3 ms·
Anecdotally, both cities and rural areas are full of kids of multigenerational households (I’m having trouble tracking down a good data source; maybe you have d
by jacobolus 5y ago
Anecdotally, both cities and rural areas are full of kids of multigenerational households (I’m having trouble tracking down a good data source; maybe you have data?). But that generally has more to do with poverty than love for a particular place. It is also more common among immigrant and minority groups.
My impression is that car-centric suburbs full of wealthy white people have the fewest multigenerational households.
The elderly are much less independent in a car-centric society, which makes them more likely to end up spending longer in an assisted living facility where families can afford it.
- rayiner 5y agoBut the immigrants and minorities want to get out of there. I have had several members of my extended family who have lived in NYC after immigrating from Bangladesh. They do it because there’s a large Bangladeshi community and lots of support for new immigrants. But invariably they move out to Long Island as soon as they’re able to do so. The most recent wave is going straight to places like Texas. My FB feed is full of pictures of 3BR houses in the exurbs with pools. If living in a transit-dependent city with kids and elderly people was so convenient, the immigration pipeline wouldn’t involve people moving to Texas as soon as they can. But that’s exactly what happens. New York City has a huge internal out migration—it would be shrinking without international immigration. As an aside, most suburbs aren’t full of “wealthy white people.” In the DC area, the places where you’re most likely to encounter multigenerational households is the Virginia suburbs where there are lots of Hispanics and Muslims. DC itself has some of the lowest fertility rates in the country, for both white people and Black people.
- jacobolus 5y ago> 3BR houses in the exurbs with pools People with kids who move from the city to the suburbs/exurbs are doing their kids a disservice (all else equal; obviously there are some compensating advantages in moving from say a 1-bedroom apartment to a 3-bedroom house on a large lot). The kids generally end up dependent, immobile, and isolated. Land is certainly much cheaper though, and a lot of the material waste involved is subsidized by the federal government or borrowed from future local taxpayers, and there is no price put on a wide range of negative externalities. Sustainably and accurately pricing the full range of costs and harms from suburbia would render it unaffordable for most. Unfortunately national, state, and local policy in the USA is substantially organized around entrenching and extending car dependency. The places where people can easily live without cars tend to have high housing prices and generally higher cost of living. In other parts of the world, there is not such a steep price premium for housing density and walkable neighborhoods.
- rayiner 5y ago> People with kids who move from the city to the suburbs/exurbs are doing their kids a disservice (all else equal; obviously there are some compensating advantages in moving from say a 1-bedroom apartment to a 3-bedroom house on a large lot). The kids generally end up dependent, immobile, and isolated. LOL. My kid was incredibly isolated when we lived in DC because there were no other families.
- jacobolus 5y agoDC is chock full of families, with a birth rate above the national average. Just because you were living in a neighborhood full of 20-something yuppies or retirees or whoever, that doesn’t mean there are no kids in the city. Or maybe you just felt culturally alienated from the families with kids in DC, most of whom are less wealthy than yourself?