Anonymous wrote:One word: SEX

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids even need a place to live?

When I was single don’t laugh I often sleep in 50-70 beds a year.

I had my parents house to crash in but spent time friends apartments, girlfriends place, my beach rental I shared with 15 friends, going in business trips. I often go out friends Friday sleep over, then straight to GF house sleep over Saturday, then home to parents Sunday night then off to a business trip the next week

This is very atypical. And, quite frankly, sounds like a nightmare. Not everyone would be ok being so rootless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your "solution" to the housing crisis is for all kids to attend college, graduate and immediately make $100k, live with their parents until they are 30, and save half a million dollars?

You're a genius, OP. A real policy savant. Where should we mail your Nobel Prize?

Care to tackle peace in the middle east next? I'm sure you can come up with a solution - perhaps set a specific date and time for everyone to drop their weapons and sing Kumbaya?

There is no "housing crisis" only an entitlement mentality crisis. People seem to believe that they have a right to live wherever they want regardless of whether they can afford it. The world does not owe you anything and this mentality does nothing to help someone afford a house. The people that complain about housing affordability are the same people that pass numerous policies that actively worsen what they are complaining about, retroactive building performance/energy efficiency standards, costly building code updates, bond initiates for "affordably housing (which make housing less affordable by increasing property taxes). I don't want to hear from these people anymore. The only objective of density bros and the "housing crisis" crazies is to force everyone else to live in high density micro apartments. They are all front groups for developers and the real estate lobby and these industries will gladly destroy communities as long as it maximizes their profits

Working hard HS-----> college ------> workforce over the span of 10-15 years and wanting to afford a home (even a "regular" non-Mansion home) is not an entitlement mentality. It is what the American Dream promises and has delivered pretty reliably until recent years. Now kids work hard, or harder, and will receive/see less of a payoff in terms of home, retirement, etc. than the generations before them.

And that sucks to realize. They're angry and rightfully so. But it isn't "entitlement" so stop throwing that word around.

Peoples expectations are not realistic anymore. In 1950, the average new construction SFH was only 958 feet and the average household size was around 3.5 people (274 sq ft per person). The average size of a new construction SFH in 2023 was 2,469 sq feet and the average household size was 2.6 people (950 sq feet per person). The average sq ft per household member today is 3.46 times larger than in 1950. So of course home are less affordable when people expect to have 3x more space per person compared to recent history. Even for the more affordable condo units people have come to expect 600-800sq ft for a one bedroom unit when it could easily have 2 bedrooms or more. Most people don’t want to buy small units with multiple bedrooms anymore so developers don’t build them frequently.

This 1000%

In the 70s people lived in 3 bed/1 bath homes of 1000 sq ft. If lucky you had a 0.5 bath/powder room. Very few homes had a full 2nd bath. The kitchen was basic (not luxury) and so was the bathroom.
People's expectations of what they need to live have changed.

None of that matters. Developers are not building 1000 sq ft 3 BR/1BA homes because the cost of instead making a 4 BR/3BA 3,5000 sq ft home instead is nominal to the amount of profit they can make off the larger home.

Homes are being built to maximize developer profit, not create modest affordable starter homes.

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids even need a place to live?

When I was single don’t laugh I often sleep in 50-70 beds a year.

I had my parents house to crash in but spent time friends apartments, girlfriends place, my beach rental I shared with 15 friends, going in business trips. I often go out friends Friday sleep over, then straight to GF house sleep over Saturday, then home to parents Sunday night then off to a business trip the next week

Anonymous wrote:You are delusional about wages. My 38-year-old daughter just started earning $75,000 after 16 years in the workforce. My recent graduate earns $50,000. I have one high-earning kid (computer science), but he's an outlier.

For feck's sake.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does dating work though when you live at home? My parents were crazy and I had a 10pm curfew, midnight on weekends (I lived at my parent's home in the summer during my internships). I also would never have been allowed to bring someone home to stay the night, even a long term boyfriend.

I think it's much better to live with roommates. We split cheap apartments with 3-5 other people.

Gen-Xer here. Yes, that’s my question too! When I was in my 20’s I was dating different people and would be mortified to bring them back to my parents house to spend the night. My parents were also not so laid back to have me sleeping over at boy’s houses if I lived with them. So bye bye sex life I guess. I’m glad I didn’t miss out on that and also on the fun times living in DC with my friends from college.

Those were some of the best years of my life which wouldn’t be quite so good if I lived with my folks!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does not at all factor in student loans, which can be crippling. And many young people may not find jobs in their industries close to home.

Student loans don’t happen by accident. Despite what Biden advertises, people have agency over which schools they attend and how much they borrow.

+1000

Nobody is entitled to whatever education they want. You need to select a college that is affordable for you. They do exist for everyone.

But don't take $150K in loans for any degree, but sure as hell not for some random degree where your avg salary is only $35K. If you are smart enough for college, you are smart enough to understand that is a dumb idea.

Work and earn $40K (10/year) to pay for college, then find a school that you can afford with minimal debt.

Or don't but then don't complain when your $150K becomes $240K because you cannot make even the minimum payments and interest keeps accruing. That is how loans work, don't take them if you don't understand that

And do you understand that many students still need to borrow money just to go to community college? I’m a teacher and my DS would’ve had to take out loans to go to CC if my dad hadn’t died and left me some money. You can save money if you don’t make enough to save.

As long as total borrowing does not exceed 1 year’s starting salary, then sure go to college. Otherwise, do not go to college because you are making a Terrible financial decision.

Living off minimum wage because you don’t have a degree is also a terrible decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your "solution" to the housing crisis is for all kids to attend college, graduate and immediately make $100k, live with their parents until they are 30, and save half a million dollars?

You're a genius, OP. A real policy savant. Where should we mail your Nobel Prize?

Care to tackle peace in the middle east next? I'm sure you can come up with a solution - perhaps set a specific date and time for everyone to drop their weapons and sing Kumbaya?

There is no "housing crisis" only an entitlement mentality crisis. People seem to believe that they have a right to live wherever they want regardless of whether they can afford it. The world does not owe you anything and this mentality does nothing to help someone afford a house. The people that complain about housing affordability are the same people that pass numerous policies that actively worsen what they are complaining about, retroactive building performance/energy efficiency standards, costly building code updates, bond initiates for "affordably housing (which make housing less affordable by increasing property taxes). I don't want to hear from these people anymore. The only objective of density bros and the "housing crisis" crazies is to force everyone else to live in high density micro apartments. They are all front groups for developers and the real estate lobby and these industries will gladly destroy communities as long as it maximizes their profits

Working hard HS-----> college ------> workforce over the span of 10-15 years and wanting to afford a home (even a "regular" non-Mansion home) is not an entitlement mentality. It is what the American Dream promises and has delivered pretty reliably until recent years. Now kids work hard, or harder, and will receive/see less of a payoff in terms of home, retirement, etc. than the generations before them.

And that sucks to realize. They're angry and rightfully so. But it isn't "entitlement" so stop throwing that word around.

Peoples expectations are not realistic anymore. In 1950, the average new construction SFH was only 958 feet and the average household size was around 3.5 people (274 sq ft per person). The average size of a new construction SFH in 2023 was 2,469 sq feet and the average household size was 2.6 people (950 sq feet per person). The average sq ft per household member today is 3.46 times larger than in 1950. So of course home are less affordable when people expect to have 3x more space per person compared to recent history. Even for the more affordable condo units people have come to expect 600-800sq ft for a one bedroom unit when it could easily have 2 bedrooms or more. Most people don’t want to buy small units with multiple bedrooms anymore so developers don’t build them frequently.

This 1000%

In the 70s people lived in 3 bed/1 bath homes of 1000 sq ft. If lucky you had a 0.5 bath/powder room. Very few homes had a full 2nd bath. The kitchen was basic (not luxury) and so was the bathroom.
People's expectations of what they need to live have changed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We all hear about inflation, housing costs in the DC area, and the hardships that face young people. But is this really so dire?

Let’s say you have a young person who lives at home with their parents after graduating college, from age 22 to 30. And let’s say their income averages $100,000 per year over that time (starting at $80-90,000 and ending up at $110-120,000 at age 30).

Of their $100,000 income, they pay $25,000 in taxes and only need to spend another $10,000 per year since they are living at home. That means they can save on average $65,000 per year—or $520,000 over the eight years (ignoring any potential investment gains).

That’s enough for them to buy a $400,000 condo in cash (or use that amount as a huge down payment if they’re getting married and need to buy a house instead). On top of that, they have enough to buy a solid $25,000 car, furniture for their new place—and still have enough left over for an emergency fund and maybe even some investments. That sounds like a pretty darn good place to be in as a 30-year-old.

Obviously, that only works under certain conditions. First, the kid has to major in something marketable. And the parents have to live in the same area and be at least middle-class/upper middle-class—but that describes most of the DCUM demographic. Thoughts? Why isn’t this the solution?

For UMC families it's more common for the kid to rent and live independently and then help them with a downpayment

Anonymous wrote:Yes, its obviously the solution but its not considered cool so people dont do it.