assumptions about population growth, but it makes it hard for economists to definitively say whether the household formation crash was just a blip from the recession, or part of a more lasting “kids in the basement” trend. Indeed, even in the more favorable Current Population Survey data, the share of young adults living with parents remains well above pre-recession rates, even for the employed.

Kolko, like many housing analysts, believes that at some point, the economy will return to fundamentals. In fact, the story goes, the low household formation rate today actually signals optimism for the future, since much more housing will have to be built to meet the pent-up demand. Homebuilders are certainly acting like that demand will come back, at least for rentals; apartment construction in 2013 was at a 15-year high. “Builders wouldn’t have done that if they weren’t betting on a strong increase in household formation,” Jed Kolko says. And to be sure, no young adults want to live with their parents forever.

But what if the pent-up demand story is just no longer true? What if the combination of graduating with debt, difficult job prospects, and stagnant wages has created a new normal? What if college graduates simply expect to spend their first decades “in the real world” shackled with debt and struggling to get by? Without clearer data, we won’t know the truth. But there’s no question that the finances of college graduates are more strained now than at practically any point in our history. Forty million Americans start out their working lives with a massive debt burden, and the salary they can earn out of college—if they can get a job at all—simply isn’t enough to keep up. “The combination of more debt and lower incomes means more risk, and many young workers are walking on an economic tightrope,” said Rohit Chopra, student loan ombudsman for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, at a recent field hearing.

If the Great Delay persists, it will handicap millennials for decades to come. A student taking out $53,000 in debt will lose $208,000 over his lifetime, according to the think tank Demos, because he will be less able to build home equity or save for retirement early in his life."(snip)


The take-away from this article involves the 'time value of money'. Spending money on student loan principal and interest payments prevents money from being directed toward assets and savings / investments. Thus millennial 'basement dwellers' forced to spend a good portion of their earnings on student loans / student loan interest payments are effectively delayed from being able to build assets / savings / investments that will ( hopefully ) increase in value ... typically delayed by 10 years or more.

Over the course of a lifetime, the ongoing student loan principal and interest payments, the resulting inability to save, the lost 'passive' income potential from those non-existant savings, and the years ofi lost compound interest earnings on the non-existant 'passive' income, can wind up 'costing' the person far more than the basic amount of their student loan debt. The Demos forecast shows that the total number of dollars 'lost' can be FOUR TIMES the original amount of student loan debt.

This certainly brings a 'new reality' to the old paradigm that a college education 'guarantees' a better future. Using the Demos example, how many years of earnings, and what increased level of earnings over those of a 'regular job', will be required to make up for a $208,000 'loss' ? And don't forget to add in the initial 4+ years of 'sacrificed' earnings during the years spent attending college instead of working at a 'regular job' on top of that $208,000 !!!

ytqclys
02-24-2014, 08:37 PM
Hopefully we'll eventually elect people with real ideas for how to fix this situation. But maybe 20-somethings guys and their parents will figure out the necessary compromises for living together happily. Then, even after those guys final get a decent income like they deserve, they'll stay at home, and spend their whole paycheck on DANCES! :)

MarvelGirl
02-27-2014, 08:54 AM
I feel for people who go to college and then can't find a job and have to move back in with their parents, I really do.

But that's not the case for many people living with their parents. I have a 24 year old boomerang kid I've kicked out several times and it's due to him being irresponsible and lacking ambition. I hate saying that because I love him but he would be content to just lay around my house, eat my food, and do pretty much nothing if I let him.

The last time he moved home, I let him stay here for a year and he saved nothing. Halfway through the year I demanded rent from him and put it aside and then when his deadline to move out came up, I gave it to him to buy a car.

He's living in a motel now because it's all he can afford and I feel bad for him but I can't enable him anymore. He's not in school, he has a shitty job and he's not looking for a better one. It makes me mad because I've only had him since he was 13. I feel like his biological mother really dropped the ball.

Zofia
03-01-2014, 04:19 PM
Wow, stripping really was a great way to spend my college years. Graduate with money in the bank, four solid years of business experience and a degree in a field that pays well.

XOXO
Z

Cashmere Star
03-02-2014, 02:45 PM
It's actually a recent trend throughout human history to be so individualized and own our own homes. Throughout the world (and history), it was actually more common for two or even three generations to live under the same roof.
Past generations of Americans were able to get their own homes after becoming adults because we were extremely wealthy compared to other countries in the past. Independence, education, owning a home and a car as an individual was attainable and accessible. Today, I don't think that's the case. I think the "going back to parents after college" trend implies that America isn't the super rich world superpower anymore, rather than "omg, our generations are failing and losing values!!"

ytqclys
03-02-2014, 11:32 PM
I feel for people who go to college and then can't find a job and have to move back in with their parents, I really do.

But that's not the case for many people living with their parents. I have a 24 year old boomerang kid I've kicked out several times and it's due to him being irresponsible and lacking ambition. I hate saying that because I love him but he would be content to just lay around my house, eat my food, and do pretty much nothing if I let him.

The last time he moved home, I let him stay here for a year and he saved nothing. Halfway through the year I demanded rent from him and put it aside and then when his deadline to move out came up, I gave it to him to buy a car.

He's living in a motel now because it's all he can afford and I feel bad for him but I can't enable him anymore. He's not in school, he has a shitty job and he's not looking for a better one. It makes me mad because I've only had him since he was 13. I feel like his biological mother really dropped the ball.

Damn MG that's rough. I don't know how you deal with that, I think I would lose my marbles. I never had or adopted kids, but I image seeing their problems must hurt much worse than dealing with your own problems.

Almost Jaded
03-03-2014, 01:38 AM
It's actually a recent trend throughout human history to be so individualized and own our own homes. Throughout the world (and history), it was actually more common for two or even three generations to live under the same roof.
Past generations of Americans were able to get their own homes after becoming adults because we were extremely wealthy compared to other countries in the past. Independence, education, owning a home and a car as an individual was attainable and accessible. Today, I don't think that's the case. I think the "going back to parents after college" trend implies that America isn't the super rich world superpower anymore, rather than "omg, our generations are failing and losing values!!"

But that's exactly the point; through a combination of corruption and manipulation of the system, and ingrained selfishness and apathy of the people, the U.S. - and most of western society - is being dragged backwards. There is no reason for this nation or any in Europe to be moving backward; indeed, technology and resources are such that the rest of the world should be catching up to us. The only thing preventing this and causing the current situation is the world's super-rich draining the pool so to speak.

Much has been made of teh 1% here. But the fact is that on a global scale it's even more lopsided. I do NOT believe in socialism or communism; however, some "redistribution" is goin gto be required soon. Historically, that means war. I'd like to think that wouldn't be necessary in this day and age, but the fact is that once again, as has so often been the case in history, lawmakers and enforcers are in the pockets of the greedy, and the rest are left to wallow as best they can. Force is the only thing that rectifies this when the laws can't be relied upon.

Melonie
03-03-2014, 04:43 AM
Past generations of Americans were able to get their own homes after becoming adults because we were extremely wealthy compared to other countries in the past. Independence, education, owning a home and a car as an individual was attainable and accessible. Today, I don't think that's the case. I think the "going back to parents after college" trend implies that America isn't the super rich world superpower anymore, rather than "omg, our generations are failing and losing values!!"

While nobody likes to admit the real facts of the situation, the highly abnormal 'gains' in the US economy in the latee 40's, 50's and 60's ... and the associated high standard of living of Americans during that period i.e. easily buying homes, buying cars, etc. ... was in fact due to the US being the only major industrial country left standing in the aftermath of World War 2. Specifically, the 'beneficial' economic effects of WW2 were A. competing foreign manufacturing facilities were bombed to rubble, B. competing skilled and semi-skilled work forces of most other countries were killed off by the millions, C. the US 'hoovered up' technology / intellectual property from around the world for 'free', and D. the US was in a position to dictate that the US dollar must be used for virtually all international transactions.

These 'beneficial' after-effects of WW2 resulted in huge economic growth and huge profits for US industries, banks, and workers. America's de-facto world monopoly didn't begin to break until our former WW2 enemies managed to rebuild their workforces and manufacturers over the course of the next generation ... leading to Volkswagens, Hondas, Sony's, etc. beginning to appear en masse in the mid to late 1960's. And even when US economic growth slacked off due to this foreign competition, the US and American workers had already built up a huge amount of capital / savings / assets. That capital / savings / assets enabled continued spending in excess of actual income, and provided a continued ability to borrow, which arguably allowed America to maintain an artificially high standard of living right up to the mid 2000's. However, at this point in time, American competitiveness has been lost, savings are starting to become exhausted, assets are liquidated, individual ability to borrow is being curtailed, etc. Thus, arguably, at this point in time it is only the US gov't's continued ability to borrow at a reasonable cost and in turn 'give' that borrowed money to certain Americans that is still sustaining America's above average standard of living relative to that of other countries.



some "redistribution" is going to be required soon. Historically, that means war. I'd like to think that wouldn't be necessary in this day and age, but the fact is that once again, as has so often been the case in history, lawmakers and enforcers are in the pockets of the greedy, and the rest are left to wallow as best they can. Force is the only thing that rectifies this when the laws can't be relied upon.

Historically, you are ( unfortunately ) absolutely correct !!! The arguable alternative is to allow the US standard of living to drop to the world-wide average, as well as for the US gov't to tax / collect enough additional moneys from American individuals and companies to not only cease additional US gov't borrowing but to actually pay down existing US gov't debts owed to other countries !!!

DonaDiabla
03-03-2014, 09:35 AM
It's actually a recent trend throughout human history to be so individualized and own our own homes. Throughout the world (and history), it was actually more common for two or even three generations to live under the same roof.
Past generations of Americans were able to get their own homes after becoming adults because we were extremely wealthy compared to other countries in the past. Independence, education, owning a home and a car as an individual was attainable and accessible. Today, I don't think that's the case. I think the "going back to parents after college" trend implies that America isn't the super rich world superpower anymore, rather than "omg, our generations are failing and losing values!!"

Actually, America was not the only place where people lived on their own. In many parts of the Caribbean such as Barbados and Jamaica, it was an honor back in the day not to burden one's parents by still living there as a adult. For example,many generations of my family would move out at the age of 18 and stay gone forever since 1800. This was not only symbol of pride but was seen as a passage to adulthood. In fact, it was customary not to even live near your parents..most people in my family tree will live between 10 cities away to even a whole country away from their parents. I failed as a woman when I lived with my mother because of our family tradition and Caribbean/Latin American background. I do not really understand why American young adults would burden their parents by living at home at all. This might be harsh to say but I would never want to burden my mother by living with her. Just like when my mother gets up in age...she not burden me by living at my home. She will maintain her own house as I will maintain mine. It is tradition and it will stay that way. My grandmother maintain her own home until her dying day and I expect my mother to do the same thing.

DonaDiabla
03-03-2014, 09:41 AM
Hopefully we'll eventually elect people with real ideas for how to fix this situation. But maybe 20-somethings guys and their parents will figure out the necessary compromises for living together happily. Then, even after those guys final get a decent income like they deserve, they'll stay at home, and spend their whole paycheck on DANCES! :)

Yuck....I agree with the most part but the men living at home part. A man should feel disgusting by even sharing a house with his parents. Unless that is a part of their culture or trying to save for their own homes....men living with their parents should be avoid at all costs.

DonaDiabla
03-03-2014, 09:47 AM
I feel for people who go to college and then can't find a job and have to move back in with their parents, I really do.

But that's not the case for many people living with their parents. I have a 24 year old boomerang kid I've kicked out several times and it's due to him being irresponsible and lacking ambition. I hate saying that because I love him but he would be content to just lay around my house, eat my food, and do pretty much nothing if I let him.

The last time he moved home, I let him stay here for a year and he saved nothing. Halfway through the year I demanded rent from him and put it aside and then when his deadline to move out came up, I gave it to him to buy a car.

He's living in a motel now because it's all he can afford and I feel bad for him but I can't enable him anymore. He's not in school, he has a shitty job and he's not looking for a better one. It makes me mad because I've only had him since he was 13. I feel like his biological mother really dropped the ball.

MarvelGirl, that is really sad that he tried to burden you with is his lack of ambition and being irresponsible. :( It does make me a bit mad when children do not ambition and want to live off their parents. :( You did the right thing by not enabling him anymore :) Hugs :)

ytqclys
03-03-2014, 10:50 AM
Yuck....I agree with the most part but the men living at home part. A man should feel disgusting by even sharing a house with his parents. Unless that is a part of their culture or trying to save for their own homes....men living with their parents should be avoid at all costs.

I don't get this at all. Even unrelated people can live together if they have the compatible lifestyles. If a person can live with their parents without conflicts, go for it. Make the most of it while you still have the people you love in your life.

When someone turns 18, either they are or are not ready for it. Sometimes someone is ready to be an adult, but their parents can't accept that, so they have to move out. Sometimes the kid is not ready to be an adult, so the parents have to force them out in order to force them to grow up.

Melonie
03-03-2014, 11:11 AM
I do not really understand why American young adults would burden their parents by living at home at all.

Part of the reason is 'cultural' change i.e. the former 'stigma' associated with being unemployed / accepting gov't benefits etc. has pretty much dissolved. Another part of the reason is economic reality i.e. an $8 per hour 28 hour per week job can't cover today's rent costs, today's $4 gasoline, today's $3 loaf of bread etc.

Vamp
03-03-2014, 01:46 PM
I think economy is only part of the story with this issue. This was going on before the the crash in 2008.

I knew a woman who was a single mother, Two children in their late 20s, both lived at home and made around 30k a year. They both lived at home and paid nothing to their mother. They didnt save any money. ( I knew the details because I was their banker) They both had brand new cars, designer clothes, and all the latest gadgets. She would tell me they couldnt afford to live on their own. The reality was they couldnt afford the lifestyle they had alone. They would of had to scale back their lifestyle dramatically. Their mother felt guilty for being a single mother most of their lives. So she allowed it.

There is a tv show called Princess about that confronts young women who run up huge credit card debt while living at home.

When I was a teenager in the 90s, we were dying to live alone or with roommates. Our first car was an old used car and we found a little hole in the wall apartment. Now they seem to want the loft apartment with the view and a new car before they leave the nest. If they cant have that, then they cant "afford" to leave home.

I think these parents are doing a HUGE disservice to their children. We now have almost a generation of 20-30 somethings who havent lived on their own. Most of my biggest life lessons happened from living on my own. It isnt just about learning to manage their finances either. It is about developing an identity and independence separate from parents. You have no clue who you are until you do.

I think that is the closest I have come to sounding like a conservative in my life LOL

simone87
03-03-2014, 02:01 PM
i think it has a lot to do with the economy, and a lot to do with the fact that parents are letting their kids do that. why struggle and be poor when you can spend your whole paycheck on fun shit and live rent/utility free?? im also seeing a lot of people in relationships of necessity..people who don't love each other, but cannot break up because they are essentially room mates and cannot survive without the other paying half of the bills.
i could not STAND living with my parents..which is why i was so grateful that stripping came into the picture. but without it, i would be fucked i think. so i guess i can't judge too hard. without parental help, the sex industry, or welfare, i know a lot of people who would probably be homeless.

ytqclys
03-03-2014, 07:53 PM
I think economy is only part of the story with this issue. This was going on before the the crash in 2008.

I knew a woman who was a single mother, Two children in their late 20s, both lived at home and made around 30k a year. They both lived at home and paid nothing to their mother. They didnt save any money. ( I knew the details because I was their banker) They both had brand new cars, designer clothes, and all the latest gadgets. She would tell me they couldnt afford to live on their own. The reality was they couldnt afford the lifestyle they had alone. They would of had to scale back their lifestyle dramatically. Their mother felt guilty for being a single mother most of their lives. So she allowed it.

There is a tv show called Princess about that confronts young women who run up huge credit card debt while living at home.

When I was a teenager in the 90s, we were dying to live alone or with roommates. Our first car was an old used car and we found a little hole in the wall apartment. Now they seem to want the loft apartment with the view and a new car before they leave the nest. If they cant have that, then they cant "afford" to leave home.

I think these parents are doing a HUGE disservice to their children. We now have almost a generation of 20-30 somethings who havent lived on their own. Most of my biggest life lessons happened from living on my own. It isnt just about learning to manage their finances either. It is about developing an identity and independence separate from parents. You have no clue who you are until you do.

I think that is the closest I have come to sounding like a conservative in my life LOL

What was the mother's income? Everything is relative. Me personally, if I had adult children living with me, I'd only ask them to kick if for a housekeeper if they didn't feel like cleaning up after themselves. I already have enough money to cover my needs and wants. I wouldn't like it that they didn't save, but I wouldn't kick them out for it.

MarvelGirl
03-03-2014, 10:09 PM
MarvelGirl, that is really sad that he tried to burden you with is his lack of ambition and being irresponsible. :( It does make me a bit mad when children do not ambition and want to live off their parents. :( You did the right thing by not enabling him anymore :) Hugs :)

Thank you. The sad thing is that it seems to be a common attitude among kids his age. That's what stuns me. There's no stigma in being a 20 something living with your parents anymore. I mean, I'm only in my 30s but at his age, we thought people who lived at home with mommy and daddy in their mid twenties were losers. Now it seems to be cool. I've met so many parents in my same situation and these kids just don't feel like growing up and have no shame in being lazy moochers. I don't get it. There are even support groups for parents trying to kick these adult babies out and force them to take on responsibility for themselves. I don't understand what happened. It's like so many people of this younger generation have no pride at all and no ambition. I can't imagine not wanting my own space and life at that age.

I don't want to paint the entire generation that way though because I know plenty of young dancers who are busting their asses to take care of themselves and I respect them for it.

Almost Jaded
03-04-2014, 12:33 AM
I'm currently watching a younger recently married couple struggle along because the husband is in this category. It isn't going well. I alternately want to laugh and cry almost daily.

Vamp
03-04-2014, 09:37 AM
^^^ Exactly!!! Could imagine being married to someone who never left home?!?! Just thinking about it makes me shudder. At the same time I feel for them.

Vamp
03-04-2014, 09:42 AM
What was the mother's income? Everything is relative. Me personally, if I had adult children living with me, I'd only ask them to kick if for a housekeeper if they didn't feel like cleaning up after themselves. I already have enough money to cover my needs and wants. I wouldn't like it that they didn't save, but I wouldn't kick them out for it.

It isnt about the money in my mind. It is about life experience. How does anyone learn how to deal with the ups and downs of life when their parents do everything for them?

Vamp
03-04-2014, 09:51 AM
Case in point...

Father being sued for support by 'spoiled' daughter, 18, who claims they kicked her out. College-bound honors student Rachel Canning of Lincoln Park, New Jersey says she was 'abandoned' by her parents the day she turned 18


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2572711/Father-spoiled-high-school-cheerleader-18-suing-parents-claims-daughter-ran-away-believed-better-own.html#ixzz2v0uCr2SZ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

MarvelGirl
03-04-2014, 11:30 AM
It isnt about the money in my mind. It is about life experience. How does anyone learn how to deal with the ups and downs of life when their parents do everything for them?

Yes, exactly. Letting them stay home forever stunts them. What kind of parent wants their child to be stunted and inadequate as an adult?

Also, the comment you quoted really bugs me. I think it's really easy for people to say "IF I had kids like that, I wouldn't mind." Yeah, most people would. It breeds resentment. There comes a time when kids are supposed to grow up, not play "forever 15" and use their own money for fun stuff while expecting you to pay all of life's necessities. The parents are being used. It hurts to know that one of the people you love most in the world is just using you to avoid the basic responsibilities of being an adult.

audrey_k
03-04-2014, 11:44 AM
I think the fact that university has become so expensive plays a large role in this... I mean, my parents paid for 50% of my first two years of college and I was able to get scholarships/grants/financial aid to cover most of the last two years, but I still graduated with $40,000 in student loans (I paid off $5,000 this month so awesomely I am down to $35000). I went to a private school and among my friends I am definitely at the lower, lower end of debt.

I lived with my parents for about 70% the time I was in college and personally I didn't mind it... it saved me over $40,000 I would say. But I can't imagine living with them now that I've graduated. I know that if I was to be in a dire financial situation they would rather just lend me some money to pay my rent than have me move back in, but if that wasn't an option I also know they would be OK with me moving back. I just wouldn't be OK with it. I would feel like such a loser having to move back in with my parents. I'm sorry to be blunt, but I would.

I graduated with an arts degree that will serve me well once I have an MFA to attach to it but at the moment is not ideal. I absolutely do not regret my major-- it's what I wanted to do-- but I knew upon graduation that I was not going to be jumping into a $50,000+ a year job the way that many of my friends are. But, that's fine with me because I would rather do something that I enjoy. Do I have to make sacrifices for that? Yes I do, I will definitely have to spend a large portion of the next two years before grad school stripping to be able to afford my own apartment/pay loans/support myself even when I do find a regular job in my field, but I also don't mind that. I would absolutely die of boredom if I had majored in computer science or business or something like that. No offense to anyone who is studying either of those things, I just can't do it.

I do have a lot of friends that graduated with arts degrees that are now living with their parents, or they're lucky and came from very wealthy families who are paying their rent and giving them a weekly allowance. But what I notice with a lot of these people is that they had this idea in college that all they needed was the degree. I think degrees are essential, honestly I would not be able to get any of the jobs I am currently applying for without my degree, but the problem is that there are another 10,000 people that have my degree and also want the job. I interned and worked my way all through college and was VERY proactive about getting my art out there for precisely that reason-- my resume is full and I have a good degree. But if you just spent your college years partying and going to class, you're going to have a difficult time getting a job out of college.

gocanucks
03-04-2014, 12:20 PM
A few thoughts from someone who stayed at home until I was 20 (first 2 years of uni), but now is a parent of pre-teens...

1. If your kids go to college/university, the bills are HUGE. Audrey_K's example is a common one. Now, maybe they shouldn't be given a free ride, but adding to their loan totals is a pretty tough deal. That's the noblest reason to have adult kids stay with their parents. I get that.

2. There are also a lot of cultures where staying with parents until you're married is the norm. We shouldn't be so quick to judge them the same way - because the expectations on the adult children isn't for a complete free ride, but they're supposed (emphasis on "supposed") to return the favor and then taken their parents in when they're no longer able to care for themselves in their final years, and not put them in a nursing home. I think kids who stay at home then place their parents at the first sign of trouble in a nursing home - totally irresponsible. But it can work both ways.

As for the grown-up kids:

3. I don't get the whole "men shouldn't want to stay with their parents and be a burden" comment - NO ONE should want to be a burden on their parents as an adult. Just putting it out there.

4. If you're going to stay at home, realize you're not there for a free ride. Pay or help with the housework, and do more than just what you're asked for - you're a grown up, stuck in a less than ideal situation - but that doesn't mean it falls on your parents to be stuck with the whole bill. Even if it's not $, you can always pay back in time/effort.

5. On the flip side, parents - don't enable your kids' behaviour that keeps them stuck at home. A co-worker's parents made her pay rent while she was at home - and gave restrictive rules that were the parent's values - enough to make her want to move out when she was able to. It doesn't have to be crazy, but it can't make it easier to let them WANT to stay.

DonaDiabla
03-04-2014, 01:16 PM
A few thoughts from someone who stayed at home until I was 20 (first 2 years of uni), but now is a parent of pre-teens...

1. If your kids go to college/university, the bills are HUGE. Audrey_K's example is a common one. Now, maybe they shouldn't be given a free ride, but adding to their loan totals is a pretty tough deal. That's the noblest reason to have adult kids stay with their parents. I get that.

2. There are also a lot of cultures where staying with parents until you're married is the norm. We shouldn't be so quick to judge them the same way - because the expectations on the adult children isn't for a complete free ride, but they're supposed (emphasis on "supposed") to return the favor and then taken their parents in when they're no longer able to care for themselves in their final years, and not put them in a nursing home. I think kids who stay at home then place their parents at the first sign of trouble in a nursing home - totally irresponsible. But it can work both ways.

As for the grown-up kids:

3. I don't get the whole "men shouldn't want to stay with their parents and be a burden" comment - NO ONE should want to be a burden on their parents as an adult. Just putting it out there.

4. If you're going to stay at home, realize you're not there for a free ride. Pay or help with the housework, and do more than just what you're asked for - you're a grown up, stuck in a less than ideal situation - but that doesn't mean it falls on your parents to be stuck with the whole bill. Even if it's not $, you can always pay back in time/effort.

5. On the flip side, parents - don't enable your kids' behaviour that keeps them stuck at home. A co-worker's parents made her pay rent while she was at home - and gave restrictive rules that were the parent's values - enough to make her want to move out when she was able to. It doesn't have to be crazy, but it can't make it easier to let them WANT to stay.

Gocanucks, when I said that "Men shouldn't want to stay with their parents and be a burden to them"....I am saying that men should be real men and tried to at least support themselves. Why should a man want to stay with his parents if he comes from a culture where that is not norm? The reason why I focus on men more with that statement is because I judge men much more harsher than women. That is just apart of my personality, really. Even as a little girl, I was much harsher on my own father's career/money choices than my mother's. But I was lucky enough to have a young father who had his own place since the age of 16. However, no one should want to burden their parents by staying them if that is not the norm in their culture. Plus I never judged people where it is cultural acceptable for them to live with their parents as adults. However, you must also understand that I come from a culture and a family in which it is a burden for your adult children to stay at home rather they pay rent or not. I mean my family has been running like that for decades and I feel that is my duty to keep that tradition. In addition, my mother paid her dues to me when I was a child and it is now time for her to live her life. Now it is my duty to pay some her bills as a way of thanking her. Currently, I am paying for my mother to get her teeth fixed. When I get out of college, I will be paying for my half of the parent plus loan she took out. My point is that I just do not understand people wanting to live at home where is not the cultural norm. That is all and it is okay for people not to agree with me. But my mother never to worry about me being a burden to her. I will always have my own place and pay my own way. She might want to help me out but I will not do that to my mother. So I feel that I am quite responsible for my age and did my duty. Many young people in my age do not, Gocanucks.

gocanucks
03-04-2014, 01:25 PM
Gocanucks, when I said that "Men shouldn't want to stay with their parents and be a burden to them"....I am saying that men should be real men and tried to at least support themselves. Why should a man want to stay with his parents if he comes from a culture where that is not norm? The reason why I focus on men more with that statement is because I judge men much more harsher than women. That is just apart of my personality, really. Even as a little girl, I was much harsher on my own father's career/money choices than my mother's. But I was lucky enough to have a young father who had his own place since the age of 16. However, no one should want to burden their parents by staying them if that is not the norm in their culture. Plus I never judged people where it is cultural acceptable for them to live with their parents as adults. However, you must also understand that I come from a culture and a family in which it is a burden for your adult children to stay at home rather they pay rent or not. I mean my family has been running like that for decades and I feel that is my duty to keep that tradition. In addition, my mother paid her dues to me when I was a child and it is now time for her to live her life. Now it is my duty to pay some her bills as a way of thanking her. Currently, I am paying for my mother to get her teeth fixed. When I get out of college, I will be paying for my half of the parent plus loan she took out. My point is that I just do not understand people wanting to live at home where is not the cultural norm. That is all and it is okay for people not to agree with me. But my mother never to worry about me being a burden to her. I will always have my own place and pay my own way. She might want to help me out but I will not do that to my mother. So I feel that I am quite responsible for my age and did my duty. Many young people in my age do not, Gocanucks.

Fair enough. I just think it's a double-standard to single out men - anyone who is at home shouldn't be seeing that as a goal, unless it's the cultural expectation - and as you said, even then it's a burden, so they should be going out of their way to help out, not just financially, but with time/effort too (and the flip side is that in those cultures, when the parents are elderly and need help, THAT'S the time where the grown-up kids should step up wherever possible).

I do think we should recognize in North America, getting a uni/college education is a HUGE burden financially - so I get the decision for kids to stay home with parents and not leaving right away ASAP, if they stop seeing home as the default solution. Or, if they can't find a decent job to be on their own right away, they need to get on their feet. I also think young adults are making unrealistic decisions in going to uni/college and getting a degree that has zero chance to pay off for them (it's tough to know what you want to do at 18, but for goodness sake don't throw 100K into the toilet to find out you don't want to do that, if at all possible) - but that's another topic altogether. Regardless, the bottom line is that if someone has to live with their parents as a grown-up, they should realize how much their parents are doing - and unlike when they're kids, it's on the adult children to give back while they're at home, in $$ / time / effort, and I hope they repay the favor in spades when their parents need help to live on their own when they get older.

DonaDiabla
03-04-2014, 01:36 PM
Thank you. The sad thing is that it seems to be a common attitude among kids his age. That's what stuns me. There's no stigma in being a 20 something living with your parents anymore. I mean, I'm only in my 30s but at his age, we thought people who lived at home with mommy and daddy in their mid twenties were losers. Now it seems to be cool. I've met so many parents in my same situation and these kids just don't feel like growing up and have no shame in being lazy moochers. I don't get it. There are even support groups for parents trying to kick these adult babies out and force them to take on responsibility for themselves. I don't understand what happened. It's like so many people of this younger generation have no pride at all and no ambition. I can't imagine not wanting my own space and life at that age.

I don't want to paint the entire generation that way though because I know plenty of young dancers who are busting their asses to take care of themselves and I respect them for it.

MarvelGirl, you are right and it makes sad. Ambition is the reason why I left my mother's home at 18. I went to San Francisco and I busted my ass at a very rich art school. I start working as PSO and I had one sugar daddy to pay my bills. However, my mother got sick and I had to take care her at 19. Her medical bills drain all of her savings and my grandmother was just too old to take care her. I did the right thing as my mother's daughter and took care of her. Even I paid for my mother's hospital bills at 19 with my PSO money. Then I tried to get married to this Indian guy...he paid off my mother's medical bills, brought me an apartment-condo, and tried to pay off all of my student loans. The point of telling this tale is that I wanted to an adult as soon as I hit 18. I lived an adult life and I am glad to responsibility of my life at 18. It is ashamed that many people in my generation do not have any pride and ambition. MarvelGirl, I complete agree with your statements about my generation :)

DonaDiabla
03-04-2014, 01:45 PM
Fair enough. I just think it's a double-standard to single out men - anyone who is at home shouldn't be seeing that as a goal, unless it's the cultural expectation - and as you said, even then it's a burden, so they should be going out of their way to help out, not just financially, but with time/effort too (and the flip side is that in those cultures, when the parents are elderly and need help, THAT'S the time where the grown-up kids should step up wherever possible).

I do think we should recognize in North America, getting a uni/college education is a HUGE burden financially - so I get the decision for kids to stay home with parents and not leaving right away. Or, if they can't find a decent job to be on their own right away, they need to get on their feet. I also think young adults are making unrealistic decisions in going to uni/college and getting a degree that has zero chance to pay off for them (it's tough to know what you want to do at 18, but for goodness sake don't throw 100K into the toilet to find out you don't want to do that, if at all possible) - but that's another topic altogether. Regardless, the bottom line is that if someone has to live with their parents as a grown-up, they should realize how much their parents are doing - and unlike when they're kids, it's on the adult children to give back while they're at home, in $$ / time / effort, and I hope they repay the favor in spades when their parents need help to live on their own when they get older.

Gocanucks, we just a difference of opinion on the matter because I live in North America and I just would not burden my mother by living with her or having her pay my way. But some your statements are cool as well. By the way, I only judge men more harsher in only one area....on certain job choices and money choices. It is not really a double standard because I also judge myself for not making enough money. I always judge myself harsher for not making at least 60,000 to 100,000 a year. Last year, I was a good year for me :) When I get my real estate license, I will judge myself if I do not sell at least 20 to 100 homes that same year.Plus I disagree with your statement about being 18 and not knowing what you want to do. I believe that it discounts young adults who actually work towards their dreams. I believe that is unrealistic to be paint everyone with the same brush just because of a few lazy young people do not know what they want to do. Currently, I pay for both of my colleges that I attend right now. I do not see why other people can not do the same thing. Yes, I am paying for my own way when it comes to my education.My mother is pleased. All I am saying that people should tried to less the burden on their parents.

DonaDiabla
03-04-2014, 03:20 PM
I don't get this at all. Even unrelated people can live together if they have the compatible lifestyles. If a person can live with their parents without conflicts, go for it. Make the most of it while you still have the people you love in your life.

When someone turns 18, either they are or are not ready for it. Sometimes someone is ready to be an adult, but their parents can't accept that, so they have to move out. Sometimes the kid is not ready to be an adult, so the parents have to force them out in order to force them to grow up.

Sorry, I guess I have a different opinion on that matter because I believe in being an adult at all costs. I love my own space but I understand if other people want to live with their parents or others. I just could not do it. I was already to be an adult since I was little. I hate being a child because I could not control my destiny. Now, I called the shots in my life and I enjoy moving out my mother's house. So I was not forced to grow up nor my mother could see me as an adult :) I choose to become an adult and live my own life at 18. Frankly, I feel like the man I talk to should be able to make it in life without depending on his parents financially or living at home. He should tried to get a good career. Even he is a sex worker....he should tried to make a good income. I would like the man to want the same thing from me. I always to be an adult in all areas of my life..But the truth is....I always wanted to be an adult. But you are right about one thing... some people are not ready for adulthood :)

Melonie
03-04-2014, 05:22 PM
I believe in being an adult at all costs

Unfortunately, the 'official' direction of America is the opposite. Thus the ACA requiring 'employers' to treat children of 'employees' up to age 26 as dependents. Thus gov't guaranteed student loans enabling 4-5-6 years worth of college attendance ( regardless of actually obtaining a 'valuable' degree ).



Two children in their late 20s, both lived at home and made around 30k a year. They both lived at home and paid nothing to their mother. They didnt save any money. ( I knew the details because I was their banker) They both had brand new cars, designer clothes, and all the latest gadgets. She would tell me they couldnt afford to live on their own. The reality was they couldnt afford the lifestyle they had alone. They would of had to scale back their lifestyle dramatically

Now we're circling back toward the original point of this thread. Today's fundamental economics dictates that an 'average' American job's $30k per year paycheck, minus the costs of 'necessities' such as food, rent, taxes, health care etc., leaves little or no 'discretionary' money for spending on such things as a new car, designer clothes, or lap dances. Arguably, this also means that many dancers are already operating on 'borrowed time' ... as many of their customers are only able to afford lap dances today because they still live with their parents.

Or more specifically, many of their 30 year old customers are only able to afford lap dances because their 60 year old parents are still working thus still paying rent / mortgage, utility bills, grocery bills etc. for both themselves as well as their 30 year old basement dweller. What happens 5 years from now when those 60 year old parents retire ... with the parents' retirement income level being just a small fraction of their current paycheck ? What happens 5 years from now when the parents' decide to sell their big house and move to a retirement apartment in Florida ? At that point the 35 year old offspring, with the same $30k per year paycheck, will be forced to pay for his own costs of living. And at that point, there will be no option except a major decline in that 35 year old's standard of living ... and a total cutoff of 'discretionary' spending on such non-essential items as lap dances.

DonaDiabla
03-04-2014, 05:51 PM
Unfortunately, the 'official' direction of America is the opposite. Thus the ACA requiring 'employers' to treat children of 'employees' up to age 26 as dependents. Thus gov't guaranteed student loans enabling 4-5-6 years worth of college attendance ( regardless of actually obtaining a 'valuable' degree ).




Now we're circling back toward the original point of this thread. Today's fundamental economics dictates that an 'average' American job's $30k per year paycheck, minus the costs of 'necessities' such as food, rent, taxes, health care etc., leaves little or no 'discretionary' money for spending on such things as a new car, designer clothes, or lap dances. Arguably, this also means that many dancers are already operating on 'borrowed time' ... as many of their customers are only able to afford lap dances today because they still live with their parents.

Or more specifically, many of their 30 year old customers are only able to afford lap dances because their 60 year old parents are still working thus still paying rent / mortgage, utility bills, grocery bills etc. for both themselves as well as their 30 year old basement dweller. What happens 5 years from now when those 60 year old parents retire ... with the parents' retirement income level being just a small fraction of their current paycheck ? What happens 5 years from now when the parents' decide to sell their big house and move to a retirement apartment in Florida ? At that point the 35 year old offspring, with the same $30k per year paycheck, will be forced to pay for his own costs of living. And at that point, there will be no option except a major decline in that 35 year old's standard of living ... and a total cutoff of 'discretionary' spending on such non-essential items as lap dances.

You are right, Melonie.

lynn2009
03-04-2014, 06:17 PM
.....

eagle2
03-04-2014, 09:13 PM
Now we're circling back toward the original point of this thread. Today's fundamental economics dictates that an 'average' American job's $30k per year paycheck, minus the costs of 'necessities' such as food, rent, taxes, health care etc., leaves little or no 'discretionary' money for spending on such things as a new car, designer clothes, or lap dances. Arguably, this also means that many dancers are already operating on 'borrowed time' ... as many of their customers are only able to afford lap dances today because they still live with their parents.

The average American's paycheck is way more than $30k per year. The median income is over $50k. Why must you always exaggerate how bad things are?



Or more specifically, many of their 30 year old customers are only able to afford lap dances because their 60 year old parents are still working thus still paying rent / mortgage, utility bills, grocery bills etc. for both themselves as well as their 30 year old basement dweller. What happens 5 years from now when those 60 year old parents retire ... with the parents' retirement income level being just a small fraction of their current paycheck ? What happens 5 years from now when the parents' decide to sell their big house and move to a retirement apartment in Florida ? At that point the 35 year old offspring, with the same $30k per year paycheck, will be forced to pay for his own costs of living. And at that point, there will be no option except a major decline in that 35 year old's standard of living ... and a total cutoff of 'discretionary' spending on such non-essential items as lap dances.

From your original article:
36 percent of the country’s 18- to 31-year-olds were living in their parents' homes in 2012

16 percent of 25- to 31-year-olds were crashing with mom and pop

That means a significant number of young adults move out of their parents house between 25 and 31. I'm sure the trend continues into the thirties, and the percentage is much lower at that age. Just because a young adult is living at home in his early 20's doesn't mean he's always going to be doing it. Most will be out of their parents home by the time they're 30 and most will be probably be earning more than 30k, especially those with college degrees in fields that are in high demand.

Sabihah
03-05-2014, 12:25 AM
The average American's paycheck is way more than $30k per year. The median income is over $50k. Why must you always exaggerate how bad things are?

That's median household income - it includes the combined incomes of families/cohabitating adults.

As of 2005, the median individual income was ~$32k.

Melonie
03-05-2014, 01:51 PM
The average American's paycheck is way more than $30k per year.

I was referring to the 30 year olds who are prime candidates for living in parents' basements. Yes median income is obviously much higher ... which is understandable since one CEO earning $10 mil can raise the average for 500 30 year olds earning ~$30k by $20k each, since one high tech wunderkind earning $100 mil can raise the average for 5000 30 year olds earning ~$30k by $20k each, etc.



That's median household income - it includes the combined incomes of families/cohabitating adults.

As of 2005, the median individual income was ~$32k.

Thank you for citing this. Unfortunately, a lot of 'headline' statistics don't actually bear out the 'conclusion' the reader is being led to draw once one takes a detailed look 'under the hood'. Also, since 2005, 'entry level' pre-tax paychecks have been more or less stagnant, while 'entry level' after-tax paychecks have shrunk thanks to rising SSI tax, rising state income tax etc.

The larger point, of course, still holds true. Given 'entry level' pay rates available, and given today's costs of 'necessities' - from owner equivalent rent to utility costs to food prices to insurance costs, it is essentially impossible for a 30 year old to be able to afford to live on their own without taking a major decline in standard of living. Some decide to accept that major decline in standard of living ... but some do not !

And yes a significant number of basement dwellers do move out of their parents' basements between the age of 25 and 31. However, the number and percentage of 25 to 31 year olds living in their parents' basements is RISING. That's a negative for the economy in general no matter how the data might be spun. That economic negative is glaringly obvious in other stats such as today's record low number of home sales to first time individual buyers ( versus record high number of corporate landlord buyers ), etc.