Young adults still not buying houses

This video is a little old, from 3 years ago, but the discussion is still very interesting.



It's about young adults not being able to buy houses because of lower wages, and because the government held interest rates too low for too long, keeping housing prices at unaffordable levels.

This was coming out of the Recession, so things have probably improved a little bit since this video aired.

Obviously this has implications for the formation of new family households, and may have something to do with lower fertility rates among the younger generation (that's were most of the babies being born into society come from).

 

About half of households have $1,000 or less saved because wages are so low and expenses are so high.

 

Blasphemy! The Trump economy is booming! Those tax cuts are yielding uuugge wage increases.

 

I think (a big) part of the reason why expenses are so high is because housing costs are so high, because cities are so overcrowded.

 

Student Loans.

Young people are already in such debt when they graduate from college it makes buying a house or starting a family difficult.

 

But what's missed by the right wingers is that its Western countries with higher poverty also have higher home ownership rates. Part of that is self-insurance (encouraged by right wing economic policies that generate higher risk of poverty).

There's an irony in this thread.

 

Whose wages are 'so low and expenses so high'? Yours? Mine? Theirs?

I know plenty of people who are happily oblivious to all of this, being so financially sound that nothing can touch them. I also know quite a few at the other end of the spectrum, who are buffeted by the slightest change in the weather.

 

Only if they take a stupid course, though. Dentists have no trouble regrouping, for example.

 

Yes, well, student loans are not issued on the basis of a sound degree to pay back the loans. at least in the US. Obviously most STEM or professional degrees would be good bets and make sense to get a student loan, but I doubt that includes more than the tiniest percentage of student loans.

 

Don't believe him. I know a radiologist who works at a big city hospital not far from me who has a left over $300,000 debt from medical school, and she is now trying to save enough money so her daughter can go to college.

How many people are willing to take on such debt right out of school? This economy is failing us.

 

There's yer problemo

Apparently the modern parent has forgotten to consider their childrens' ability to survive into adulthood. Apparently, it doesn't matter if your kids remain unable to put a roof over their own head at age 30, and so must endure eternal teenhood in crappy share houses.

 

Medical degrees where I live run at $130k, and everything costs more in this country. I find it hard to believe that a medical degree runs to $300k in America. Are you sure this woman didn't actually borrow money to pay for living expenses/accommodation/rent, as well? Because that is clearly an optional expense, which she didn't need to incur. She should have stayed at home with her parents and commuted to the nearest university. It's insanity to borrow money for accommodation. If you have to do that, you cannot afford a university education, period.

FTR, that $130k for a medical degree is almost always paid off within about 5 years. New doctors here earn that per year, fresh out of school. Since most are sensible enough to stay at home until the debt is repaid, they can easily manage it within 5 years - EASILY, and still live a very good life - not missing out on the fun stuff.

PS: How many people are willing to take on college debt? Far too many, apparently! Idiot children (and their idiot parents) who never stop to think that a Sociology degree won't translate to a solid 6 figure income for life.

 

Perhaps not. The economy is consistent with voting patterns. The problem has to be focused on the Democrats who fail to offer folk choice. Their Plastic Conservatism ensures that equality of opportunity is never an option.

I do see some examples of Democrat change, particularly of politician selection reliant on activists rather than money. It could grow and change the economy, switching it away from reliance on the housing market.

 

But those examples are few and far between. The DNC remains committed to focusing on trying to walk a line between Big Business and the public need/good. And in the context of a capitalist society that reverts to benefits for capitalists and the rich with crumbs promised to the people.

 

I agree. But I've seen you support fascist. A kack report here https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/13/politics/democratic-socialists-whats-in-a-name/index.html but indicating the reality.

 

Houses are expensive because they are big, bigger than necessary for a new family buying.

 

More importantly, in America, they're actually nowhere near expensive - outside of a few notable cities. You guys earn almost the same as we do, but our houses are around 5 - 10 x the cost of yours. Do the math. Americans have nothing to complain about.

 

Well, what you are saying remains a bit of a mystery to me. Do you mean B. Sanders and Cortez as these "fascists" you say I've supported? Or who/what?

 

the rich are people. and what do you mean by 'promised'? free stuff?

 

Arse!

 

You know, I've tried to discuss things with you before and always with the same result. You either don't seem to know who you should unite with when you can and be civil about it, or you may think you're superior to everyone else and have a need to express yourself in a manner that reflects it. Either way I'm very close to being done with you altogether.

 

You're the fellow agreeing with a fascist. For a radical you're limp

 

I notice you haven't made many friends on this forum. With your preference for attack rather than discussion, you just threw away another possibility. Bye.

 

Bye! Supporting fascism isn't left