5 ms·

I'm sure I will get down voted for this but.... In times past, most parents would have kicked them out of the house and told them to get a job. Now we regularl

I'm sure I will get down voted for this but.... In times past, most parents would have kicked them out of the house and told them to get a job. Now we regularly have parents that let their kids live at home, even when they have high paying jobs (which used to be frowned upon). There are two issues here: First supply and demand in the economy. Many jobs that young men used to do have either been exported to other countries or are being done by cheap undocumented labor. Second, parents that have enabled this behavior. As much as it isn't pleasant, the fear of not having a roof over your head, or being able to eat is a powerful motivator for people to get off the game console and to find a job, even if it is cleaning toilets with a toothbrush. But when you have parents you can coast and play video games, while living relatively stress free life. The problem is that a leisure economy is not sustainable long term. If the current generation has less wealth, they won't have the luxury of letting their kids stay at home to play video games. As much as technology will eliminate some jobs, it creates others, and the issue is not really a lowered demand for labor. It's that people looking for a larger profit are trying juice the labor markets in the US by increasing the supply of labor to lower the price by exporting production to places with cheaper labor and bringing in more labor competition......and we are seeing the effects of it. Explanations like this article are akin to being on a ship with a large hole in the front. It is causing it to lean forward but instead of fixing the hole they are re-arranging the furniture on the deck to try to fix the tilt.

Retric 8y ago
Relatively recently it was fairly common to see 3+ generations living in the same house. The norm of young people moving out really had more to do with selling more homes and urbanization than any long term cultural norm. Lower male participation in the workforce is a separate though 60+ year trend and has a wide range of causes. More education, more stay at home dads, automation, etc. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300001 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300001
- lgleason 8y ago
  That is a fair point, though it was a different dynamic. For example in rural farming areas they were an extra set of hands to work on the family farm etc..
  - Retric 8y ago
    Not just farms, large companies like Walmart have killed off a lot of multigenerational family business. At the same time people are changing jobs far more fequently so working for 40 years without any unemployment has become unusual.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  Even in urban areas it was not uncommon for young adults to live with their parents (and grandparents) until they married, at least up until the end of WWII. Women wouldn't move out because it was considered improper for an unmarried woman to live away from her parents; and men wouldn't move out because they wouldn't have anyone to cook and clean and launder for them, and most didn't have the skills to do this themselves (though some would move to lodgings where a certain amount of this was taken care of for them). Suburbanization and the increased availability of housing helped change that. But I'd guess the biggest contributor would have been the increasing age at first marriage. Living with your parents until marriage is one thing if you're married by 21, and quite another if you're single at 30 and can afford to move out - which was increasingly the case in the second half of the 20th century. Of course, now fewer and fewer can afford to move out, even if they're 30+ and unmarried.
- pnutjam 8y ago
  This article acts like higher wages have been tried already, bullshit.
nradov 8y ago
The unemployment rate is under 3% in several states now, including places with relatively low cost of living. There are jobs available for young men who want to work as long as they are willing to move. https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
mercer 8y ago
> I'm sure I will get down voted for this but.... I indiscriminately downvote all comments that make such a statement, and I'm pretty sure others here do the same. It does make me wonder why though. Is it insecurity? Some kind of martyrdom-insurance if people do downvote you? Your comment seems perfectly okay as it is, if not for that.

Retric 8y ago

Relatively recently it was fairly common to see 3+ generations living in the same house. The norm of young people moving out really had more to do with selling more homes and urbanization than any long term cultural norm. Lower male participation in the workforce is a separate though 60+ year trend and has a wide range of causes. More education, more stay at home dads, automation, etc. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300001 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300001

lgleason 8y ago
That is a fair point, though it was a different dynamic. For example in rural farming areas they were an extra set of hands to work on the family farm etc..
- Retric 8y ago
  Not just farms, large companies like Walmart have killed off a lot of multigenerational family business. At the same time people are changing jobs far more fequently so working for 40 years without any unemployment has become unusual.
cimmanom 8y ago
Even in urban areas it was not uncommon for young adults to live with their parents (and grandparents) until they married, at least up until the end of WWII. Women wouldn't move out because it was considered improper for an unmarried woman to live away from her parents; and men wouldn't move out because they wouldn't have anyone to cook and clean and launder for them, and most didn't have the skills to do this themselves (though some would move to lodgings where a certain amount of this was taken care of for them). Suburbanization and the increased availability of housing helped change that. But I'd guess the biggest contributor would have been the increasing age at first marriage. Living with your parents until marriage is one thing if you're married by 21, and quite another if you're single at 30 and can afford to move out - which was increasingly the case in the second half of the 20th century. Of course, now fewer and fewer can afford to move out, even if they're 30+ and unmarried.
pnutjam 8y ago
This article acts like higher wages have been tried already, bullshit.

nradov 8y ago

The unemployment rate is under 3% in several states now, including places with relatively low cost of living. There are jobs available for young men who want to work as long as they are willing to move. https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

mercer 8y ago

> I'm sure I will get down voted for this but.... I indiscriminately downvote all comments that make such a statement, and I'm pretty sure others here do the same. It does make me wonder why though. Is it insecurity? Some kind of martyrdom-insurance if people do downvote you? Your comment seems perfectly okay as it is, if not for that.