3 ms·
Cost of housing
by geenat 2y ago
Cost of housing
- hparadiz 2y agoI don't think this is accurate. I am far far far better off than either my grandparents or parents at this age and house ownership percentages in the United States are at the high end of what we had in the 60s and 70s. I think the real answer is that now people are faced with the choice and many are simply choosing not to.
- t-writescode 2y agoAre most people better off? Or just you? I know how a lot of people I know would answer.
- hparadiz 2y agoAmong my extended family, cousins, etc yes. Everyone has more square footage. Even double or triple. Even those that don't make six figures or live in Europe have much larger living spaces.
- t-writescode 2y agoWhen the only houses being built are monstrous, is that a useful metric? The majority of people I know don't own a house. They rent and they're in their 30s.
- ProfessorLayton 2y ago>I think the real answer is that now people are faced with the choice and many are simply choosing not to. It's not like they're choosing no in a vacuum. The price of housing bleeds into everything else being expensive too, especially in HCOL areas. Childcare is incredibly expensive, and in many cases it makes more sense for one of the parents to not work than to pay for it. That of course makes the calculus of having a child more complicated, let alone more than one.
- theendisney 2y agoSome 30-40 years ago there use to be stores here in the netherlands ran by old people who owned the building and the inventory. They live on the first floor. Almost no bills to pay. On a slow day they would sell 1 puzzle and 2 postcards. This was enough to buy food. I remember one that had motion detection lamps. If no one was in the store for 3 minutes the lights went off. In 2024 the new owner pays some 7-9000 per month and atleast 1000 worth of other bills. They also "own" a modest home that costs [say] 1500+600 and have some employees who also live in expensive houses. Shopping there is unsurprisingly expensive. Politics is artifically limiting construction and we all became the slaves of the owner class.
- michaelt 2y ago> I am far far far better off than either my grandparents or parents at this age Perhaps you have more disposable income and savings because you don't have the expense of supporting a stay-at-home wife and two kids?
- hparadiz 2y agoPeople have kids on the annual income I make in a month.
- anon291 2y ago> I think the real answer is that now people are faced with the choice and many are simply choosing not to. Moreover... many people are living very interesting engaging lives without kids that would have been impossible before due to the previous centrality of children to the social scene. In the past, not having kids was met with suspicion. Having children opened doors, economically, socially, and professionally, for better or worse. Today, you are probably going to have more opportunities without kids. Indeed having kids limits you, versus someone who does not.
- geenat 2y agoSmart people are not going to have kids in poverty or have a child with roommates.
- anon291 2y agoLiterally no one cares. This is not a major concern when deciding to have a child. Why don't we just ask the people that do have lots of kids. Not a single one, regardless of income (not everyone is rich), seems to really care. Truly we live in a rich country. No one who is not mentally challenged is going houseless. I recommend the book 'Hannah's children'.