I am a boomer. My first apartment was 200 sf walk up apartment with no AC, no dishwasher, a pullman kitchen that consisted of a mini fridge and hot plate with bars on windows and doors.

Today kids want doormen, pools, gyms in their first apt.

Things are not really more expensive it is expectations are higher. And that costs more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Many of those homes don't exist anymore. You will likely be buying a condo instead, which is totally fine by me. I'm a young Gen X and bought my first home last year. It's a 2BR, 2BA condo. I'm not demanding that the government give me a SFH or kick our elders out of their SFH.

Agreed.

But fact remains that majority of boomers lived with "a lot less". Most were in 1200-1500 sq ft homes-3 bedroom and 1.5 to 2 baths. They didn't live in 4000sq ft + mansions. or even 2400sq ft homes. They had ONE tv, not 3+. They often lived with one car--the SAHM would drive the dad to work or the family went without a car during the day.
Kids played outside with the niehgborhood kids after school, most didn't go to 3 hours of dance/gymnastics/club BB/etc.

But nowadays the equivalent home is a condo or TH, in rare instances there are newer smaller SFH.

And don't start on intrest rates-I can recall my parents having a mortgage for 16%+.

Oh come on- plenty of those crap small homes that the boomers lived in are still there (unless they tore down to build themselves a McMansion). The millennials who try to buy them are often getting outbid by cash offers. My boomer parents (who don't live in the DMV) were literally horrified by what we had to pay for our 1940s Silver Spring non-updated "starter" home. I say that in quotes because unless we really want to become house poor we will never move. Which is fine. But it's funny how some parents like mine can acknowledge how certain things are more challenging for their kids while others are so hostile and combative.

Yeah. Maybe our grandparents lived in these 1940's starter homes that now we have to pay $700,000 for, but our parents built new mcmansions in the 1980's and 1990's for pennies of what they cost now. And they still live there. So we millennials are stuck with buying grandma's house for 3/4 of a million dollars, and our parents judging us for not having as much as them.

Be an adult and move to a place you can better afford. Don’t cry because you are keeping yourself in a place where demand outstrips supply. That is a choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Many of those homes don't exist anymore. You will likely be buying a condo instead, which is totally fine by me. I'm a young Gen X and bought my first home last year. It's a 2BR, 2BA condo. I'm not demanding that the government give me a SFH or kick our elders out of their SFH.

Agreed.

But fact remains that majority of boomers lived with "a lot less". Most were in 1200-1500 sq ft homes-3 bedroom and 1.5 to 2 baths. They didn't live in 4000sq ft + mansions. or even 2400sq ft homes. They had ONE tv, not 3+. They often lived with one car--the SAHM would drive the dad to work or the family went without a car during the day.
Kids played outside with the niehgborhood kids after school, most didn't go to 3 hours of dance/gymnastics/club BB/etc.

But nowadays the equivalent home is a condo or TH, in rare instances there are newer smaller SFH.

And don't start on intrest rates-I can recall my parents having a mortgage for 16%+.

Oh come on- plenty of those crap small homes that the boomers lived in are still there (unless they tore down to build themselves a McMansion). The millennials who try to buy them are often getting outbid by cash offers. My boomer parents (who don't live in the DMV) were literally horrified by what we had to pay for our 1940s Silver Spring non-updated "starter" home. I say that in quotes because unless we really want to become house poor we will never move. Which is fine. But it's funny how some parents like mine can acknowledge how certain things are more challenging for their kids while others are so hostile and combative.

Yeah. Maybe our grandparents lived in these 1940's starter homes that now we have to pay $700,000 for, but our parents built new mcmansions in the 1980's and 1990's for pennies of what they cost now. And they still live there. So we millennials are stuck with buying grandma's house for 3/4 of a million dollars, and our parents judging us for not having as much as them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Many of those homes don't exist anymore. You will likely be buying a condo instead, which is totally fine by me. I'm a young Gen X and bought my first home last year. It's a 2BR, 2BA condo. I'm not demanding that the government give me a SFH or kick our elders out of their SFH.

Agreed.

But fact remains that majority of boomers lived with "a lot less". Most were in 1200-1500 sq ft homes-3 bedroom and 1.5 to 2 baths. They didn't live in 4000sq ft + mansions. or even 2400sq ft homes. They had ONE tv, not 3+. They often lived with one car--the SAHM would drive the dad to work or the family went without a car during the day.
Kids played outside with the niehgborhood kids after school, most didn't go to 3 hours of dance/gymnastics/club BB/etc.

But nowadays the equivalent home is a condo or TH, in rare instances there are newer smaller SFH.

And don't start on intrest rates-I can recall my parents having a mortgage for 16%+.

Oh come on- plenty of those crap small homes that the boomers lived in are still there (unless they tore down to build themselves a McMansion). The millennials who try to buy them are often getting outbid by cash offers. My boomer parents (who don't live in the DMV) were literally horrified by what we had to pay for our 1940s Silver Spring non-updated "starter" home. I say that in quotes because unless we really want to become house poor we will never move. Which is fine. But it's funny how some parents like mine can acknowledge how certain things are more challenging for their kids while others are so hostile and combative.

However the vast majority do not want to live in those homes. Most kids who grew up MC/UMC expect to live as nice as they grew up, but to do it instantly once out of college. Not realizing that their parents most likely did NOT live that way in their 20s (and possibly even 30s).

This.

My kids would fall over if they saw where I lived in my 20s through mid-30s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Many of those homes don't exist anymore. You will likely be buying a condo instead, which is totally fine by me. I'm a young Gen X and bought my first home last year. It's a 2BR, 2BA condo. I'm not demanding that the government give me a SFH or kick our elders out of their SFH.

Agreed.

But fact remains that majority of boomers lived with "a lot less". Most were in 1200-1500 sq ft homes-3 bedroom and 1.5 to 2 baths. They didn't live in 4000sq ft + mansions. or even 2400sq ft homes. They had ONE tv, not 3+. They often lived with one car--the SAHM would drive the dad to work or the family went without a car during the day.
Kids played outside with the niehgborhood kids after school, most didn't go to 3 hours of dance/gymnastics/club BB/etc.

But nowadays the equivalent home is a condo or TH, in rare instances there are newer smaller SFH.

And don't start on intrest rates-I can recall my parents having a mortgage for 16%+.

Oh come on- plenty of those crap small homes that the boomers lived in are still there (unless they tore down to build themselves a McMansion). The millennials who try to buy them are often getting outbid by cash offers. My boomer parents (who don't live in the DMV) were literally horrified by what we had to pay for our 1940s Silver Spring non-updated "starter" home. I say that in quotes because unless we really want to become house poor we will never move. Which is fine. But it's funny how some parents like mine can acknowledge how certain things are more challenging for their kids while others are so hostile and combative.

However the vast majority do not want to live in those homes. Most kids who grew up MC/UMC expect to live as nice as they grew up, but to do it instantly once out of college. Not realizing that their parents most likely did NOT live that way in their 20s (and possibly even 30s).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know, my greatest generation grandfather worked for less than years of his life and retired on a full pension in his 40s. My father worked from 22 to 62 and retired on a full pension. Both played golf and lived very well. Same with his side of the family--his father retired at 50 and lived a full comfortable 40 years collecting his pension. My spouse and I have worked since we were 22 and won't ever retire even though we are better educated than both. There is no pension but the money we tried to save since we were 22.

Pensions disappeared because of corporate greed. Top executives are allowed to shelter unlimited amounts of compensation from taxes. Employees have limits of how much they can contribute annually to their 401k

Walmarts CEO Doug McMillon kept about $169m in his deferred compensation account. When he retires he will be able to generate a monthly retirement check of more than $1 million dollars.

Only about half of employees of the shameful Walmart stores save any money at all in their 401k. Their salaries are just too low to set aside anything.

This has nothing to do with people born in the 50s or people born in the 70s. This is pure greed amongst the powerful and voters not voting for their best interests.

How? Please explain this.

I’d much prefer the mobility of a 401k over a pension. I don’t want to be stuck working the same place forever for a retirement benefit. The idea of a pension seems archaic and also mathematically doesn’t make a lot of sense unless the next generation of workers is larger in number.

+1 401K are much more useful than a pension. Allows the individual to have choices. Smart people move their 401K to their "own IRA" whenever they leave a company. Thus giving them more control over investment choices.

Personally, I wish we had the option to also opt out of SS and invest on our own. I'd have way more than I will ever get from SS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Many of those homes don't exist anymore. You will likely be buying a condo instead, which is totally fine by me. I'm a young Gen X and bought my first home last year. It's a 2BR, 2BA condo. I'm not demanding that the government give me a SFH or kick our elders out of their SFH.

Agreed.

But fact remains that majority of boomers lived with "a lot less". Most were in 1200-1500 sq ft homes-3 bedroom and 1.5 to 2 baths. They didn't live in 4000sq ft + mansions. or even 2400sq ft homes. They had ONE tv, not 3+. They often lived with one car--the SAHM would drive the dad to work or the family went without a car during the day.
Kids played outside with the niehgborhood kids after school, most didn't go to 3 hours of dance/gymnastics/club BB/etc.

But nowadays the equivalent home is a condo or TH, in rare instances there are newer smaller SFH.

And don't start on intrest rates-I can recall my parents having a mortgage for 16%+.

Oh come on- plenty of those crap small homes that the boomers lived in are still there (unless they tore down to build themselves a McMansion). The millennials who try to buy them are often getting outbid by cash offers. My boomer parents (who don't live in the DMV) were literally horrified by what we had to pay for our 1940s Silver Spring non-updated "starter" home. I say that in quotes because unless we really want to become house poor we will never move. Which is fine. But it's funny how some parents like mine can acknowledge how certain things are more challenging for their kids while others are so hostile and combative.

It goes back to the area has changed discussion. It’s not the same place it was 50 years ago. We left the DMV when we realized that we would always be cash poor. We sold our small house, picked up and moved to a different part of the country where we could get what we wanted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Many of those homes don't exist anymore. You will likely be buying a condo instead, which is totally fine by me. I'm a young Gen X and bought my first home last year. It's a 2BR, 2BA condo. I'm not demanding that the government give me a SFH or kick our elders out of their SFH.

Agreed.

But fact remains that majority of boomers lived with "a lot less". Most were in 1200-1500 sq ft homes-3 bedroom and 1.5 to 2 baths. They didn't live in 4000sq ft + mansions. or even 2400sq ft homes. They had ONE tv, not 3+. They often lived with one car--the SAHM would drive the dad to work or the family went without a car during the day.
Kids played outside with the niehgborhood kids after school, most didn't go to 3 hours of dance/gymnastics/club BB/etc.

But nowadays the equivalent home is a condo or TH, in rare instances there are newer smaller SFH.

And don't start on intrest rates-I can recall my parents having a mortgage for 16%+.

Oh come on- plenty of those crap small homes that the boomers lived in are still there (unless they tore down to build themselves a McMansion). The millennials who try to buy them are often getting outbid by cash offers. My boomer parents (who don't live in the DMV) were literally horrified by what we had to pay for our 1940s Silver Spring non-updated "starter" home. I say that in quotes because unless we really want to become house poor we will never move. Which is fine. But it's funny how some parents like mine can acknowledge how certain things are more challenging for their kids while others are so hostile and combative.

Anonymous wrote:That millennial or Gen-Z starter SFH is now listed in Woodbridge for $500K to $600K. This home sold for $78K when it was built in 1984, it's had a few updates and now sells for $566K.

https://redf.in/yzv8UR

There are houses under $400k in Woodbridge. They aren’t awesome but they’d be fine.

My first house was just under $400k in NE and it was unlivable. Two bedrooms plus nursery, one bathroom, no AC, never updated and built in the 1930s. The ceilings were water damaged and falling in. The neighborhood was…okay maybe. But we were two feds and what could we do?

We fixed it up as we went and eventually sold it many years later.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know, my greatest generation grandfather worked for less than years of his life and retired on a full pension in his 40s. My father worked from 22 to 62 and retired on a full pension. Both played golf and lived very well. Same with his side of the family--his father retired at 50 and lived a full comfortable 40 years collecting his pension. My spouse and I have worked since we were 22 and won't ever retire even though we are better educated than both. There is no pension but the money we tried to save since we were 22.

Pensions disappeared because of corporate greed. Top executives are allowed to shelter unlimited amounts of compensation from taxes. Employees have limits of how much they can contribute annually to their 401k

Walmarts CEO Doug McMillon kept about $169m in his deferred compensation account. When he retires he will be able to generate a monthly retirement check of more than $1 million dollars.

Only about half of employees of the shameful Walmart stores save any money at all in their 401k. Their salaries are just too low to set aside anything.

This has nothing to do with people born in the 50s or people born in the 70s. This is pure greed amongst the powerful and voters not voting for their best interests.

How? Please explain this.

I’d much prefer the mobility of a 401k over a pension. I don’t want to be stuck working the same place forever for a retirement benefit. The idea of a pension seems archaic and also mathematically doesn’t make a lot of sense unless the next generation of workers is larger in number.

Anonymous wrote:I don't know, my greatest generation grandfather worked for less than years of his life and retired on a full pension in his 40s. My father worked from 22 to 62 and retired on a full pension. Both played golf and lived very well. Same with his side of the family--his father retired at 50 and lived a full comfortable 40 years collecting his pension. My spouse and I have worked since we were 22 and won't ever retire even though we are better educated than both. There is no pension but the money we tried to save since we were 22.

Pensions disappeared because of corporate greed. Top executives are allowed to shelter unlimited amounts of compensation from taxes. Employees have limits of how much they can contribute annually to their 401k

Walmarts CEO Doug McMillon kept about $169m in his deferred compensation account. When he retires he will be able to generate a monthly retirement check of more than $1 million dollars.

Only about half of employees of the shameful Walmart stores save any money at all in their 401k. Their salaries are just too low to set aside anything.

This has nothing to do with people born in the 50s or people born in the 70s. This is pure greed amongst the powerful and voters not voting for their best interests.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Wait, really? If only we millennials had known there were bountiful, affordable houses out there in the prime locations the boomers got to live and all we had to do was be ok with a little smaller house!

No, wait, even a friggin' vacant lot costs a million bucks: https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/Rock-Spring-Rd-22207/home/22678434

So I guess it actually is that housing is completely unaffordable and not "millennials only want HGTV houses" after all.

I am loathe to get sucked into this discussion, but these weren't prime locations years ago. That's why there were 2 BR, 1 ba houses on them. The definition of a prime location changes over the years, and if you are lamenting that you can't buy in what was once a run-of-the-mill neighborhood but is not a prime location, you're really off base.

This. Oceanfront property used to sell at a discount in LA because of a feared Japanese invasion. Should we all be complaining that Manhattan beach is now expensive but used to be dirt cheap?

That millennial or Gen-Z starter SFH is now listed in Woodbridge for $500K to $600K. This home sold for $78K when it was built in 1984, it's had a few updates and now sells for $566K.

https://redf.in/yzv8UR

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole argument is stupid. But anyone is welcome to buy a house that the Boomers had available to them a high interest rates. Go forth with that 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1200 sq foot abode.

Many of those homes don't exist anymore. You will likely be buying a condo instead, which is totally fine by me. I'm a young Gen X and bought my first home last year. It's a 2BR, 2BA condo. I'm not demanding that the government give me a SFH or kick our elders out of their SFH.

Agreed.

But fact remains that majority of boomers lived with "a lot less". Most were in 1200-1500 sq ft homes-3 bedroom and 1.5 to 2 baths. They didn't live in 4000sq ft + mansions. or even 2400sq ft homes. They had ONE tv, not 3+. They often lived with one car--the SAHM would drive the dad to work or the family went without a car during the day.
Kids played outside with the niehgborhood kids after school, most didn't go to 3 hours of dance/gymnastics/club BB/etc.

But nowadays the equivalent home is a condo or TH, in rare instances there are newer smaller SFH.

And don't start on intrest rates-I can recall my parents having a mortgage for 16%+.

Millenials are whiny and entitled. Boomers have more money because they’re older. Millenials are richer than Boomers were at their age. It takes time to build wealth.

https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/millennials-personal-finance-real-estate-50742ffe?st=qrfc0qlfqglupds&reflink=article_copyURL_share

The median household net worth of older millennials, born in the 1980s, rose to $130,000 in 2022 from $60,000 in 2019, according to inflation-adjusted data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Median wealth more than quadrupled to $41,000 for Americans born in the 1990s, which includes the generation’s youngest members, born in 1996.

The turnaround has been so dramatic that millennials—mocked at times for being perpetually behind in building wealth, buying homes, getting married and having children—now find themselves ahead.

In early 2024, millennials and older members of Gen Z had, on average and adjusting for inflation, about 25% more wealth than Gen Xers and baby boomers did at a similar age, according to a St. Louis Fed analysis.