4 ms·

Sounds like you should advocated for a drinking age of 25 instead. Or move all those other things you get to do at 18 to 25 also.

• PietdeVries 10y ago
  Let me know when you have this thing in place: I will start a "Spring Break Holiday Park" somewhere in the south where beer is $20 and a Rum&Coke goes for $40. Only people from 25 are allowed in.
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
• Unklejoe 10y ago
  I think we should actually lower the drinking age. It's currently 21 here. In fact, being 18 really gains you nothing here other than the ability to join the military and get into trouble with the law. My main point is that a few years should go by after a child enters into the adult world before they have access to a fund left for them. There's usually a short "reckless" period immediately after graduating high school and college. However, this usually calms down after the initial shock of having sudden freedom wears off. I have two friends who inhereted $20,000+ sums of money from relatives when they were in their late teens, and both of them pissed it away in under a year. Looking back, both of them seem to regret it. (Me and my friends are all around 25 years old).
  • slavik81 10y ago
    > I have two friends who inhereted $20,000+ sums of money from relatives when they were in their late teens, and both of them pissed it away in under a year. Looking back, both of them seem to regret it. Would they have learned that lesson without making that mistake? Are you even sure they really wouldn't do the same again? To quote Time, "About 70 percent of people who suddenly receive a windfall of cash will lose it within a few years, according to the National Endowment for Financial Education." Just to make the anecdotes match the statistics, I inherented roughly 30k. It remained in my education fund until I finished undergrad. At 22, I opened an investment account. It's been paying dividends for the better part of a decade now.
    • Unklejoe 10y ago
      [Would they have learned that lesson without making that mistake? Are you even sure they really wouldn't do the same again?] It's hard to say. However, I think one really learns the value of money after having been in the work force for a while. I think that experience may have had a positive impact on their decision making had this happened later on in their life. [To quote Time, "About 70 percent of people who suddenly receive a windfall of cash will lose it within a few years, according to the National Endowment for Financial Education."] I believe it. But I also believe that the likelyhood of making good financial choices increases with some time spent in the work force. In this case, they had been living a nice lifestyle under their parents when they received the money. [Just to make the anecdotes match the statistics, I inherented roughly 30k. It remained in my education fund until I finished undergrad. At 22, I opened an investment account. It's been invested in the TSX60 for the past 6 years now.] You are also on hackernews, a website which consists of generally well-educated people. I'm not trying to sound snotty here, but there's a good chance that you have better judgement than most people.
      • slavik81 10y ago
        > I think one really learns the value of money after having been in the work force for a while. Perhaps you should consider using that as your criteria rather than discriminating based on age. I'd still disagree, but that policy would deprive fewer people than your current proposal.
        • Unklejoe 10y ago
          True. Even though there's a correlation, basing it off of age would screw some people who are otherwise capable. Point taken.