11 ms·

42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support

158 points by root-parent 3mo ago

Ancalagon 3mo ago
This article is shilling some courseware for CNBC FYI.
- resoluteteeth 3mo ago
  I think that's an ad that appears at the bottom of most of the articles on "cnbc make it" so I'm not the specific article is shilling it per se.
BiraIgnacio 3mo ago
> A large portion of U.S. adults are making ends meet with help from their parents.
anthonypasq 3mo ago
I think the word "rely" is doing some heavy lifting here. Still being on your parent's family phone plan doesnt mean youd be destitute if they werent helping you out.
- yesfitz 3mo ago
  I went to the source[1] referenced by the article and found the exact question. It took about 90 seconds. "How financially independent you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed)" 1: https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...
  - flumes_whims_ 3mo ago
    According to that 17% of boomers+ are dependent on their parents. Just looking at boomers, that is around 70 on average. How many people that age even have parents still alive, let alone financially depend on them?
    - pessimizer 3mo ago
      I'd speculate (based on a study I've recently been made aware of) about 17%.
    - busterarm 3mo ago
      Boomers can be trust fund babies too.
      - vel0city 3mo ago
        Not only that, if you're a single boomer with a living parent and neither of you have much other incomes its probably better to cohabitate in that old family house that was paid off in the 90s and share what little benefits you both receive.
        busterarm 3mo ago
        I think people also underestimate what a serious obligation this can be. I'm taking care of an elderly parent with dementia who cannot afford the care that they need. It costs me significant time and money. It has completely stalled my career. I'm not actually getting anything from them and it's worse than taking care of a newborn baby. It's interesting because I'm around the age where most of my peers are dealing with something like this and it's something I'd never heard talked about seriously even once my whole life. I was totally unprepared for it and it seems to be a thing that large numbers of people are quietly suffering with. It has given me a lot of empathy for people who I may have judged as underperformers, etc.
        vel0city 3mo ago
        It's a story I've seen a lot. Proper care for those people in such situations is a hard full-time job on its own, and something we in society are mostly undervaluing. We really suck at late stage life planning and discussions. I'm sorry for all the difficult times you've experienced so far and the hard times to come. It's a lot to give. Be sure to look for what benefits you/they quality for. Be sure to still spend time to ensure you stay mentally healthy as well.
- butlike 3mo ago
  I don't know, that one doesn't seem as benign as your making it out to be. I would say if you're having your parents subsidize your phone bill you're still not technically living on your own.
  - lattalayta 3mo ago
    Cell phone companies incentivize this, though. It's a better deal for both the parents and children (often 50%) with no difference in service
  - anthonypasq 3mo ago
    theres plenty of people making 6 figures at 25 that still have their parents pay their phone bill because they get a family discount. i dont get your point
- burningChrome 3mo ago
  >> Still being on your parent's family phone plan doesnt mean youd be destitute if they werent helping you out. I think there's some important things like this that should be considered. In the late 90's early aughts, I didn't need a laptop, smartphone and 24/7 internet access with 1GB download speeds or half the technological stuff kids need these days to be a contributing member of society. Now those are all standard items for kids growing up. When I was in college in 2000, life was pretty easy. I paid $350/month for rent, cable, heat and landline phone. That was literally my entire financial costs for the month. Beer, going out to the bars, random things here and there? Easy to cover when you're making $10/hour working 35 hours a week. Now? Your basic needs will consistently run $1,500 for all of the stuff you need to function into today's society. Having your parents covering some of that in order for you to live on your own I think is not abnormal any more. As a Gen Xer, we had it really good. I've started to realize kids these days are put at a massive disadvantage because we require everything to be accessible via the internet and smartphones.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
    > $350/month [ 2000 ] > $1500/month [ 2026 ] CPI inflation would suggest that the current cost ought to be about $692. So if it really costs $1500 to cover the things you've mentioned (noticeabley absent: student loans, health insurance, car payments) then either our society is deeply fucked or your list has changed or your estimates are wrong or your memory is wrong or all of the above.
    - iwontberude 3mo ago
      CPI is a bullshit number. CPI indexes Social Security COLAs, TIPS payouts, tax brackets, and federal pensions. Every 0.1% shaved off CPI saves the Treasury real money on its indexed obligations.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
        Please tell me more. It is acknowledged as not covering some costs that affect many people severely. But that does not by itself make it a bullshit number.
- dclowd9901 3mo ago
  Yet, with 37% of people being only a $400 surprise cost away from financial destitution, you might be completely wrong. https://www.investopedia.com/here-s-how-many-americans-can-t-afford-a-usd400-emergency-the-numbers-may-shock-you-11814788 https://www.investopedia.com/here-s-how-many-americans-can-t...
  - Legend2440 3mo ago
    That's not what your linked article says. 37% of survey respondants say they would need to use a credit card to cover a $400 expense. They wouldn't be destitute, they just don't immediately have the cash. It also cites another study that put the number much lower, at 8%.
- alphawhisky 3mo ago
  I think that the vast majority of people who are "relying" on their parents for finances actually belong to the upper class. Family Feudalism has bred two consecutive generations of entitled shitheads, and these people are gonna have the wheel soon (if not already) in the US politically. This has concerning potential consequences.
cliglot 3mo ago
I may have ended up that way if I hadn’t gotten into software as a teenager. Luckily a did and the timing was right for me to make some sort of decent career out of it. I did live independently prior to going into software, but it sucked and was fragile and likely would have fallen apart long term. I also doubt I could find a similar living situation as a young man with no credit or much money to his name. Even the mom and pop landlords use management companies that run you through a black box for approval/rejection with little room for negotiation.
- rconti 3mo ago
  > Even the mom and pop landlords use management companies that run you through a black box for approval/rejection with little room for negotiation. Rental approvals are ridiculous. We're renting an apartment while we remodel our house. We've taken out mortgages, refi'd mortgages, and (by now) taken out 3 HELOCs in a row (2 of them subsequently closed as we needed to re-file for more $). While there's a lot of paperwork involved, it feels pretty easy. "Promise to pay us back? Cool!" Filling out apartment rentals was awful. The rejections, the tiny paper forms asking you about creditors and bank accounts, how much money you owe each of them every month, personal references, "supervisor's phone number", have you ever been to jail, ever failed to pay rent for any reason, previous landlords' contact info. Look, I get that rent is an unsecured obligation (vs a mortgage), but every step of it was gross and accusatory.
  - inigyou 3mo ago
    And they wonder why they only get the most desperate people as tenants!
jdw64 3mo ago
[dead]
josefritzishere 3mo ago
The parallels between the Great Depression and the conditions now are worrisome.
- nilamo 3mo ago
  I don't know what you mean, the DOW is over 50k. /s
  - josefritzishere 3mo ago
    The stock market isn't the economy. Those are different things. If you are new to this area, the Wikipedia article is good for basics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy
    - jjav 3mo ago
      I'm thinking you missed the "/s"
    - nilamo 3mo ago
      https://youtu.be/nE2132OUc5s https://youtu.be/nE2132OUc5s
annjose 3mo ago
Whenever I see a claim that "x% of adults do y", my brain goes: - "x% of what? what is the denominator?". Without that number, the claim is meaningless. - surely it cannot be the entire population, so it has to be a survey. - how many people participated in the survey? what was the distribution? Here is that info for this study. I found this in the PDF version of the study report [0] referred to at the end of the Northwestern page [1]. > Methodology The Harris Poll conducted a total of 4,375 online interviews among the general U.S. adult (18+) population between January 5th and January 21st, 2026. Included in this overall total is a sample of 816 High-Net-Worth individuals (those with total household investable assets, excluding pensions, retirement plans and property, greater than $1,000,000). [0] https://filecache.mediaroom.com/mr5mr_nwmutual/179168/2026%20P%26P%20Wave%20I%20Data%20Deck%20The%20Financial%20States%20of%20America.pdf https://filecache.mediaroom.com/mr5mr_nwmutual/179168/2026%2... [1] https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...
- nathan_compton 3mo ago
  Typically surveys are adjusted for sampling biases before reporting. That appears to be the case here. So there is usually some attempt to account for the biases in the sampled population. The impulse to ask "what population was sampled?" is good but its not always a straight line from there to "these results directly reflect that sampling bias." In fact, from the page you posted: "Data for the general U.S. population (including the High Net Worth oversample) were weighted to Census targets for education, age, gender, race/ethnicity, region and household income. A full methodology is available." I would presume that the headline number attempts to account for sampling bias.
  - annjose 3mo ago
    I agree with you - there’s usually some adjustment for sampling bias, and this study says it is matching Census targets. But I had to go three levels down to see that info before I derive any meaning from the number. My concern is that headlines like “x% of adults do y” get repeated without anyone (sometimes even journalists writing the article) seeing the methodology or nuance behind them. Context matters.
alistairSH 3mo ago
33% of GenX is still depending on their parents? That's shocking... I'm at the young end of GenX at 49yo. So, a slice of the population that is fast approaching retirement age is still reliant on their septuagenarian or octogenarian parents for money? Wow.
- alistairSH 3mo ago
  Source: https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st... OK, now I'm questioning the whole thing... it also claims 17% of Boomers reliant on their parents. So, we have some substantial number of 62-80 years olds relying on their 90-100 year old parents? Seems unlikely.
  - butlike 3mo ago
    It's plausible if it's an inheritable nest egg amount. Though I agree, seems unlikely.
  - pessimizer 3mo ago
    Wait until you see the homeownership statistics, or the average age of homebuyers.
  - piguin 3mo ago
    Maybe you're not familiar with the entire economy? There are a lot of households that depend on retirement checks of the oldest members and households that don't have traditional work but may have family homes, businesses and farms still in the name of the oldest relatives. Different groups would have different results as far as whether they will inherit independence or become destitute if parents die.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
      17% of generally retired people are relying on the retirement checks of their parents ? Really ?
    - 3mo ago
wonderwonder 3mo ago
Its expensive out there. I used to judge people for not being able to stand on their own but now my mindset is if someone is working 40+ hours a week and sticking to a reasonable budget and not driving a new car then not sure what else we can ask them to do. Most of these people that are getting help aren't saving for retirement either so its just a long game of desperation. Easy to say get a better job but not everyone has the skills or mental acuity to do that. With that said there are aboslutely a lot of people that have no concept of budgeting and are their own worst enemy
snovymgodym 3mo ago
The figure might be misleading. It might not be. Either way, the idea that the natural and normal state of affairs is that every person can go out into the world and be a perfectly self sufficient but comfortable atomized economic unit without support from their family or society is deeply flawed. This wasn't the norm for most of human history, and it isn't the norm globally today.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
  It might, however, be a nice thing to aspire to, no? Economic self-sufficiency doesn't have to imply atomization, I think.
  - PaulHoule 3mo ago
    It's an interesting question. We have a group that promotes a "living wage" construct in Tompkins County that pushes the unquestioned assumption that people who are working in the lowest paying jobs can live 100% alone. It's not something I want to challenge directly, but... It reminds me of discussions about the minimum wage in the late 1980s when it was common for teenagers to work at supermarkets and fast food markets. I think the public never really understood how the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit was specifically intended to help out people who were raising a family with low incomes that was economically efficient and how there is some logic to people who are working in low income jobs qualifying for food stamps, it is not just a way "Wal-Mart is stealing for us." e.g. part of "affordability" is keeping costs low and as much leftie folks want to sweep it under the rug there is a lot of internal class conflict in groups such as women: like the Sheryl Sandberg type definitely benefits from exploiting less wealthy women to do child care work for them and child care is basically problematic because the child care worker is not productive enough to put their own children in child care without subsidy and you don't get the Fordist scenario where the auto line worker can easily afford to own one of the cars they make.
pessimizer 3mo ago
Reminder that black US slave descendants have a median wealth of about $5000 (i.e the equity they have in their cars.) When you consider black crime, consider the OP statistic in light of that. Most black people I know have parents who rely on their support (and siblings, and cousins, etc.) Whatever is happening to 42% of Americans is happening to 97% (figures drawn from my ass) of black Americans. $5000 is pretty good. I'm from Chicago, where the median black wealth is $0. https://colorofwealth.org/ https://colorofwealth.org/
joe_mamba 3mo ago
What do you call the situation where your parents depend on your support? I helped my dad with a 6000 Euro out of pocket surgery so he can regain the use of his shoulder. And I'm an average working class Europoor, not a stock broker. And my mom is paying some of the bills for my grandma because she can't afford the bills on her ~300 Euro pension.
entrepy123 3mo ago
Ok, but why? https://wtfhappenedin1971.com https://wtfhappenedin1971.com has been linked on HN many times before. Is it related to that? Searching the internet, one can read more, such as: > In August 1971, alongside the "Nixon Shock" that severed the dollar's convertibility to gold, the Nixon administration imposed a 90-day economy-wide freeze on all wages and prices. This was the first time the U.S. enacted wage and price controls outside of wartime. Following the initial 90-day freeze, the Nixon administration implemented a complex, multi-tiered price control system on the petroleum industry that lasted for years. > In August 1971, Nixon was "floating" the dollar, abandoning the gold standard and "freezing" prices and wages. This video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EBEapf3OFw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EBEapf3OFw asks the below: > Why did America deliberately destroy its own manufacturing industry? And starts off, > It did not happen all at once. Americans watched their own country lose it, brand by brand, factory by factory. Every time, the country was handed the same three reasons...(It looked inevitable. And every one of them was true enough to believe.) Plenty of those factories were still making money the day they were ordered shut. They closed anyway, on the say-so of men who had never worked a shift in their lives and grew richer each time another one went dark....
AviationAtom 3mo ago
So if said kids are relying on their parents for support... how are their kids going to rely on them? The idea behind generational wealth is that there is something left to pass down. If you have nothing to pass down, because both you and your parents spent it all, then you're fully on your own to support yourself. Somewhere along the line the bill always comes due.
- aianus 3mo ago
  How so? If you don’t touch the principal you can live off the investment returns forever and so can your descendants.
  - ironman1478 3mo ago
    Health care costs at the end of your life can eat everything you've ever saved and more. Cost of maintenance on housing is increasing and property insurance rates + HOA rates are going up. This idea only works under ideal conditions.
    - AviationAtom 3mo ago
      I'd be curious if the folks that are advocating for people to provide support to their adults kids also expect those adult kids to keep their parents living with them when elderly. I know assisted living facilities charge exorbitant amounts of money, to the point it's often advised to setup a trust, so the parent's assets are no longer viewed as their assets. These facilities apparently charge based on assets, where if you have none then suddenly the monthly cost to live there equates only to the value of your Social Security Income payments.
      - ironman1478 3mo ago
        If my parents are indicative of anything, they're just going with the flow and believing it'll all magically work out.
        3mo ago
cestith 3mo ago
These numbers are a nice snapshot, but I see no comparison to historical numbers in the article. I know many families who have had intergenerational support happening from older to younger and vice versa.
seemaze 3mo ago
The premise of TFA along with the entirety of the comments are eloquently embodied by the misfit troubadour and grunge philosopher Todd Snider in Statistician's Blues [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUK6zjtUj00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUK6zjtUj00
jampekka 3mo ago
This seems to be some self-help for the well-off (and their kids) to not feel bad about such dependence, but totally ignores the large population whose parents aren't affluent enough to support their children. Or may even need support from their children. I don't think the feefees of the well off is the gravest issue here.
- charlie90 3mo ago
  In my experience, poorer families tend to live in multigenerational housing at a much higher rate. So this doesnt seem to be true. Less affuluent usually means more sharing of resources, not less.
nullorempty 3mo ago
[flagged]
- tangenter 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - nullorempty 3mo ago
    [flagged]
  - bogwog 3mo ago
    Yup, and don't even get me started about what they're doing to the frogs!!!!11 (hint: it's very s*nful)
- DaSHacka 3mo ago
  Not a reply I expected to see on HN, but frankly I agree. I've heard enough "this country doesn't have enough talent!!! We need millions more immigrants to cover the gap!" While almost every recent cybersecurity graduate I know is quite literally UNABLE to find a relevant job, with most resigning to hitting up the employers of jobs they had in HS with low-skill work like wiping down decommissioned K-12 Chromebooks for resale on ebay. What an absolute waste of their talents. We obviously have the talent in this country, we're literally the forefront of the field. Employers just prefer a 'subclass' of laborers with less rights (e.g. H1Bs/illegal immigrants that the employer can hold over their head) and lower minimum livable salary compared to regular citizens.
- ripe 3mo ago
  > STOP spending on immigration programs... to improve situation for kids of the people who built out the western civilization The common misconception that the US Government is wasting money on immigration is pushed by Trump and FOX News, who both lie regularly. For example, see [1] about how Trump rejected a report produced by Federal researchers. The report is available [2]. Overall, the refugee resettlement program gives the country back many times what the government spends. And even if you just focus on the expenditure, the bulk of it is on border enforcement and imprisonment, which goes to domestic private companies. As to your love for "the people who built western civilization", I'll just leave it up there. Your connotation is clear, and it doesn't reflect well on you. [1] Trump administration rejects report showing positive impact of refugees https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/refugees-revenue-cost-report-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/refugees-reve... [2] Rejected Report Shows Revenue Brought In by Refugees. SEPT. 19, 2017: A draft of a study rejected by Trump administration officials that found that refugees brought in $63 billion more in government revenues over the past decade than they cost. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/19/us/politics/document-Refugee-Report.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/19/us/politics/d...
cliglot 3mo ago
How you define “rely”. I’ve certainly seen trust fund kids who’s success is anchored on “daddy gave me a sweet job at his company” and others who’d be dead or in prison if it wasn’t for the constant money poured into the legal system by their parents.
- conductr 3mo ago
  There’s a huge spectrum. I’m mid 40s and my wife grew up much wealthier than I did. We have done quite well, but I I’m a bit frugal, like to save, despise waste and excess, and therefore don’t like traveling like they do. I like traveling but all the fancy upgraded experiences at every turn is what I refuse to spend money on. But we don’t go without, we “rely” on my in laws to upgrade our travel (or that’s how my wife has structured the relationship with them, they pay for everything and we cover the drinks is basically how it works out). I’m not a huge fan of it but they don’t care and it keeps my wife off my back lol, so whatever. We travel with them a lot but even when we don’t I think my wife uses their card to pay for it. It’s between them is what I say, I don’t want to be a part of it as it feels like we’re taking advantage of them but apparently they’re fine with it. Is this fitting the definition of “rely” because it’s nonessential
  - fragmede 3mo ago
    Is it taking advantage if they have a lot of money and want to spoil their daughter and son-in-law?
    - conductr 3mo ago
      Probably not, just against my nature to let people spoil me. So I have some internal conflict about it but let it occur. There may be a better word for it but that's kind of how I feel when we, they, spend more annually that the median household income on our travel.
- michaelt 3mo ago
  According to the more detailed report [1] the questions and answers were: Q2630. Do you currently consider yourself financially independent? Yes: 72% No: 28% Q2634. How financially independent do you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed)? Fully independent: 44% Mostly independent: 17% Somewhat dependent: 17% Fully dependent: 8% Not applicable: 14% Then they report 17+17+8=42 = "42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support" [1] https://news.northwesternmutual.com/download/2026+P%26P+Market+-+WAVE+3+-+Financial+Independence.pdf https://news.northwesternmutual.com/download/2026+P%26P+Mark...
exiguus 3mo ago
The question that was ask in the survey was: How financially independent you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed) I understand that YC is questioning the results of the survey. The YC community is very privileged; and i bet, if we do the same survey in this community, 20% or less of adults rely on their parents.
- randysalami 3mo ago
  Haha. I had the opposite thought. If they are very privileged, wouldn’t they rely more? I guess there is privileged you make yourself and privileged you are born into and then more easily make for yourself. But if you are the latter and can support yourself, would you really then do it entirely on your own and not still benefit/rely from/on your parents? I’m not sure (and yes I am including family vacations, connections, and other kinds of arrangements).
  - gedy 3mo ago
    Yeah right? I used to live in nicer/upper area and like everybody got help from their parents for house, if not outright given to them.
  - exiguus 3mo ago
    I've asked myself the same question. And I've come to the conclusion that there's a difference between feeling independent and being independent. Like: I built a $50 billion business with my own hands. Okay, I got the first $2 billion from my parents. Okay, I got the first $2 billion for every business from my parents until I was successful.
- jghn 3mo ago
  Also, the first thought I had was "what %age of adults are 18-30". Not that a 30yo should be dependent on their parents but I'd assume that people answering yes skew younger. And to your point about YC, that's also a young skewed demographic.
  - exiguus 3mo ago
cliglot 3mo ago
> CPI inflation would suggest that the current cost ought to be about $692. Rent alone will probably blow that. I live in a burnt out rust belt shithole city and I’m struggling to understand how rent is this high. I pay a good bit more than $692 to live in a slum just outside the ghetto right now and I have to feel gracious for that. It’s closer to what I paid in a decent middle class neighborhood in Florida. That was only 5-6 years ago. This is in a city where the best people can say about it is: “well it’s cheaper”. Hell when I lived in South Carolina from 2017-2019. My apartment there was closer to the stated inflation figure, but this was for a place that regularly flooded the downstairs neighbors and left me for weeks without AC in the peak of summer because of careless management. Still not as bad as business rents. I’ve seen downtown business close because they’re being made to be $7000 for a shitty 100 year old property surrounded by condemned properties.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
  Let me suggest the problem: CPI inflation suggests a rough doubling of basic living costs. How many jobs can you point to that are paying 2x in 2026 what they were paying in 2000? There are some. But the data seems to suggest that the majority do not.
  - nonameiguess 3mo ago
    This posted while I was still in the middle of my other rant, but when I was doing the four guys in one apartment thing putting myself through community college, my job was overnight janitor at Knott's Berry Farm and paid $6.50 an hour. Minimum wage in California is now $16.90, so that at least is more than double.
  - tpmoney 3mo ago
    After the big corrections entry level jobs had to do during and after COVID, I think it's probably more than you think. As an example, the BLS says in 2000 the mean hourly wage for "Food preparation and serving related" jobs was $7.72 / hour [1]. As of May 2025, they list the median hourly wage (yes median and mean aren't the same, but for this purpose, I don't think the differences would affect the overall point that much) at $16.85 / hour [2] Likewise for "Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance", we went from $9.41/hour to $18.12 / hour. Though admittedly not every field saw such gains. "Sales and related" didn't do quite as well, going from $13.46 to just $18.52. "Office and Administrative" did a bit better going from $12.64 to $22.81, but that's still a bit under the 2x mark. "Construction and extraction" also missed the 2x mark by a bit, going from $16.56 to $28.63. Still the numbers I think aren't quite as dire as the vibes make it feel right now. [1]: https://www.bls.gov/oes/bulletin_2000.pdf https://www.bls.gov/oes/bulletin_2000.pdf [2]: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ocwage.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ocwage.pdf
NDlurker 3mo ago
I lived with my parents until I was 20 and they helped me out until I was 22. My girlfriend's kids are on the same path. Though even with people in their 30s and 40s I think it's common to get help for unexpected big expenses because a lot of people don't have adequate emergency funds.
PaulHoule 3mo ago
My 20-something son is living with us but he does pay (some) rent. I half expect to have to apologize for this, like when I was growing up people would think you are a loser if you were in this situation. Today people think we are really smart and the people who are paying more rent than they can afford to live alone that are losing.
- pllbnk 3mo ago
  I can’t understand morally or financially how can parents charge anything of their children. Not judging it, just honestly can’t understand it. Isn’t it the parents’ responsibility to build the foundation for their children and keep building it until it’s there? I am viewing it from a moral angle where it’s the parents’ selfish choice to have a child so they must take full responsibility until a child is or feels that they can be independent.
  - pizzafeelsright 3mo ago
    In my house the >8 years old the kids start paying rent. They get paid for normal house work (minimum wage). Rent is ~$300/month. I pay the kid minimum wage for chores because that is work and work should be rewarded. They pay me rent. That rent and other expenses are ~80% of their pay. Some must go to savings and "taxes". They have to keep books as well. The rest is theirs. I know other fathers that charge their adult children rent, keep the money, and then gift it to them at the wedding or to help them buy a house.
    - pllbnk 3mo ago
      I understand that such a game of life might be beneficial for a child. But I would like to understand the reasoning to do that with an adult. > I know other fathers that charge their adult children rent, keep the money, and then gift it to them at the wedding or to help them buy a house. This looks like a game which should have ended by the time a child is an adult. I am raising a very young child so I am very concerned about the future and constantly thinking what's the right way to raise him.
rconti 3mo ago
When I was a kid, we never had a ton of extra money, but my parents were very supportive-- they paid for most of my college expenses, for example. Their outlook was that us kids shouldn't have to work-- "school is your job". (However, both my sister and I _did_ have jobs while in school). However, I never _asked_ my parents for money. I had a good education and a well-paying job, and was able to turn IPO money into a house down payment. In the end, we struggled to close the deal, and my wife and I both asked to borrow money from our parents. Of course they were happy to do so, but I still remember it as feeling so hard to do -- just something that I "shouldn't" have to do. And, of course, it also made me reflect on those who didn't have family support to fall back on, let alone jobs that paid well.
- bradlys 3mo ago
  Never had a ton of extra money but your parents can casually pay for your college expenses and buy a house for you?
  - rconti 3mo ago
    Excellent work with the reading there, champ.
- dyauspitr 3mo ago
  I have never asked my parents for money. They have had to resort to trickery (asking for bank details for some passport stuff) to send me money. I hope to be able to do the same for my kid.
  - toast0 3mo ago
    Always check the pockets of jackets before donating! My mom snuck $100 in a jacket my wife almost donated without realizing.
    - fragmede 3mo ago
      Then again, the person receiving the donated jacket could use the $100 more than the person donating it. It's fun to imagine what I might do if a billionaire gave me a million dollars, or 0.1% of their wealth. Thing is, me giving $5,000 to a homeless person would change their life more than me getting that million dollars.
1970-01-01 3mo ago
The link to their study is much more interesting: https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...
slibhb 3mo ago
Downward mobility is almost entirely caused by housing costs, which are a self-inflicted problem. We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. I live in an expensive area and I'm always shocked by how many of my friends who cannot afford to buy a home (or even a condo) are NIMBYs. These are people in their 20s through 40s who have been earning since college, can't afford to buy, yet get annoyed whenever there's new construction that "alters the character of the neighborhood". Talk about false consciousness. I can at least understand people who own a home feeling this way.
- Animats 3mo ago
  > We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. If actual number of houses was the problem, house prices would not be increasing in areas of population decline. It's existing houses being repriced upward by speculation that makes them unaffordable.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - jayGlow 3mo ago
    are these areas with declining populations and rising housing prices increasing the number of houses? it could be that the population declines because no one can afford to live there however it's still a desirable area so prices remain high. cities like Austin are seeing reduction in housing prices despite population increase due to construction of new housing.
    - alphawhisky 3mo ago
      That only covers a portion of the population. Don't forget the middle of nowhere towns that refuse to tax their citizens (but eat grant money like pigs) and refuse to allow new housing. All of this is essentially being done to maximize property value and keep new people out. This is why people are moving to cities in the US. Not a desire, but a need in order to make ends meet and get on the property ladder.
tamimio 3mo ago
Because boomers are selfish and holding onto most of the wealth, ruining and destroying the generations to follow. It’s a weird phenomenon actually, their parents gave them everything possible, even independence, yet, the boomers do all sort of shenanigans to keep holding on the wealth, and when they can’t, they go on manipulation tactics, as if their lives are the center of universe and all generations after are the minions to serve them.
- alphawhisky 3mo ago
  >all generations after are the minions to serve them Serve their kids. The money is only incidental to the power structure (nepotism, classism, xenophobia) that they intend to pass down to their chosen successors. They've been working to limit economic mobility, opportunity, and fairness for a while now.
- senordevnyc 3mo ago
  Wait, so you're annoyed that the boomers are using their wealth to help support their kids (the respondents to this survey) instead of just giving it to them and making them trust fund kids? Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of negative things to say about boomers, but I'm not sure how your complaint here really fits the article.
Animats 3mo ago
Data table.[1] [1] https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...
kittikitti 3mo ago
Many people I know brag about how much they rely on their parents.
fullshark 3mo ago
The post WW2 boom in America was an exceptional time. This is the status quo for humanity.
shevy-java 3mo ago
The biggest problem here is finding secure and reliable income in the long term. People here in the 1960s, for instance, could save up quite a lot of money. This is of course possible today too, but what if you can only find low income jobs? You'll remain working poor for the rest of your life. That's not exactly fair from an inter-generational point of view. Meanwhile the number of superrich is growing. That's also unfair. And money buys legislation, so (many, but not all) democracies are broken.
WarOnPrivacy 3mo ago
I rely on my kids for financial support. It takes four of us (earning typical wages) to afford basic bills + basic emergencies. I don't believe the US will exit the 4-income economy in my lifetime.
Garlef 3mo ago
So: Since this is US centric: - Is it better/worse than other countries? ... better/worse than "comparable" countries? - What's the historical trend? - And in both directions (geographical, historical): How does it relate to the respective diffences in wealth inequality?
msarrel 3mo ago
It's shocking how once again the number one contributing factor to success is being born to parents who support you for your whole life.
stronglikedan 3mo ago
I'd wager that number isn't so different from previous generations, but it's just not as taboo to admit it nowadays.
boogieknite 3mo ago
have a large extended family almost entirely living in the Seattle area while i grew up in rural Oregon i moved out after high school and did my best to stay out (of course occasionally life has other plans). nearly all of my 30ish Seattle cousins stayed with their parents until getting married, some never moved out. i was so confused because i was close with my cousins and we seemed pretty like-minded, but it really just came down to housing costs
tsoukase 3mo ago
As a Greek, and I believe fellow Italians do, I cannot believe how one can live for the first 10-20 years of his adult life without their parents' help, especially today. Old money, inheritance and a house are almost always existent and extend the intergenerational bonding. I don't know if I am jealous or repelled by northern Europeans or even the USA that don't exhibit thus behaviour.

158 points by root-parent 3mo ago

Ancalagon 3mo ago

This article is shilling some courseware for CNBC FYI.

resoluteteeth 3mo ago
I think that's an ad that appears at the bottom of most of the articles on "cnbc make it" so I'm not the specific article is shilling it per se.

BiraIgnacio 3mo ago

> A large portion of U.S. adults are making ends meet with help from their parents.

anthonypasq 3mo ago

I think the word "rely" is doing some heavy lifting here. Still being on your parent's family phone plan doesnt mean youd be destitute if they werent helping you out.

yesfitz 3mo ago
I went to the source[1] referenced by the article and found the exact question. It took about 90 seconds. "How financially independent you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed)" 1: https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...
- flumes_whims_ 3mo ago
  According to that 17% of boomers+ are dependent on their parents. Just looking at boomers, that is around 70 on average. How many people that age even have parents still alive, let alone financially depend on them?
  - pessimizer 3mo ago
    I'd speculate (based on a study I've recently been made aware of) about 17%.
  - busterarm 3mo ago
    Boomers can be trust fund babies too.
    - vel0city 3mo ago
      Not only that, if you're a single boomer with a living parent and neither of you have much other incomes its probably better to cohabitate in that old family house that was paid off in the 90s and share what little benefits you both receive.
      - busterarm 3mo ago
        I think people also underestimate what a serious obligation this can be. I'm taking care of an elderly parent with dementia who cannot afford the care that they need. It costs me significant time and money. It has completely stalled my career. I'm not actually getting anything from them and it's worse than taking care of a newborn baby. It's interesting because I'm around the age where most of my peers are dealing with something like this and it's something I'd never heard talked about seriously even once my whole life. I was totally unprepared for it and it seems to be a thing that large numbers of people are quietly suffering with. It has given me a lot of empathy for people who I may have judged as underperformers, etc.
        vel0city 3mo ago
        It's a story I've seen a lot. Proper care for those people in such situations is a hard full-time job on its own, and something we in society are mostly undervaluing. We really suck at late stage life planning and discussions. I'm sorry for all the difficult times you've experienced so far and the hard times to come. It's a lot to give. Be sure to look for what benefits you/they quality for. Be sure to still spend time to ensure you stay mentally healthy as well.
butlike 3mo ago
I don't know, that one doesn't seem as benign as your making it out to be. I would say if you're having your parents subsidize your phone bill you're still not technically living on your own.
- lattalayta 3mo ago
  Cell phone companies incentivize this, though. It's a better deal for both the parents and children (often 50%) with no difference in service
- anthonypasq 3mo ago
  theres plenty of people making 6 figures at 25 that still have their parents pay their phone bill because they get a family discount. i dont get your point
burningChrome 3mo ago
>> Still being on your parent's family phone plan doesnt mean youd be destitute if they werent helping you out. I think there's some important things like this that should be considered. In the late 90's early aughts, I didn't need a laptop, smartphone and 24/7 internet access with 1GB download speeds or half the technological stuff kids need these days to be a contributing member of society. Now those are all standard items for kids growing up. When I was in college in 2000, life was pretty easy. I paid $350/month for rent, cable, heat and landline phone. That was literally my entire financial costs for the month. Beer, going out to the bars, random things here and there? Easy to cover when you're making $10/hour working 35 hours a week. Now? Your basic needs will consistently run $1,500 for all of the stuff you need to function into today's society. Having your parents covering some of that in order for you to live on your own I think is not abnormal any more. As a Gen Xer, we had it really good. I've started to realize kids these days are put at a massive disadvantage because we require everything to be accessible via the internet and smartphones.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
  > $350/month [ 2000 ] > $1500/month [ 2026 ] CPI inflation would suggest that the current cost ought to be about $692. So if it really costs $1500 to cover the things you've mentioned (noticeabley absent: student loans, health insurance, car payments) then either our society is deeply fucked or your list has changed or your estimates are wrong or your memory is wrong or all of the above.
  - iwontberude 3mo ago
    CPI is a bullshit number. CPI indexes Social Security COLAs, TIPS payouts, tax brackets, and federal pensions. Every 0.1% shaved off CPI saves the Treasury real money on its indexed obligations.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
      Please tell me more. It is acknowledged as not covering some costs that affect many people severely. But that does not by itself make it a bullshit number.
dclowd9901 3mo ago
Yet, with 37% of people being only a $400 surprise cost away from financial destitution, you might be completely wrong. https://www.investopedia.com/here-s-how-many-americans-can-t-afford-a-usd400-emergency-the-numbers-may-shock-you-11814788 https://www.investopedia.com/here-s-how-many-americans-can-t...
- Legend2440 3mo ago
  That's not what your linked article says. 37% of survey respondants say they would need to use a credit card to cover a $400 expense. They wouldn't be destitute, they just don't immediately have the cash. It also cites another study that put the number much lower, at 8%.
alphawhisky 3mo ago
I think that the vast majority of people who are "relying" on their parents for finances actually belong to the upper class. Family Feudalism has bred two consecutive generations of entitled shitheads, and these people are gonna have the wheel soon (if not already) in the US politically. This has concerning potential consequences.

cliglot 3mo ago

I may have ended up that way if I hadn’t gotten into software as a teenager. Luckily a did and the timing was right for me to make some sort of decent career out of it. I did live independently prior to going into software, but it sucked and was fragile and likely would have fallen apart long term. I also doubt I could find a similar living situation as a young man with no credit or much money to his name. Even the mom and pop landlords use management companies that run you through a black box for approval/rejection with little room for negotiation.

rconti 3mo ago
> Even the mom and pop landlords use management companies that run you through a black box for approval/rejection with little room for negotiation. Rental approvals are ridiculous. We're renting an apartment while we remodel our house. We've taken out mortgages, refi'd mortgages, and (by now) taken out 3 HELOCs in a row (2 of them subsequently closed as we needed to re-file for more $). While there's a lot of paperwork involved, it feels pretty easy. "Promise to pay us back? Cool!" Filling out apartment rentals was awful. The rejections, the tiny paper forms asking you about creditors and bank accounts, how much money you owe each of them every month, personal references, "supervisor's phone number", have you ever been to jail, ever failed to pay rent for any reason, previous landlords' contact info. Look, I get that rent is an unsecured obligation (vs a mortgage), but every step of it was gross and accusatory.
- inigyou 3mo ago
  And they wonder why they only get the most desperate people as tenants!

jdw64 3mo ago

[dead]

josefritzishere 3mo ago

The parallels between the Great Depression and the conditions now are worrisome.

nilamo 3mo ago
I don't know what you mean, the DOW is over 50k. /s
- josefritzishere 3mo ago
  The stock market isn't the economy. Those are different things. If you are new to this area, the Wikipedia article is good for basics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy
  - jjav 3mo ago
    I'm thinking you missed the "/s"
  - nilamo 3mo ago
    https://youtu.be/nE2132OUc5s https://youtu.be/nE2132OUc5s

annjose 3mo ago

Whenever I see a claim that "x% of adults do y", my brain goes: - "x% of what? what is the denominator?". Without that number, the claim is meaningless. - surely it cannot be the entire population, so it has to be a survey. - how many people participated in the survey? what was the distribution? Here is that info for this study. I found this in the PDF version of the study report [0] referred to at the end of the Northwestern page [1]. > Methodology The Harris Poll conducted a total of 4,375 online interviews among the general U.S. adult (18+) population between January 5th and January 21st, 2026. Included in this overall total is a sample of 816 High-Net-Worth individuals (those with total household investable assets, excluding pensions, retirement plans and property, greater than $1,000,000). [0] https://filecache.mediaroom.com/mr5mr_nwmutual/179168/2026%20P%26P%20Wave%20I%20Data%20Deck%20The%20Financial%20States%20of%20America.pdf https://filecache.mediaroom.com/mr5mr_nwmutual/179168/2026%2... [1] https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...

nathan_compton 3mo ago
Typically surveys are adjusted for sampling biases before reporting. That appears to be the case here. So there is usually some attempt to account for the biases in the sampled population. The impulse to ask "what population was sampled?" is good but its not always a straight line from there to "these results directly reflect that sampling bias." In fact, from the page you posted: "Data for the general U.S. population (including the High Net Worth oversample) were weighted to Census targets for education, age, gender, race/ethnicity, region and household income. A full methodology is available." I would presume that the headline number attempts to account for sampling bias.
- annjose 3mo ago
  I agree with you - there’s usually some adjustment for sampling bias, and this study says it is matching Census targets. But I had to go three levels down to see that info before I derive any meaning from the number. My concern is that headlines like “x% of adults do y” get repeated without anyone (sometimes even journalists writing the article) seeing the methodology or nuance behind them. Context matters.

alistairSH 3mo ago

33% of GenX is still depending on their parents? That's shocking... I'm at the young end of GenX at 49yo. So, a slice of the population that is fast approaching retirement age is still reliant on their septuagenarian or octogenarian parents for money? Wow.

alistairSH 3mo ago
Source: https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st... OK, now I'm questioning the whole thing... it also claims 17% of Boomers reliant on their parents. So, we have some substantial number of 62-80 years olds relying on their 90-100 year old parents? Seems unlikely.
- butlike 3mo ago
  It's plausible if it's an inheritable nest egg amount. Though I agree, seems unlikely.
- pessimizer 3mo ago
  Wait until you see the homeownership statistics, or the average age of homebuyers.
- piguin 3mo ago
  Maybe you're not familiar with the entire economy? There are a lot of households that depend on retirement checks of the oldest members and households that don't have traditional work but may have family homes, businesses and farms still in the name of the oldest relatives. Different groups would have different results as far as whether they will inherit independence or become destitute if parents die.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
    17% of generally retired people are relying on the retirement checks of their parents ? Really ?
  - 3mo ago

wonderwonder 3mo ago

Its expensive out there. I used to judge people for not being able to stand on their own but now my mindset is if someone is working 40+ hours a week and sticking to a reasonable budget and not driving a new car then not sure what else we can ask them to do. Most of these people that are getting help aren't saving for retirement either so its just a long game of desperation. Easy to say get a better job but not everyone has the skills or mental acuity to do that. With that said there are aboslutely a lot of people that have no concept of budgeting and are their own worst enemy

snovymgodym 3mo ago

The figure might be misleading. It might not be. Either way, the idea that the natural and normal state of affairs is that every person can go out into the world and be a perfectly self sufficient but comfortable atomized economic unit without support from their family or society is deeply flawed. This wasn't the norm for most of human history, and it isn't the norm globally today.

deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]
PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
It might, however, be a nice thing to aspire to, no? Economic self-sufficiency doesn't have to imply atomization, I think.
- PaulHoule 3mo ago
  It's an interesting question. We have a group that promotes a "living wage" construct in Tompkins County that pushes the unquestioned assumption that people who are working in the lowest paying jobs can live 100% alone. It's not something I want to challenge directly, but... It reminds me of discussions about the minimum wage in the late 1980s when it was common for teenagers to work at supermarkets and fast food markets. I think the public never really understood how the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit was specifically intended to help out people who were raising a family with low incomes that was economically efficient and how there is some logic to people who are working in low income jobs qualifying for food stamps, it is not just a way "Wal-Mart is stealing for us." e.g. part of "affordability" is keeping costs low and as much leftie folks want to sweep it under the rug there is a lot of internal class conflict in groups such as women: like the Sheryl Sandberg type definitely benefits from exploiting less wealthy women to do child care work for them and child care is basically problematic because the child care worker is not productive enough to put their own children in child care without subsidy and you don't get the Fordist scenario where the auto line worker can easily afford to own one of the cars they make.

pessimizer 3mo ago

Reminder that black US slave descendants have a median wealth of about $5000 (i.e the equity they have in their cars.) When you consider black crime, consider the OP statistic in light of that. Most black people I know have parents who rely on their support (and siblings, and cousins, etc.) Whatever is happening to 42% of Americans is happening to 97% (figures drawn from my ass) of black Americans. $5000 is pretty good. I'm from Chicago, where the median black wealth is $0. https://colorofwealth.org/ https://colorofwealth.org/

joe_mamba 3mo ago

What do you call the situation where your parents depend on your support? I helped my dad with a 6000 Euro out of pocket surgery so he can regain the use of his shoulder. And I'm an average working class Europoor, not a stock broker. And my mom is paying some of the bills for my grandma because she can't afford the bills on her ~300 Euro pension.

entrepy123 3mo ago

Ok, but why? https://wtfhappenedin1971.com https://wtfhappenedin1971.com has been linked on HN many times before. Is it related to that? Searching the internet, one can read more, such as: > In August 1971, alongside the "Nixon Shock" that severed the dollar's convertibility to gold, the Nixon administration imposed a 90-day economy-wide freeze on all wages and prices. This was the first time the U.S. enacted wage and price controls outside of wartime. Following the initial 90-day freeze, the Nixon administration implemented a complex, multi-tiered price control system on the petroleum industry that lasted for years. > In August 1971, Nixon was "floating" the dollar, abandoning the gold standard and "freezing" prices and wages. This video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EBEapf3OFw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EBEapf3OFw asks the below: > Why did America deliberately destroy its own manufacturing industry? And starts off, > It did not happen all at once. Americans watched their own country lose it, brand by brand, factory by factory. Every time, the country was handed the same three reasons...(It looked inevitable. And every one of them was true enough to believe.) Plenty of those factories were still making money the day they were ordered shut. They closed anyway, on the say-so of men who had never worked a shift in their lives and grew richer each time another one went dark....

AviationAtom 3mo ago

So if said kids are relying on their parents for support... how are their kids going to rely on them? The idea behind generational wealth is that there is something left to pass down. If you have nothing to pass down, because both you and your parents spent it all, then you're fully on your own to support yourself. Somewhere along the line the bill always comes due.

aianus 3mo ago
How so? If you don’t touch the principal you can live off the investment returns forever and so can your descendants.
- ironman1478 3mo ago
  Health care costs at the end of your life can eat everything you've ever saved and more. Cost of maintenance on housing is increasing and property insurance rates + HOA rates are going up. This idea only works under ideal conditions.
  - AviationAtom 3mo ago
    I'd be curious if the folks that are advocating for people to provide support to their adults kids also expect those adult kids to keep their parents living with them when elderly. I know assisted living facilities charge exorbitant amounts of money, to the point it's often advised to setup a trust, so the parent's assets are no longer viewed as their assets. These facilities apparently charge based on assets, where if you have none then suddenly the monthly cost to live there equates only to the value of your Social Security Income payments.
    - ironman1478 3mo ago
      If my parents are indicative of anything, they're just going with the flow and believing it'll all magically work out.
      - 3mo ago

cestith 3mo ago

These numbers are a nice snapshot, but I see no comparison to historical numbers in the article. I know many families who have had intergenerational support happening from older to younger and vice versa.

seemaze 3mo ago

The premise of TFA along with the entirety of the comments are eloquently embodied by the misfit troubadour and grunge philosopher Todd Snider in Statistician's Blues [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUK6zjtUj00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUK6zjtUj00

jampekka 3mo ago

This seems to be some self-help for the well-off (and their kids) to not feel bad about such dependence, but totally ignores the large population whose parents aren't affluent enough to support their children. Or may even need support from their children. I don't think the feefees of the well off is the gravest issue here.

charlie90 3mo ago
In my experience, poorer families tend to live in multigenerational housing at a much higher rate. So this doesnt seem to be true. Less affuluent usually means more sharing of resources, not less.

nullorempty 3mo ago

[flagged]

tangenter 3mo ago
[flagged]
- nullorempty 3mo ago
  [flagged]
- bogwog 3mo ago
  Yup, and don't even get me started about what they're doing to the frogs!!!!11 (hint: it's very s*nful)
DaSHacka 3mo ago
Not a reply I expected to see on HN, but frankly I agree. I've heard enough "this country doesn't have enough talent!!! We need millions more immigrants to cover the gap!" While almost every recent cybersecurity graduate I know is quite literally UNABLE to find a relevant job, with most resigning to hitting up the employers of jobs they had in HS with low-skill work like wiping down decommissioned K-12 Chromebooks for resale on ebay. What an absolute waste of their talents. We obviously have the talent in this country, we're literally the forefront of the field. Employers just prefer a 'subclass' of laborers with less rights (e.g. H1Bs/illegal immigrants that the employer can hold over their head) and lower minimum livable salary compared to regular citizens.
ripe 3mo ago
> STOP spending on immigration programs... to improve situation for kids of the people who built out the western civilization The common misconception that the US Government is wasting money on immigration is pushed by Trump and FOX News, who both lie regularly. For example, see [1] about how Trump rejected a report produced by Federal researchers. The report is available [2]. Overall, the refugee resettlement program gives the country back many times what the government spends. And even if you just focus on the expenditure, the bulk of it is on border enforcement and imprisonment, which goes to domestic private companies. As to your love for "the people who built western civilization", I'll just leave it up there. Your connotation is clear, and it doesn't reflect well on you. [1] Trump administration rejects report showing positive impact of refugees https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/refugees-revenue-cost-report-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/refugees-reve... [2] Rejected Report Shows Revenue Brought In by Refugees. SEPT. 19, 2017: A draft of a study rejected by Trump administration officials that found that refugees brought in $63 billion more in government revenues over the past decade than they cost. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/19/us/politics/document-Refugee-Report.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/19/us/politics/d...

cliglot 3mo ago

How you define “rely”. I’ve certainly seen trust fund kids who’s success is anchored on “daddy gave me a sweet job at his company” and others who’d be dead or in prison if it wasn’t for the constant money poured into the legal system by their parents.

conductr 3mo ago
There’s a huge spectrum. I’m mid 40s and my wife grew up much wealthier than I did. We have done quite well, but I I’m a bit frugal, like to save, despise waste and excess, and therefore don’t like traveling like they do. I like traveling but all the fancy upgraded experiences at every turn is what I refuse to spend money on. But we don’t go without, we “rely” on my in laws to upgrade our travel (or that’s how my wife has structured the relationship with them, they pay for everything and we cover the drinks is basically how it works out). I’m not a huge fan of it but they don’t care and it keeps my wife off my back lol, so whatever. We travel with them a lot but even when we don’t I think my wife uses their card to pay for it. It’s between them is what I say, I don’t want to be a part of it as it feels like we’re taking advantage of them but apparently they’re fine with it. Is this fitting the definition of “rely” because it’s nonessential
- fragmede 3mo ago
  Is it taking advantage if they have a lot of money and want to spoil their daughter and son-in-law?
  - conductr 3mo ago
    Probably not, just against my nature to let people spoil me. So I have some internal conflict about it but let it occur. There may be a better word for it but that's kind of how I feel when we, they, spend more annually that the median household income on our travel.
michaelt 3mo ago
According to the more detailed report [1] the questions and answers were: Q2630. Do you currently consider yourself financially independent? Yes: 72% No: 28% Q2634. How financially independent do you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed)? Fully independent: 44% Mostly independent: 17% Somewhat dependent: 17% Fully dependent: 8% Not applicable: 14% Then they report 17+17+8=42 = "42% of adults rely on their parents for financial support" [1] https://news.northwesternmutual.com/download/2026+P%26P+Market+-+WAVE+3+-+Financial+Independence.pdf https://news.northwesternmutual.com/download/2026+P%26P+Mark...

exiguus 3mo ago

The question that was ask in the survey was: How financially independent you currently feel from your parents (meaning you could support yourself without them if needed) I understand that YC is questioning the results of the survey. The YC community is very privileged; and i bet, if we do the same survey in this community, 20% or less of adults rely on their parents.

randysalami 3mo ago
Haha. I had the opposite thought. If they are very privileged, wouldn’t they rely more? I guess there is privileged you make yourself and privileged you are born into and then more easily make for yourself. But if you are the latter and can support yourself, would you really then do it entirely on your own and not still benefit/rely from/on your parents? I’m not sure (and yes I am including family vacations, connections, and other kinds of arrangements).
- gedy 3mo ago
  Yeah right? I used to live in nicer/upper area and like everybody got help from their parents for house, if not outright given to them.
- exiguus 3mo ago
  I've asked myself the same question. And I've come to the conclusion that there's a difference between feeling independent and being independent. Like: I built a $50 billion business with my own hands. Okay, I got the first $2 billion from my parents. Okay, I got the first $2 billion for every business from my parents until I was successful.
jghn 3mo ago
Also, the first thought I had was "what %age of adults are 18-30". Not that a 30yo should be dependent on their parents but I'd assume that people answering yes skew younger. And to your point about YC, that's also a young skewed demographic.
- exiguus 3mo ago

cliglot 3mo ago

> CPI inflation would suggest that the current cost ought to be about $692. Rent alone will probably blow that. I live in a burnt out rust belt shithole city and I’m struggling to understand how rent is this high. I pay a good bit more than $692 to live in a slum just outside the ghetto right now and I have to feel gracious for that. It’s closer to what I paid in a decent middle class neighborhood in Florida. That was only 5-6 years ago. This is in a city where the best people can say about it is: “well it’s cheaper”. Hell when I lived in South Carolina from 2017-2019. My apartment there was closer to the stated inflation figure, but this was for a place that regularly flooded the downstairs neighbors and left me for weeks without AC in the peak of summer because of careless management. Still not as bad as business rents. I’ve seen downtown business close because they’re being made to be $7000 for a shitty 100 year old property surrounded by condemned properties.

PaulDavisThe1st 3mo ago
Let me suggest the problem: CPI inflation suggests a rough doubling of basic living costs. How many jobs can you point to that are paying 2x in 2026 what they were paying in 2000? There are some. But the data seems to suggest that the majority do not.
- nonameiguess 3mo ago
  This posted while I was still in the middle of my other rant, but when I was doing the four guys in one apartment thing putting myself through community college, my job was overnight janitor at Knott's Berry Farm and paid $6.50 an hour. Minimum wage in California is now $16.90, so that at least is more than double.
- tpmoney 3mo ago
  After the big corrections entry level jobs had to do during and after COVID, I think it's probably more than you think. As an example, the BLS says in 2000 the mean hourly wage for "Food preparation and serving related" jobs was $7.72 / hour [1]. As of May 2025, they list the median hourly wage (yes median and mean aren't the same, but for this purpose, I don't think the differences would affect the overall point that much) at $16.85 / hour [2] Likewise for "Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance", we went from $9.41/hour to $18.12 / hour. Though admittedly not every field saw such gains. "Sales and related" didn't do quite as well, going from $13.46 to just $18.52. "Office and Administrative" did a bit better going from $12.64 to $22.81, but that's still a bit under the 2x mark. "Construction and extraction" also missed the 2x mark by a bit, going from $16.56 to $28.63. Still the numbers I think aren't quite as dire as the vibes make it feel right now. [1]: https://www.bls.gov/oes/bulletin_2000.pdf https://www.bls.gov/oes/bulletin_2000.pdf [2]: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ocwage.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ocwage.pdf

NDlurker 3mo ago

I lived with my parents until I was 20 and they helped me out until I was 22. My girlfriend's kids are on the same path. Though even with people in their 30s and 40s I think it's common to get help for unexpected big expenses because a lot of people don't have adequate emergency funds.

PaulHoule 3mo ago

My 20-something son is living with us but he does pay (some) rent. I half expect to have to apologize for this, like when I was growing up people would think you are a loser if you were in this situation. Today people think we are really smart and the people who are paying more rent than they can afford to live alone that are losing.

pllbnk 3mo ago
I can’t understand morally or financially how can parents charge anything of their children. Not judging it, just honestly can’t understand it. Isn’t it the parents’ responsibility to build the foundation for their children and keep building it until it’s there? I am viewing it from a moral angle where it’s the parents’ selfish choice to have a child so they must take full responsibility until a child is or feels that they can be independent.
- pizzafeelsright 3mo ago
  In my house the >8 years old the kids start paying rent. They get paid for normal house work (minimum wage). Rent is ~$300/month. I pay the kid minimum wage for chores because that is work and work should be rewarded. They pay me rent. That rent and other expenses are ~80% of their pay. Some must go to savings and "taxes". They have to keep books as well. The rest is theirs. I know other fathers that charge their adult children rent, keep the money, and then gift it to them at the wedding or to help them buy a house.
  - pllbnk 3mo ago
    I understand that such a game of life might be beneficial for a child. But I would like to understand the reasoning to do that with an adult. > I know other fathers that charge their adult children rent, keep the money, and then gift it to them at the wedding or to help them buy a house. This looks like a game which should have ended by the time a child is an adult. I am raising a very young child so I am very concerned about the future and constantly thinking what's the right way to raise him.

rconti 3mo ago

When I was a kid, we never had a ton of extra money, but my parents were very supportive-- they paid for most of my college expenses, for example. Their outlook was that us kids shouldn't have to work-- "school is your job". (However, both my sister and I _did_ have jobs while in school). However, I never _asked_ my parents for money. I had a good education and a well-paying job, and was able to turn IPO money into a house down payment. In the end, we struggled to close the deal, and my wife and I both asked to borrow money from our parents. Of course they were happy to do so, but I still remember it as feeling so hard to do -- just something that I "shouldn't" have to do. And, of course, it also made me reflect on those who didn't have family support to fall back on, let alone jobs that paid well.

bradlys 3mo ago
Never had a ton of extra money but your parents can casually pay for your college expenses and buy a house for you?
- rconti 3mo ago
  Excellent work with the reading there, champ.
dyauspitr 3mo ago
I have never asked my parents for money. They have had to resort to trickery (asking for bank details for some passport stuff) to send me money. I hope to be able to do the same for my kid.
- toast0 3mo ago
  Always check the pockets of jackets before donating! My mom snuck $100 in a jacket my wife almost donated without realizing.
  - fragmede 3mo ago
    Then again, the person receiving the donated jacket could use the $100 more than the person donating it. It's fun to imagine what I might do if a billionaire gave me a million dollars, or 0.1% of their wealth. Thing is, me giving $5,000 to a homeless person would change their life more than me getting that million dollars.

1970-01-01 3mo ago

The link to their study is much more interesting: https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...

slibhb 3mo ago

Downward mobility is almost entirely caused by housing costs, which are a self-inflicted problem. We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. I live in an expensive area and I'm always shocked by how many of my friends who cannot afford to buy a home (or even a condo) are NIMBYs. These are people in their 20s through 40s who have been earning since college, can't afford to buy, yet get annoyed whenever there's new construction that "alters the character of the neighborhood". Talk about false consciousness. I can at least understand people who own a home feeling this way.

Animats 3mo ago
> We don't, as a matter of intentional policy, build enough housing. If actual number of houses was the problem, house prices would not be increasing in areas of population decline. It's existing houses being repriced upward by speculation that makes them unaffordable.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- jayGlow 3mo ago
  are these areas with declining populations and rising housing prices increasing the number of houses? it could be that the population declines because no one can afford to live there however it's still a desirable area so prices remain high. cities like Austin are seeing reduction in housing prices despite population increase due to construction of new housing.
  - alphawhisky 3mo ago
    That only covers a portion of the population. Don't forget the middle of nowhere towns that refuse to tax their citizens (but eat grant money like pigs) and refuse to allow new housing. All of this is essentially being done to maximize property value and keep new people out. This is why people are moving to cities in the US. Not a desire, but a need in order to make ends meet and get on the property ladder.

tamimio 3mo ago

Because boomers are selfish and holding onto most of the wealth, ruining and destroying the generations to follow. It’s a weird phenomenon actually, their parents gave them everything possible, even independence, yet, the boomers do all sort of shenanigans to keep holding on the wealth, and when they can’t, they go on manipulation tactics, as if their lives are the center of universe and all generations after are the minions to serve them.

alphawhisky 3mo ago
>all generations after are the minions to serve them Serve their kids. The money is only incidental to the power structure (nepotism, classism, xenophobia) that they intend to pass down to their chosen successors. They've been working to limit economic mobility, opportunity, and fairness for a while now.
senordevnyc 3mo ago
Wait, so you're annoyed that the boomers are using their wealth to help support their kids (the respondents to this survey) instead of just giving it to them and making them trust fund kids? Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of negative things to say about boomers, but I'm not sure how your complaint here really fits the article.

Animats 3mo ago

Data table.[1] [1] https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026 https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-st...

kittikitti 3mo ago

Many people I know brag about how much they rely on their parents.

fullshark 3mo ago

The post WW2 boom in America was an exceptional time. This is the status quo for humanity.

shevy-java 3mo ago

The biggest problem here is finding secure and reliable income in the long term. People here in the 1960s, for instance, could save up quite a lot of money. This is of course possible today too, but what if you can only find low income jobs? You'll remain working poor for the rest of your life. That's not exactly fair from an inter-generational point of view. Meanwhile the number of superrich is growing. That's also unfair. And money buys legislation, so (many, but not all) democracies are broken.

WarOnPrivacy 3mo ago

I rely on my kids for financial support. It takes four of us (earning typical wages) to afford basic bills + basic emergencies. I don't believe the US will exit the 4-income economy in my lifetime.

Garlef 3mo ago

So: Since this is US centric: - Is it better/worse than other countries? ... better/worse than "comparable" countries? - What's the historical trend? - And in both directions (geographical, historical): How does it relate to the respective diffences in wealth inequality?

msarrel 3mo ago

It's shocking how once again the number one contributing factor to success is being born to parents who support you for your whole life.

stronglikedan 3mo ago

I'd wager that number isn't so different from previous generations, but it's just not as taboo to admit it nowadays.

boogieknite 3mo ago

have a large extended family almost entirely living in the Seattle area while i grew up in rural Oregon i moved out after high school and did my best to stay out (of course occasionally life has other plans). nearly all of my 30ish Seattle cousins stayed with their parents until getting married, some never moved out. i was so confused because i was close with my cousins and we seemed pretty like-minded, but it really just came down to housing costs

tsoukase 3mo ago

As a Greek, and I believe fellow Italians do, I cannot believe how one can live for the first 10-20 years of his adult life without their parents' help, especially today. Old money, inheritance and a house are almost always existent and extend the intergenerational bonding. I don't know if I am jealous or repelled by northern Europeans or even the USA that don't exhibit thus behaviour.