patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,264,406 comments by 15,112 users - Ceffer, tanked online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 45 - 49 of 49 Search these comments
NDrLoR
2009 Jun 29, 2:34pm
I hear many young men and women asking, “Why can’t I buy a home like my father did?
It really does show how things have changed for the worse. My mother, who was born in 1902, had five brothers born between 1890 and 1900, none went to college--my mother the only one in her family with college education. By the time every one of the brothers was 25, they were self-supporting, married with at least one child and were buying a home. By the time I knew them in the 1950's, they all had comfortable homes, nice cars and my aunts never worked--they were truly the luckiest generation--came of age while blue-collar jobs were still plentiful, then had good pensions. None of them probably made more than $20K a year ever.
hydramatic the only problem with that though is well think about it. They didn't have an education so therefore they assumed that getting married, having children and buying a home were the only symbols of wealth and maturity.
Studies have shown that the more education someone has the less children they have. This is why you don't see rhode scholars on any shows on TLC! On the same note it's why they are promoting education in the developing world as it acts a mental birthcontrol. I'm not trying to put your family down generally what you described was pretty much the common thing to do.
Back then also there were far fewer rights for african americans, the top marginal tax rate in the 50's was 90%, lead paint, asbestos etc. The good old days really weren't all that good when everything is factored in.
Ever read the book the Cluetrain Manifesto? Basically it's these small statements about the future and then paragraphs explaining them. It's a free book written nearly 10 years ago. Well one thing was that the idea of place being a factor would no longer exist. Well yes and no. I think people need to be more mobile. If a company can move and he labor can't due to their own choices it can hold them back. If you are an employer and you know a job could move or at least require travel would you hire someone that has a mortage and kids? Probably not. Well what job these days doesn't move?
missgredenko
2009 Jun 30, 11:24pm
LOL Mikey and don’t forget being seen w/that guy w/dark socks under his sandals.
Was there ever a time when that look was acceptable?
Great. Now I have to buy a new outfit, too? The horror!
Oh man I spilled my coffee on that one. I thought only older men favored that look.
missgredenko
2009 Jun 30, 11:56pm
"His income was 2.5x as much as the original price of the home."
Education had nothing to do with this part. We haven't fully embraced the damage of inflation to our discretionary income and savings ability. We don't fully acknowledge that although our paychecks are nominally greater than Mom and Dads we don't really have the same purchasing power. Plus there's the aspirational norms of today. I know darn well when I'm looking at $250k homes that I'm sure as heck not competing with anyone making $625k. No they're off looking at the million dollar waterfront homes.
In fact the last $250k home I looked at was bought by a 26 year old w/ heavy education debt.
Now can I buy a home at that 1974 ratio for my family? Yes, they exist in upstate NY if I don't mind living next to the sex offender apartments or where the bullets fly on a weekly basis.
When I was a child, one of the guys that owned a very large proportion of our town (wealthy) also lived in a home about the same size as ours on the other side of the neighborhood. His big splurge was when his kids started going to college he built another small addition w/a hot tub and enlarged one of his bathrooms. I do think the very rustic camp got an upgrade too. Very restrained compared to what we see today.
elliemae
2009 Jul 1, 12:14am
Obviously, times have changed. The richest people in town used to live in bigger homes, but not by much. It was considered to be gauche to flaunt your wealth, other than driving new cars and dressing a little nicer. That was before teevee and the media was in all of our homes, showing us the way that the upper crust and celebwhores live. Opulence has replaced restraint (we want it all, we want it now!).
It's funny that people are returning to values and living in smaller homes - but the smaller homes are still over 2000 sq ft for a family of 5 from what I've read. I have no room to speak, live alone in 1700sq ft (including basement, tho). Homes have become the status symbol, the urban myth of having the perfect grass and yard makes you a better person.
Getting back to the original post, I believe that multi-generational living is wonderful and can help when times are hard. But it takes a paradigm shift.
« First « Previous Comments 45 - 49 of 49 Search these comments
www.patriotledger.com/opinions/x1592251232/THOMAS-LANEY-Multi-generational-living-has-many-benefits
This article was in a local paper today. I'd say it makes a fair amount of sense
"Who decided, and why, when young men or women reach 25 they are obligated to move away from their parents, get married, start a career, and begin from scratch what has already been half done for them?
The concept came after WWII when, with the GI bill, young couples of modest income could buy a starter home. Although an excellent opportunity at the time, it is unrealistic today.
Unfortunately today, young couples still partly measure their success by their ability to own a home. We should update these out-of-date values into methods that work today.
Multi-generational living is commonly done throughout the world because it works, it solidifies the family, it allows families to be intra-supportive and, in my view, is the best avenue for family prosperity today.
Pooling several incomes has great value today. Should we, then, seek home ownership with two or three generations under one roof or strike out on our own and frequently find ourselves in a situation that cannot be supported while maintaining an outward appearance of prosperity for the sake of the out-of-date values?
I suggest many Americans are forfeiting worthwhile goals to achieve the empty goal of maintenance of appearances. The idea that appearances matter more than truth is of course ephemeral and counter-productive but very popular to pretenders to an affluent society. Don’t measure yourself against them.
With this in mind, my advice to young couples aspiring to home ownership is to examine options with the resolve to enter into it in a solvent way.
Over-extension is a major pit-fall.
Multi-generational living makes sense today. But the opportunity is not for everyone. You need to plan.
Who will own what portion of the home in what year and what is your equity? Who will inherit your equity and what will they use it for?
The obstacle for the young buyer has always been the 10 percent down payment. With an entry level home in this area being $350,000, what was possible in the ’50s with a $6,000 home is often impossible today with the exception of an entry level condo at $125,000.
The real estate market has out distanced the young couple’s ability to own a home. That does not mean it’s impossible for a young couple of modest means to find a way. Multi-generational living can be part of the process.
Aspirations of home ownership have been tainted by affluence in America. More precisely those who aren’t affluent, want to appear to be.
This is illustrated by the family with the beautiful house, cars, swimming pool and a foreclosure sign in front. This is too often an ill-conceived, short-lived experience which ends in disaster but remains an enormous temptation in communities where appearances are so important.
Be singular and focused on your intentions. With the multi-generational living idea, the family works as a unit toward the betterment of the family as a whole. This is a proven method that should be restored ito answer problems many young people are having today.
Some European families have owned the same land for 500 years. They do this because they have to and it makes sense. What is done in this country, upon close scrutiny, makes no sense.
We do it because it has become traditional.
I hear many young men and women asking, “Why can’t I buy a home like my father did? Is something wrong with me?†The demoralizing struggle with this issue results in foreclosure, divorces, alcoholism and the disintegration of the American family.
Multi-generational living strengthens the family through continuity of purpose and solvency. "
#housing