Study: Record number of young people still living at home

posted at 10:11 am on August 2, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

Right on the heels of especially tepid reports on both July joblessness and the second quarter’s weaksauce economic growth, here’s still more discouraging news about the newly perpetual state of near-stagnation in which our economy is currently languishing. According to a new study from Pew Research, a rising portion of young adults are still living in their parents’ homes instead of moving out into apartments or homes of their own, with that number reaching a new record in 2012:

In 2012, 36% of the nation’s young adults ages 18 to 31—the so-called Millennial generation—were living in their parents’ home, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data. This is the highest share in at least four decades and represents a slow but steady increase over the 32% of their same-aged counterparts who were living at home prior to the Great Recession in 2007 and the 34% doing so when it officially ended in 2009.

A record total of 21.6 million Millennials lived in their parents’ home in 2012, up from 18.5 million of their same aged counterparts in 2007. Of these, at least a third and perhaps as many as half are college students. (In the census data used for this analysis, college students who live in dormitories during the academic year are counted as living with their parents).

Younger Millennials (ages 18 to 24) are much more likely than older ones (ages 25 to 31) to be living with their parents—56% versus 16%. Since the onset of the 2007-2009 recession, both age groups have experienced a rise in this living arrangement.

Pew points to a number of factors to explain the increase, including declining marriage rates as well as declining employment rates — in 2012, only 63 percent of 18-to-31 year olds had jobs, whereas 70 percent of them had jobs in 2007.

Another factor is rising college enrollment, from 35 percent of 18-to-24 year olds in March 2007 to 39 percent in March 2012, as young people in college are more likely to be living at home than those not enrolled in college. This might, on its face, seems like a good thing, since it means more young people are going to college and getting a higher degree — but a lot of that probably has to do with the federal government forcing artificially cheap student loans into the market, the easy availability of which increases demand and leads to higher tuition prices, which in turn mean that a lot of these students are taking on huge amounts of student debt. It’ll be tough to pay all of that off when you graduate without a job and nowhere to live but your parents’ couch.

The recession might technically be over, but this is a testament about how things really haven’t inherently improved much at all.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Several of them post here under various names.

libtardordie
non(non)partisan
bambam
drywall
pablum honey
urbanlightweight

to name a few members of the hive mind.

CurtZHP on August 2, 2013 at 10:17 AM

And they voted for Obama. Enjoy your dependency!

MaiDee on August 2, 2013 at 10:18 AM

953,000 Jobs Created In 2013

222,000 are full-time

731,000 are part-time

They can’t do much to move on when this ‘amazing economy’ is producing primarily part-time jobs.

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Study: Record number of young people still living at home

Isn’t that where their faded poster of Obama is hanging?

Electrongod on August 2, 2013 at 10:19 AM

The MSM will probably tout it as a successful Obama initiative to strengthen the family.

Drained Brain on August 2, 2013 at 10:19 AM

I blame the Baby Boomers.

LoganSix on August 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Part time POTUS, full time Community Organizer(Agitator)…

d1carter on August 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Own it youngins

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM

To all of the Obamabots living in their mummy’s basement, an oldie, but still fittin’ goody:

Stupid Is As Stupid Does

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Kick yourselves out, find an apartment, and get out of your parents’ nests.

Take the reigns.

Good Lt on August 2, 2013 at 10:22 AM

The recession might technically be over, but this is a testament about how things really haven’t inherently improved much at all.

Why do people keep saying this? If the recession was over we wouldn’t be talking about it’s continuous effects.

HotAirian on August 2, 2013 at 10:22 AM

If 40 is the new 30 and 50 is the new 40 then 26 is the new 16.

Yup.

PackerBronco on August 2, 2013 at 10:23 AM

Own it youngins

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM

That’s the problem right there. They don’t OWN anything! And when you don’t own anything, you have no skin in the game. So you can vote for your dreamy and oh so hip messiah (who has no experience actually running anything and a huge chip on his shoulder for anyone who does…), and when he turns it all to crap, you lose nothing.

CurtZHP on August 2, 2013 at 10:24 AM

things really haven’t inherently improved much at all.

Nonsense! Obama is President.

What could possibly be better than that?

Anything doesn’t count as an answer guys :-P

Gatsu on August 2, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Slackers

Bmore on August 2, 2013 at 10:30 AM

“Jobs created” is so bogus too, the only jobs Federal Government “creates” are for public sector that suck money from the economy. This admin has stood in the way of allowing the private sector to Create Jobs, where the job creation should be.

kirkill on August 2, 2013 at 10:30 AM

To all of the Obamabots living in their mummy’s basement, an oldie, but still fittin’ goody:

Stupid Is As Stupid Does

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Excellent. I was talking to leftys last night. And I sad something very like your classic:

“All of those racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, flatearther, greedy Fascists saw “Change We Can Believe In!” and they thought Obama was talking about the near-term…ya know…like the next Recovery Summer or the 8th one or something.

And they answered that, even according to Rasmussen, most people blame the economy on (drumroll) BUSH and the WH has plans to keep it that way but add congress as agents of Satan.

IlikedAUH2O on August 2, 2013 at 10:31 AM

Kick yourselves out, find an apartment, and get out of your parents’ nests.

Take the reigns.

Good Lt on August 2, 2013 at 10:22 AM

But…but…Mom is such a good cook!

Liam on August 2, 2013 at 10:32 AM

953,000 Jobs Created In 2013

222,000 are full-time

731,000 are part-time

They can’t do much to move on when this ‘amazing economy’ is producing primarily part-time jobs.

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Liberals wanted us to be more like the europeans

workingclass artist on August 2, 2013 at 10:35 AM

How many college students major in silly things like Liberal Arts and Women’s Studies — ‘earning’ degrees that go nowhere in the job market? They can’t produce a product or supply a service. No wonder they can’t find good paying jobs.

How many others never held a job because they were told by liberals that one at a fast food place is ‘undignified’? So, they come out of college not only with a useless degree, but also with no work experience.

Worse, their parents did nothing to warn them about all that.

Liam on August 2, 2013 at 10:48 AM

HA! The Fat Man’s featured on Drudge.

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 10:49 AM

The US is Italy now.

Thank obama, the platinum-sprayed horseturd, who attracts only flies.

Schadenfreude on August 2, 2013 at 10:50 AM

This is anecdotal, but I think an unmentioned significant factor is that the number of kids at home has reached a critical mass where the social stigma of living with your parents is significantly diminished. Why get a place when you can live rent free and spend all your money on cars, girls and booze?

Also, today’s parents are a lot more tolerant of things like your boyfriend/girlfriend staying over or smoking a little weed on the back porch than what are now the grandparents.

So, at the same time the incentives for moving back home may be increasing, the disincentives for living there are decreasing.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

“Mom, can I borrow a few bucks? I need to buy some posterboard and stuff, to make an Obama sign.”

Ward Cleaver on August 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

And how many parents moved in WITH THEIR KIDS following the financial debacle of 2008? Answer: a lot. Including mine for a bit.

Would love to see the total numbers of family consolidations since 2008.

Youngs98 on August 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

So these moron Millenials (I’m one of them) support Obama (I don’t support him), but yet live with their parents whom support them.

Oh yeah, the parents are most likely Romney supporters.

And to top it off, Obama hurts their parents income financially, which in turn hurts the Millenials financially, and yet they still support Obama!

Sick times.

sentinelrules on August 2, 2013 at 10:52 AM

This is anecdotal, but I think an unmentioned significant factor is that the number of kids at home has reached a critical mass where the social stigma of living with your parents is significantly diminished. Why get a place when you can live rent free and spend all your money on cars, girls and booze?

Also, today’s parents are a lot more tolerant of things like your boyfriend/girlfriend staying over or smoking a little weed on the back porch than what are now the grandparents.

So, at the same time the incentives for moving back home may be increasing, the disincentives for living there are decreasing.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

So you are living at home, smoking weed on the back porch. Interesting.

Ward Cleaver on August 2, 2013 at 10:52 AM

Failure to launch.

itsnotaboutme on August 2, 2013 at 10:53 AM

Imagine if the 2008 Presidential ballot for 18-31 year olds would have said on it,
“If you vote for Obama then in 2013 you will be living with your parents and most likely have no job.”,
think they would have voted for Obama?

albill on August 2, 2013 at 10:56 AM

You can bet the majority of these millenials sponging off their parents, lecture them on the glorius accomplishments of obama.

just before they go to thier new 29 hour a week no benefits job.

sniffles1999 on August 2, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Imagine if the 2008 Presidential ballot for 18-31 year olds would have said on it,
“If you vote for Obama then in 2013 you will be living with your parents and most likely have no job.”,
think they would have voted for Obama?

albill on August 2, 2013 at 10:56 AM

I think, “Yes.”

To paraphrase Alfred E. Neumann: “What — me work?”

Liam on August 2, 2013 at 10:58 AM

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

IOW, Obama’s scorched earth economic policies have absolutely nothing to do with the increase in dependency.

antipc on August 2, 2013 at 11:00 AM

just before they go to thier new 29 hour a week no benefits job.

sniffles1999 on August 2, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Friends with benefits are better than a job with benefits when someone can stay on mom and dad’s health insurance plan till he’s 26.

Liam on August 2, 2013 at 11:00 AM

This is anecdotal, but I think an unmentioned significant factor is that the number of kids at home has reached a critical mass where the social stigma of living with your parents is significantly diminished. Why get a place when you can live rent free and spend all your money on cars, girls and booze?

Going back to Stupid Is As Stupid Does

Besides, Mummy makes me Pop-Tarts and gives me a Flintstones vitamin every morning. Plus, looking forward to premature balding, a paunch, and a full box of condoms with an expiration date of 01.01.10 isn’t so bad when, at 25, I am still considered a child on my parents’ health insurance policy.

Eventually, if Obama is reelected, I know he will issue an Executive Order that will force my parents to continue to pay me an allowance until I am 50. I mean, like ya know, it’s only fair. Some of the kids that I graduated with have their own homes and businesses. It’s not like I am demanding a lot and it’s not fair that they have more than me. Anyhoo, it’s the law in economically-sound countries like Italy*. Me and my chums are working on a really kewl name to call ourselves…unlike in other countries.

In Italy, people like me, ya know, twenty- and thirty-somethings, who are on an allowance, are called “bamboccioni” – “big babies!” The utter nerve!

In Japan, grown-ups call us “parasaito shinguru.” Can you believe it? They think we are parasitic singles. Unbelievable. We didn’t ask to be born. If you didn’t want to take care of us in the style to which we have become accustomed, then you should have aborted us. Take that, お爺さん!

Now, in Germany, they call people like us “Nesthockers,” but what do you expect from NAZIS? I mean, HELLOOOOOOO….

And, just who the fvck do those British snobs think they are calling their adult children KIPPERS? After all, who calls their children fish?

Everyone should recognise that, whether they are gutted, salted or pickled, Kids In Parents’ Pockets Eroding Retirement Savings deserve basic marine rights and, if they aren’t going to be respected, then these victims need to organise and appeal to the United Nations.

KIPPERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!

* In Italy, a judge ordered a (then) 60 year-old father to resume paying allowance to his (then) 32 year-old daughter.

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 11:02 AM

“This shows labor force participation by age cohort, indexed to January 2007. Young people–most strikingly 18 to 19, but also 20 to 24, and 25 to 35–are simply dropping out of the work force. These young Americans are not in the denominator of the headline unemployment figure. They’re the most energetic, strongest, most inventive Americans. They’re sitting on couches in the Obama economy. Su casa es la casa de su madre. It’s not because “the economy sucks,” which is the strange existential answer that even Ivy-educated twenty-somethings will give you. It is because the Obama presidency actively harms young people, and seeks to do so more every day.

On the reasons why and the methods how, more anon.

Meanwhile, N.B., the 55+ cohort has actually become more active and more involved in the labor force since January 2007….”

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/08/the-saddest-chart-young-americans-are-simply-dropping-out.php

Chart at link

workingclass artist on August 2, 2013 at 11:02 AM

aFTER 5 years its time obama manned up and admitted the crappy economy is his responsiblity.

DONT FORGET FOLKS, Our taxes will be paying for the ANNUAL LUXURY Marthas Vineyard vacation for the annointed one and a posse of like 75 to 100 servants, bodyguards and lackys.

sniffles1999 on August 2, 2013 at 11:02 AM

So you are living at home, smoking weed on the back porch. Interesting.

Ward Cleaver on August 2, 2013 at 10:52 AM

And, bytching ‘cuz mum makes him smoke outside.

‘I have rights, you know?!?!?!’

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 11:03 AM

In Asia, one lives in one’s home of mother and father until time of marriage.

paulsur on August 2, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Would you like some fries with your Hope & Change™ ?

EA_MAN on August 2, 2013 at 11:07 AM

DONT FORGET FOLKS, Our taxes will be paying for the ANNUAL LUXURY Marthas Vineyard vacation for the annointed one and a posse of like 75 to 100 servants, bodyguards and lackys.

sniffles1999 on August 2, 2013 at 11:02 AM

And that’s after he leaves office.

SailorMark on August 2, 2013 at 11:12 AM

If I had a millenial son or daughter who voted for that POS Obama, and they still lived at home, they’d be charged for rent, food, healthcare (my insurance), and I’d put them to work around the house and yard…and remind them every day who they voted for who made this paradise all possible for them. I’d also remind them that I am their King, that all that is theirs is mine, and if they insult their mother even with one roll of the eyes that their stuff will be out on the curb ASAP.

Ungrateful, spoiled, thankless, stupid, naive, with the most ridiculously unrealistic expections for any generation in human history.

Hey, Millenials, you want to take the first step to improving the world? NEVER vote Democrat EVER AGAIN. (Not saying to vote GOP 100% necessarily)

KirknBurker on August 2, 2013 at 11:14 AM

NYTimes: “Obamanomics strengthens families, keeps them together longer”

The Rogue Tomato on August 2, 2013 at 11:21 AM

MS-NBC: “Obamanomics cures empty-nest syndrome”

The Rogue Tomato on August 2, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 11:03 AM

For your poster blog.

http://www.sott.net/image/image/s4/88655/full/police_state_47520181985.gif

Barred on August 2, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Newsweek: “People who hate Obama’s policies hate families”

The Rogue Tomato on August 2, 2013 at 11:25 AM

single young people move in with parents-

single OLD people move in with children-

it’s only fair.

gerrym51 on August 2, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Barred on August 2, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Thx!

Pic of the Day: ‘A Police State Is A Safe State’

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Vote for Obommy and live with mommy. Forever.Nice return on your $250,000 investment for four years at Yale! The same could have been accomplished by dropping out of the 8th. grade.Yes folks, elections do have consequences and this is one at which I shall shed no tears.

MaiDee on August 2, 2013 at 11:33 AM

As a member of this generation, I have to point out that we didn’t create this situation. The baby boomers mismanaged everything and then gave us the result. Eventually, we’ll be responsible for American society but not until we’re actually in charge. Is my generation in charge? Of course not. We have almost no say in any of the major institutions in our society. And with modern medical technology keeping the baby boomers alive yet longer… we might not be in places of authority for some time to come.

We’ll make do and are of course responsible for our own choices. But we didn’t create this environment. We didn’t pass these laws. And blaming Obama on my generation is idiotic. We were hardly decisive. The reality is that voter turn out in my age group especially at the time of the election wasn’t game changing. Obama would have been elected either way.

We are for better or worse… along for the ride. We’re your children and while we’re adults at this point the baby boomers still maintain positions of authority throughout every institution. That is likely fair and reasonable. But with power comes responsibility.

If you want to blame any generation for the current state of American politics, economics, or society in general… my generation is effectively blameless. In time, we will gain power and in gaining power we will gain responsibility. But at this point… short of killing you all and ruling over the land on our throne of skulls… exactly how are we to take control?

We will do our best to take care of our selves and our own. But the aegis of moral responsibility falls to those in power first… while some love to say “those darn kids”… the reality is that we’re not in control. Power and responsibility go hand in hand. If we are powerless to control the system we cannot be held accountable.

Karmashock on August 2, 2013 at 11:34 AM

Pic of the Day: ‘A Police State Is A Safe State’

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Of course, to the lover of ultimate liberty, any country which tries to keep its citizens safe is a police state…

After all:

Stimson made a decision to eliminate the Cipher Bureau. The decision likely was based on budget considerations, but it has come down to us as based on the need for acting in good faith in international relations. Whatever the reason for terminating the Cipher Bureau, when he did so Stimson spoke the single most famous sentence ever uttered about codes and ciphers:

“Gentlemen do not read other gentlemen’s mail.”

In his history of the Cipher Bureau, Yardley charged that Stimson had axed the organization strictly for moralistic reasons. In his own autobiography, Stimson did not deny this: he noted that although he became a heavy consumer of decrypt intelligence in wartime, certain practices that might be necessary during war were unacceptable during peace.

http://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic_heritage/center_crypt_history/pearl_harbor_review/black_chamber.shtml

In your world, gentlemen don’t even read the envelope on someone else’s mail.

unclesmrgol on August 2, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 11:02 AM

She already has the Holy Grail. Why any need to write a thesis upon it?

unclesmrgol on August 2, 2013 at 11:40 AM

It’s official; Obama supporters live in their parent’s basement.

CrustyB on August 2, 2013 at 11:45 AM

This is anecdotal, but I think an unmentioned significant factor is that the number of kids at home has reached a critical mass where the social stigma of living with your parents is significantly diminished. Why get a place when you can live rent free and spend all your money on cars, girls and booze?

Because you’re supposed to be a responsible adult who pays your own bills.

But given how Obama supporters like yourself are neither adults or responsible, and certainly won’t pay your own bills, this shouldn’t surprise us.

Also, today’s parents are a lot more tolerant of things like your boyfriend/girlfriend staying over or smoking a little weed on the back porch than what are now the grandparents.

Those aren’t parents. They are imbecile adults who have decided to allow a child to run the household.

So, at the same time the incentives for moving back home may be increasing, the disincentives for living there are decreasing.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Of course. Worthless lazy liberal parents breed worthless lazy liberal children. The Obama Party supports and endorses laziness and worthlessness, so it should be no surprise that more and more Obama supporters like yourself are lazy and worthless.

northdallasthirty on August 2, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Been a while since I smoked weed on the back porch. Some crisp autumn days I do miss it. But then I remind myself that I can afford the expensive gin now.

It seems as though most posters here don’t actually know any people under 30. They tend to be polite, hard-working and smart, in my experience. Maybe it’s different off on the red states where y’all live.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 11:47 AM

It seems as though most posters here don’t actually know any people under 30. They tend to be polite, hard-working and smart, in my experience. Maybe it’s different off on the red states where y’all live.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 11:47 AM

That’s hilarious, given what your people under 30 in New York City are doing.

But that’s typical. Liberals like yourself are little better than animals lacking any intelligence, manners, or initiative. Instead, you’re just lazy and worthless moochers and parasites who don’t pay your bills and commit welfare fraud.

northdallasthirty on August 2, 2013 at 11:54 AM

My husband and I have told our girls that we don’t have a problem with them living with us after they finish school, but we do expect them to be trying to find a job if they don’t have one, and to contribute to food, mortgage, and utility bills to the best of their ability as well as some chores around the house.

I’ve seen cases where the child stays at home and is essentially a large kid with no responsibilities and lot of benefits. I’ve also known cases where the member of the younger generation contributed to the household, financially and/or by doing the stuff that needed to be done around the house and yard that the parents were getting too old or ill to do easily themselves. Yes, the mother still did the cooking and laundry, but the “child” more than pulled his or her weight around the house.

A multi-generational household isn’t a problem. The problem is when an individual of any generation expects a free ride no matter their abilities to contribute to the household.

LibraryGryffon on August 2, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Been a while since I smoked weed on the back porch. Some crisp autumn days I do miss it. But then I remind myself that I can afford the expensive gin now.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Well, of course, since Barack Obama supporters in New York like yourself can use EBT cards to purchase liquor.

Rule number one: Obama supporters like urban elitist are all tax frauds and welfare cheats.

northdallasthirty on August 2, 2013 at 11:59 AM

unclesmrgol on August 2, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Tell all of that to the family that was just ‘visited’ and had their home searched because they, separately, looked for a rice cooker (wife, who’s is a conservative, anti-terrorism blogger, natch!) and backpack (hubby) online a few weeks ago.

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 12:01 PM

In your world, gentlemen don’t even read the envelope on someone else’s mail.

Untrue. How else would the gentlemen at the post office deliver the mail?

In your world, on the other hand, you and Stoic Tyrant would install bedcams in every bedroom in America to stop adultery, rape, and child abuse (because they only happen in bedrooms or sumthin) if you could figure out a way to do it cost-effectively.

Yes, your Big Brother brutha, Stoic Patriot, actually would support that and I have the posts to prove it.

Resist We Much on August 2, 2013 at 12:04 PM

It’s official; Obama supporters live in their parent’s basement.

CrustyB on August 2, 2013 at 11:45 AM

…hope it floods periodically!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Why get a place when you can live rent free and spend all your money on cars, girls and booze?

Also, today’s parents are a lot more tolerant of things like your boyfriend/girlfriend staying over or smoking a little weed on the back porch than what are now the grandparents.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Friends with benefits are better than a job with benefits…

Liam on August 2, 2013 at 11:00 AM

I’m not defending Obama’s economy or policies in the slightest, but those are two examples of a stereotype about people who live with their parents — a stereotype that’s probably not true for most, let alone all. People have this notion that anyone who lives with his or her (but I notice they go after the men more) parents must be spending every day reading comic books, playing video games, looking at porn, and smoking pot, while sitting in their pajamas and waiting for Mom to give them a sandwich, and then later $50 so they can get drunk with their “bros”/”girls.” In reality, most who live with their parents do work, both outside the home and within it. Many are taking care (or helping to take care) of a parent or grandparent. Some are just very close with their parents, and, even while they’re working, their parents just like having them around. I can think of a few people who are in this age bracket to whom this applies. Two are paralegal brothers who are in the family business; one woman is a special-ed teacher; one works in a business setting and then comes home and takes care of her mom. If they live in a structure that works for them, why should anyone else care what their living arrangements are?

bmmg39 on August 2, 2013 at 12:07 PM

The problem is growing irresponsibility, both of the parents and the adult children, and of the government.

The adult children are grossly irresponsible in that they refuse to take responsibility for their own lives, refuse to have the umbilical cord cut.

The parents are irresponsible in raising their children and failing to teach them the necessity of responsibility, and continuing to enable this behavior into their adulthood. They are doing their children no favors.

The government is irresponsible in giving incentives for adult children to stay at home. What kind of mindless crap is it to allow a 26 (twenty-six!!!) year old “child” to remain on it’s parent’s health insurance? For gods sake, I was a damn doctor by the time I was 24! This government sanctioned aimlessness is disgusting.

I went to college, but I was out of my parent’s home at age 18. I would have been out of their home at 18 if I had to live in a cardboard box and only eat every other day. This has to do with self-pride and a sense of self-responsibility.

I am sickened by the attitudes of all three of the above miscreant groups.

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Thanks to the evil democrat party headed by the racist 0bama, young people will have next to zero chance of being fully employed. It is next to impossible to launch when the only jobs available are maxed out at 25 hours a week. Just wait until the evil democrat party pushes amnesty through and even those 25 hr/wk jobs go to people that broke the law for years take them.

jukin3 on August 2, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Man o man you are one stupid ass puke.

Bmore on August 2, 2013 at 12:17 PM

They kind of have to live with mom and dad. Most studio apartments don’t have sufficient space to store all that Occupy gear, and ‘Bush Lied/People Died’ signs…

CaptFlood on August 2, 2013 at 12:19 PM

In Asia, one lives in one’s home of mother and father until time of marriage.

paulsur on August 2, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Absolutely. And many here used to live (or still live) by the same philosophy. Meanwhile, many people move out precisely because they want more privacy to bring a gal/guy over, to start fooling around without being walked in on. And some live with their folks because that’s not the sort of relationship they want, or want to be assumed to be having.

bmmg39 on August 2, 2013 at 12:19 PM

My husband and I have told our girls that we don’t have a problem with them living with us after they finish school, but we do expect them to be trying to find a job if they don’t have one, and to contribute to food, mortgage, and utility bills to the best of their ability as well as some chores around the house.

I’ve seen cases where the child stays at home and is essentially a large kid with no responsibilities and lot of benefits. I’ve also known cases where the member of the younger generation contributed to the household, financially and/or by doing the stuff that needed to be done around the house and yard that the parents were getting too old or ill to do easily themselves. Yes, the mother still did the cooking and laundry, but the “child” more than pulled his or her weight around the house.

A multi-generational household isn’t a problem. The problem is when an individual of any generation expects a free ride no matter their abilities to contribute to the household.

LibraryGryffon on August 2, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Thank you for distinguishing between the true slackers and the ones who help mom and dad in every way they can. I’m sure your daughters will be in the latter group.

And the world seems more crowded than it is because of this notion that every person must have his or her own little space, using his or her own air conditioner, own heater, own stove, own television, own bathroom. Not every family needs to be

The Waltons

, but, yes, some households are multi-generational (some have three generations) and the system works for them.

bmmg39 on August 2, 2013 at 12:26 PM

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Here, if your side gets its wish, your utopian ‘hard-working, smart, polite under-30s’ will have one more real characteristic in common: ‘unemployed’…

From the same article:

‘Only 44 per cent of 18 to 34-year-olds have jobs, making Italian youth the most inactive in Europe.
Sociologist Chiara Saraceno said the trend is worrying for Italy’s future, as young Italians risk becoming a ‘lost generation,’ lacking skills and founding families later.’

jimver on August 2, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Slackers to be sure. P.S. the world is not over crowded. Just have a look at the % of earth undeveloped. No many of today’s youth it turns out have been coddled and prefer to be lazy like water. That said there are many youth that want to lay down accomplishments during their short time here. God speed to all those whom search for merit through accomplishment. The rest may starve.

Bmore on August 2, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Democratics should embrace this phenomenon as a ‘low-Carbon lifestyle’. Imagine how much happier mother Gaia would be if we all lived with our parents!

Happy-happy-happy!!

slickwillie2001 on August 2, 2013 at 12:36 PM

bmmg39: I’m speaking more of the kids who actually have the option. Not the ones who can’t afford to move out or the ones staying around to help an aging relative, but the ones who have jobs and options. Suggesting that, with the stigma reduced, the balance between the negatives of living at home and the positives )especially disposable income) had shifted. Given that the stay-at-homers are only about a third of the group anyway, I’m talking about a minority of a minority.

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 12:39 PM

urban elitist on August 2, 2013 at 12:39 PM

If you consider only the material equation, or the stigma produced by what other people think, then you are a pathetic loser.

The main deciding factors should be pride in yourself, a sense of responsibility, and a desire to move Forward!(pun intended) with your life. A young adult will be far worse off in life without that sense of earned self-pride and responsibilty than without that iPhone and BMW at 25.

Of course, if you are an urban elitist then the government will give you all the sense of pride and responsibility that you can handle.

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

The biggest problem here in southern California is expensive rent. A one bedroom apartment costs 1400 dollars. A four bedroom house is over 2000. It used to be that two or three friends making minimum wage could still afford an apartment together. Now it is much more difficult even if you make more than minimum wage. Because not only is the apartment more but car insurance and now the mandated health insurance as well as utilities and the high cost of food make it extremely difficult.

Rose on August 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

I really need to look up some statistics on employment since The One’s first inauguration. Specifically, I’m interested in number of people added to the potential workforce, number of people in the workforce, number of FT jobs added, number of PT jobs added.

I have all the links for this. I’ve just been too lazy to look it up. I’m certain that they aren’t numbers the Obama administration would want put on the evening news, however.

Chris of Rights on August 2, 2013 at 1:19 PM

Rose on August 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

Rose, yes it is difficult. Sometimes life is difficult.

But it is not impossible. It just depends on what your priorities are. And solving these types of problems now will only serve to make the rest of your life better and more fulfilling.

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

I wasn’t talking about me. I’m a homeowner in my fifties. I’m just saying that for this generation things are not as easy as it was for us back in the 70′s and 80′s and I think it is a little too easy to judge by our own experiences. Things have changed drastically from when we were young people fresh out of college.

Rose on August 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

A multi-generational household isn’t a problem. The problem is when an individual of any generation expects a free ride no matter their abilities to contribute to the household.

LibraryGryffon on August 2, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Thank you. You get it.

I lived at home until age 30. But I paid rent, helped out constantly with chores, projects, front and back yard maintenance, etc. I saved my money too with the intent to move out. And, I did.

You live at home with your parents, you should be a VALUE-ADDING tenant, and not a OWS slug.

KirknBurker on August 2, 2013 at 1:55 PM

Rose on August 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

Rose, I graduated high school in 1970, and believe me, moving out of my parents house was not easy. I couldn’t find a job to fit my college schedule so I started my own maintainance business to make enough to rent a room. I had to do without a car and raman noodles was my staple food. Believe me, it was not a bed of roses. It made me appreciate college a lot more though.

This experience developed a strong enough sense of self-pride that, even though I was unemployed for nine months a couple years ago, there was no way I was going to take unemployment or government assistance of any kind.

This is the kind of lesson in responsibility and self pride this generation needs. Not to give it to them is cruel.

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 2:11 PM

KirknBurker on August 2, 2013 at 1:55 PM

I’m sure your parents appreciated having you around and having that extra time with you. I think it is too easy for people to automatically assume the worse of situations. My son was sharing a house with his friends and when one of them got married they were unable to pay the full rent without him and couldn’t find a new roommate (they are Christians and didn’t want to live with just anyone). I told my son he was welcome to move back home until he decided what to do. I like having him here but it is temporary and he knows that. But I am enjoying the extra time with him.

Rose on August 2, 2013 at 2:12 PM

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 2:11 PM

And it would today be next to impossible to even rent a room with the amount of money you made even when allowing for inflation. It is out of control and no amount of sacrifice would allow you to pay 500 dollars or more a month just for a room. I paid 50 dollars a month when I was making 7.00 an hour. That room would now go for about 600 dollars a month.

Rose on August 2, 2013 at 2:18 PM

If you consider only the material equation, or the stigma produced by what other people think, then you are a pathetic loser.

The main deciding factors should be pride in yourself, a sense of responsibility, and a desire to move Forward!(pun intended) with your life.

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

– except some who live with their parents do have pride in themselves and have a sense of responsibility. And some who live “on their own” actually get assistance to do so. Is it more responsible to live with one’s parents and help out with them and their house, or to live “on one’s own” and get government assistance?

You live at home with your parents, you should be a VALUE-ADDING tenant, and not a OWS slug.

KirknBurker on August 2, 2013 at 1:55 PM

Agreed.

bmmg39 on August 2, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Rose on August 2, 2013 at 2:18 PM

I completely understand your point.

In fact, my 37 y.o. son hit a very rough spot and we welcomed him back home for a short period. He helped us immeasurably, but we made sure he did not slip into being too comfortable. It was understood that this would be a short term arrangement, and he was able to get back on his feet and get his own place only 6 months into our 1 year agreement. He has to work 2 jobs and take work on the side to have his own place, but that is what HE wanted to do.

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 3:51 PM

except some who live with their parents do have pride in themselves and have a sense of responsibility. And some who live “on their own” actually get assistance to do so. Is it more responsible to live with one’s parents and help out with them and their house, or to live “on one’s own” and get government assistance?

bmmg39 on August 2, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Getting government assistance is not living on your own. A big big problem in our society is that government has become “Daddy” to too many people.

NOMOBO on August 2, 2013 at 3:53 PM

Story

For me the most heartbreaking part is so many young who’s prime will quickly pass are wasting it. Prime years 18-38. The years of invincibility wasted. Shame on all who enable this behavior.

Bmore on August 3, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Quit sounding like it’s crystal meth, Bmore. Really.

bmmg39 on August 3, 2013 at 10:26 AM