Given that universities are largely online only and dorms are closed, it’s not surprising that large numbers of college age students would be moving home. Including them with people in their late 20s muddies the waters.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-...
So, the increase was mostly driven by 18-24 year olds (both college-age as well as some new grads), who were already 2.4x more likely to live with their parents.
If so, this seems really obvious and that is was useless research.
"The analysis of recent trends and characteristics is based on the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS), conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics."
In particular, further in Pew's methodology section ("How we did this"), the authors note that the CPS counts all unmarried students in dorms as living with their parents. This is a pretty big caveat. However, this still indicates an shift of students living off-campus who moved back in with their parents.
Additionally:
"The Current Population Survey (CPS), also referred to as the household survey, is a monthly sample survey of 60,000 eligible households conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics
The survey is conducted using a combination of live telephone and in-person interviews with household respondents."
So, the shift is driven by surveys, rather than generic assumptions.
That said, IMO, the value-add of this analysis is not the top-line number, but the relative shift (5% absolute increase _since February_).
[0] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-...
I suppose if you made a category 'temporarily living at home', then you would also be able to track after Corona how many students remained living at home (which might be an indicator of economic damage)
Worse is that the above is largely true for most students wrapping up trade schools and 2-4yr degrees. I hope that people working on 8+ year degrees have the insider connections to help them find gainful work - but IDK how realistic that is.
This isn't some recent covid thing; this goes back to at least the 2008 crash.
I think it's a real problem for our future that there are now lots of adults who have never lived to see a functioning housing market with plentiful supply. Everyone under 30 thinks its normal that you have to save your salary for 25 years to afford a down payment on a home. It isn't.
Anyway, growth is unsustainable: if housing keeps being a good investment for long enough, sooner or later it becomes unaffordable.
I agree it's a real problem, and we may have to get creative looking for solutions.
Decrease in buying population and/or decrease in incomes of the buying population would result in lower prices.
Communal housing was the norm in much of the world, including USSR, and it’s only recently that China built housing for everyone to move into the cities.
At the end of the day, prices rise due to demand (and gentrification, or even more extreme, billionaires parking their $ in US real estate and not even living there).
There is lots of cheap housing in the USA, but no one wants to live there. Someone should start a tech hub in Detroit’s abandoned housing regions, it’s a bargain.
> Daniel Gilbert (born January 17, 1962) is an American billionaire businessman, investor, and philanthropist. He is the cofounder of Quicken Loans and founder of Rock Ventures.[3]
Downtown, but to a larger extend Midtown and Corktown changed a lot. People want to live there again.
Probably due to lots of government funding, but Reaganomics has finally righted things back to feudalism.
Success!
Now at 35 I can't imagine it more readily, even if not quite yet. But even at 30 I chose to go abroad and spend four years in a different country, and wouldn't want to miss that experience.
Of course we can build more houses, but at what cost to environment...