914
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] turnip@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Its because the US excluded housing appreciation from the CPI, leading to lots of cheap debt all over the world that gradually bid up home values via the cantillon effect. Its now called owners equivalent rent, and its ridiculous.

Exporting all our production to China also helped dropped rates via deflation, though housing being excluded allowed it to simply flow into housing instead of achieving prosperity.

[-] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago

Remember, just because someone posts something on the Internet with confidence, doesn't mean they know what they're talking about.

A lot of people really need to stop taking advice from Twitter/X, Facebook/Meta, Reddit/Lemmy, etc.

Spare me the predictable reply "but why should I listen to you" or any variation.

[-] Apocalypteroid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago

Username checks out

[-] happytimeharry@lemmy.world 12 points 4 hours ago

lol yes wanting freedom and to be away from your parents at 18. A psyop. Jesus Christ.

[-] superniceperson@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago

Most people in most of history don't want that. Or at least not enough to make their life immeasurably worse.

[-] lobut@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 hour ago

I'm 42 and my parents recently moved in with me. Someone killed me.

[-] jsomae@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 hours ago

I came back later when I realized family is important to me.

[-] 96VXb9ktTjFnRi@feddit.nl 10 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

I wish this was our problem. Of course, there should be no shame in living with your parents. But it should be out of free will, and here in the Netherlands sadly that isn't the case for many. Our housing market simply doesn't offer affordable housing options. For many young people the only option is a rental apartment that will cost you so much, that if you can afford it at all, you can forget about ever saving any money. Which means that you'll effectively be stuck in this situation forever. Which is an option to consider, but meanwhile those who can afford to buy a house, because of rich parents or whatnot, they have a far better deal, often even paying less on a monthly basis, while at the same time their house increases in value. It's a major dividing factor in our society, separating the rich from the poor. Of course staying home is another realistic option to consider, and more and more people make this choice, but only for lack of a better option. The real tragedy is of course when staying at home is also not a realistic option. A fucked-up housing market makes the vulnerable all the more vulnerable.

[-] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 hours ago

this is basically what it’s like in america… including the infuriating fact that people’s mortgage payment on a home is usually less than rent… but the man won’t give you a home loan so you’re endlessly a wage slave and paying rent.

landlords even brag about how smart they are by paying their mortgage directly with the rent… like they have a free house hack… forgetting that someone is forced to pay to live….

the only good way to beat it i know is to buy a foreclosure home for cheap and fix it up… but even then you need a good chunk saved up and it’s risky

[-] CluelessCalls@lemm.ee -3 points 4 hours ago

It’s a psy op perpetrated by kids by being awful.

[-] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 4 hours ago

if your kids are awful, good chance you did that to them.

[-] FenderStratocaster@lemmy.world 41 points 17 hours ago

I'm in the party that thinks if you have a full-time job you should be able to afford a home

[-] twice_hatch@midwest.social 13 points 17 hours ago

Both can be true, we can put pressure on all fronts

Also homes could be way cheaper if zoning were fixed, density were legalized, and property taxes were retooled into a land tax

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 3 points 14 hours ago

I dunno about America, but Australia has the problems you listed, but we also have problems with tax incentives to investing in housing rather than investing elsewhere, which also helps push up property prices by increasing demand without affecting supply.

[-] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 19 points 17 hours ago

Asian families: what do you mean "leave"?

Seriously, it's not a bad thing to stay until you can afford to leave.

[-] Wanpieserino@lemm.ee 12 points 16 hours ago

Me, my pregnant wife, my retired dad and my working brother all live in one house. Belgium

Can we afford to live in 3 houses? Yes.

Is it necessary? No.

The house is paid off. One house is being heated, ...

Me and my wife save up about 2500 euros per month. My brother saves up even more because he's spending literally nothing. He saves up his entire paycheck.

Building generational wealth is pretty fun. My parents worked for us. Me and my wife work for our kid. I got basically a house as inheritance in a great economy. Our kid will have a house + investment portfolio (Stoxx 600, gold/silver, ...)

Our biggest "waste" of money is traveling. I don't even have a car, just using my taxes to have a long tail e bike that does the same shit.

We have 2 cars on the property, they barely are used. Literally one is being used to drive to train station. The other one for the grocery store within 2 km. It's good that one of those two is a company car, otherwise gigantic waste of money.

Our household (my wife works 14 hours per week ATM). Earns a net income of: 9300 euros.

Include capital gains of like 4%. It becomes a total of 13300 euros net "income" per month. An e bike valued 9,5k euros. An electric car.

All because we are mentally stable enough to live under one roof.

[-] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 5 points 14 hours ago

Shame my house would be pretty crowded in that situation. Although those pod bunk beds look fucking sweet and could work.

It's certainly cheaper to get the pod bunkbed that will make any child scream with excitement than it is to buy a larger house which will leave them bored while all their stuff is moved and likely move them away from their friends.

[-] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 14 hours ago

Unfortunately I can't live with my parents. I probably won't have kids, but if I do, I doubt they could afford to live anywhere else. Not unless I leave the US. It's rough here.

[-] BeNotAfraid@lemmy.world 68 points 1 day ago

No THIS POST is a psyop to help normalise the idea of generational family living at home again so that we'll swallow the ungodly recession and poverty that will be brought upon the entire working class; should we not agree, as a global unit, to Tax the rich and restore wealth to the Government, Middle and Working classes and out of the hands of Billionaires. Fuck this post.

[-] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Anytime anyone suggests we need to decrease consumption people complain that it's a plot by the rich to get us used to poverty.

we should eat less meat

The elites are trying to make the poor eat bugs

we need to drive less

The rich are taking away our freedom

we need to live in denser housing

The rich are trying to force you into a shoe box

You know what the rich really want?, consumption. They want you buying as much as possible because that's the way we get growth and it also makes it so you have less savings and are more dependent on your job, and less likely to make demands or quit.

I agree we need massive wealth redistribution and consumption by the 1% is magnitudes more harmful then the rest. But the current american lifestyle of heating and cooling an entire house for 1-2 people in a sprawled out suburb where you have to drive everywhere and have meat with every meal is not sustainable either. We need to reprioritize what we value as a society, deemphasizing individuality and private ownership and moving towards community.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 11 points 19 hours ago

You know what the rich really want?, consumption. They want you buying as much as possible because that's the way we get growth and it also makes it so you have less savings and are more dependent on your job, and less likely to make demands or quit.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 15 points 20 hours ago

Depends on your family.

[-] chalupapocalypse@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago

Yeah I'm not living with my mom thanks

[-] spaduf@slrpnk.net 16 points 22 hours ago

Generational conflict is the other major factor. If the generation above me weren't so difficult to be around it wouldn't be so hard to imagine.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 3 points 14 hours ago

Conservative family values...

[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 128 points 1 day ago

The real reason your parents want you out is so they can fuck everywhere in peace and bring the kink back into their life. Kids are the ultimate mood spoilers.

*meant in jest, you're all lovely*

[-] fireweed@lemmy.world 50 points 1 day ago

Other way around too. One major reason why the current cohort of 18-25 year olds aren't getting any is because no one wants to bring someone back to their parents' place.

[-] parody@lemmings.world 3 points 3 hours ago

USA needs love hotels like elsewhere (Asia, LatAm)

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 78 points 1 day ago

Here's the thing.

It shouldn't be stigmatized, and it shouldn't be something that's any of anyone else's business beyond being an interesting fact about a person. Just one more nugget to find.

There's no single right answer for everyone.

Families are fucking complicated. Some of them, you could happily live together your entire life. Others, you might need a giant house and you'd still have friction. Some, you don't even want to be in the same state, much less share a house.

It is, however, true that as the number of people in a group increases, the work required to maintain healthy relationships increases exponentially.

If there is not parity between those relationships, it multiplies the effect. Which means that everyone involved has to be willing to adapt and change over time for things to stay hair and healthy. When that isn't the case, the household is going to split in some way or another, and that usually means someone leaving is essentially necessary.

Think about it. Two people that love each other have work to do to maintain their relationship, be it romantic, friendship, parent/child, siblings, whatever. You add a third person to that, and instead of one relationship you have 4, not three. Because each individual relationship exists, and now the three way one does.

Now, think about two people starting a family. Say they only have one kid. The kid becomes an adult, with adult needs, responsibilities, wants, and habits. If the parents keep treating them like a child, dissonance will occur in most situations.

Now, have that child get married too. You've now got 4 individual relationships to maintain, the original triplet, the new triplet with the spouse and parents, plus a triplet with each parent, the child, and the child's spouse, then the quartet.

That's a shit ton of work. You've got all those people having to compromise, adjust their habits and remember boundaries. That's not something where everyone is going to major the optimum decision every single time. It's impossible almost, though if everyone puts in the effort roughly equally, it can be maintained for a lifetime.

Now, the second couple have a kid. Map out those connections and the level of difficulty spikes hard.

But, as hard as it is, if you find someone that's living in shared space, people still assume there's something wrong with the younger adults involved. And there may be, but it isn't a certainty the way people assume it will be.

There's benefits and drawbacks to every option when it comes to how a family lives, be it centralized, spread out, or fully disconnected.

Now, I've done all of that. At various points, I've lived with my sibling and parents as an adult; we've all lived apart as individuals, we've lived as duos (though not in every combination), and I've had two partners that lived with me during all of that, and a best friend that was there through damn near all of it, and his husband for a while, plus my kid in the mix.

At various points, different people owned the house, even though it's been the same house that I grew up in for most of that. It was originally my dad as owner, with my mom having her share of that as a spouse. Then they divorced, and my dad got the house and my mom got a big check. She still lived here, but that's a separate thing. Then my dad fucked up, and me and my best friend bought it. Now, I'm the only one on the mortgage.

The dynamics of that meant that the "power" shifted as ownership did because at the end of the day, whoever is on the mortgage/deed has final legal responsibility, financial responsibility, and that means having final say on some matters, no matter how democratic everything else is. That creates an extra dynamic on top of all the others.

I can tell you for sure that it takes work, hard emotional work, to navigate every iteration of that. When that work isn't being done by everyone, shit can get bad fast.

But it's also amazing. The amount of good in it is mind boggling if you take each family unit being apart as the goal that is the only measure of success. When everyone is clicking along, and there's equity between everyone, gods it's beautiful.

Just on a practical level, everyone with income had more left over than they otherwise would have, and none of us have ever had to face the bad times alone. We've had each others back more times than I can even count (I tried, and I kept remembering more until I gave up, and I was creeping on triple digits where the level of support was part of at least one of us making it through).

And on the emotional level? It can be chaotic, yeah, but if you don't know the goodness of being able to just hug your dad any time you want to because he's just in the other room, I'm sorry. Right now, I can go hug my dad, and don't have to leave the house. He'll laugh, and ask what's up. I'll say "nothing, I just love you", and then we'll get teary eyed and he'll say it back, and then we go about our days.

It isn't for everyone. But gods damn, it sure as hell isn't a bad thing to try either

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 21 hours ago

YES thank you, finally somebody says it. I couldn't muster the motivation to make this exact thought into a post yet even though the idea has been going through my head for a long time.

Of course, if every person uses their own house, you need lots of houses which "stimulates the economy", i.e. it shifts wealth from the pockets of the workers into the pockets of the construction companies, up from where it goes partially to the owner's pockets, partially to the wages. Yet with every iteration of the game the owners grab a bigger and bigger piece of the wealth, until it is all accumulated uphill. Consider:

[-] trolololol@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

It's a bit thick on the wages and thin on shareholders but the concept is right

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 day ago

I made 10 bucks an hour in 2007 and had a one bedroom one bathroom apartment for $475 in a college city.

Living on your own was possible 18 years ago.

[-] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 3 points 17 hours ago

These days $475 a person crammed into an apartment with more people than bedrooms is a good deal. It's shocking to hear about how within just the 21st century it was possible to afford housing

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] slappypantsgo@lemm.ee 2 points 14 hours ago

Abolish rent, abolish ext family living.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 6 points 18 hours ago

Indirectly, maybe.

I also think it’s mostly just shitty parents, possibly who also had shitty parents, that forced the “hard knock life” on kids to make them “tough” and self reliant. Assuming they weren’t just regular old being abusive in some form. Being poor can also drive people out, if someone isn’t earning money in an already economically tight situation it can create a lot of friction.

Americans have a kinda messed up family life. This “self reliance” that separates the family unit and attempts to make it a standalone entity against everyone else really doesn’t reflect the way a lot of the rest of the world operates with closer family and community ties. Even not too long ago America was a lot different in that fashion. Probably WW2 and the growth that followed were the main shift.

[-] metallic_substance@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago

While I totally agree that it shouldn't be stigmatized, "psyop by the central banks" is absolute fucking lunacy and there isn't a single shred of evidence to support it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] marte@lemmy.eco.br 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is less a psy-op thing than it is a product of Western society's history - and I don't mean it as in "capitalism is bad and everything I don't like is caused by it", but literally living in such individualist society makes people live or want to live in smaller groups as much as they can afford it. And it dates before capitalist rise, in my opinion.

However... I don't think living in smaller groups, like living alone or with a +1, is inherently a bad thing. As people said here, there may be multiple reasons one would like to departure from their parents' house, a lot of them are genuine and to have this option is a good thing. What I see as a bad thing is that each house is meant to be a world by its own and in some places and contexts we don't have any community bond. This phenomenon contributes to anomie in Durkheim's sense, in my opinion.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ArtificialHoldings@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago

Multi generational households are known for their lack of privacy and personal agency. You could not pay me to move back in with my parents. I don't even stay with them over the holidays because it's that bad. The banks did not have to brainwash me on this one.

[-] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 46 points 1 day ago

Maybe the kids also want their privacy? If you don't own n old house with thick brick walls between the rooms, you are basically unable to casually have sex without all adjacent rooms hearing you.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 8 points 22 hours ago

i love my family! the love however is at odds with knowing what its like to live in the same house as my family

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
914 points (95.0% liked)

People Twitter

6819 readers
1910 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS