Hacker News Reader

Comment by superkuh | Hacker News Reader

Alternately: what happens when a whole generation never gives up control and prevents most born after them from aquiring housing or currency by creating an regulatory environment and economy rigged to only benefit corporations they own? But sure, blame this on the youths again, as is tradition.

View on HN

I don't like the narrative of generation divide, it's those who own vs those who rent. It's been like this for a couple of centuries and in several countries ended up in revolutions.

> it's those who own vs those who rent

Or those with pensions vs. those without

Pensions? Not in the US - they're practically extinct [1]. Of course that means that people can be blamed for not saving in their 401k-s, which is also convenient.

1: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2024/03/19/pensions-are...

Over here would be "What happens when real estate is the only investment vehicle without capital gains tax?"

Is it that people can’t buy a house or that they can’t buy a house where they want to live? There is a vast swaths in the US where your average worker could buy a house in middle America based on wages they could make there.

Housing prices relative to income have gone up pretty much nationwide:

https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/home-price-income-ratio-re...

In many of the areas I am talking about teachers, lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, policemen, other government workers, etc can affordably buy a house in those areas.

Housing prices have historically been highly correlated with income and interest rates. That correlation seems to have broken down.

There are areas where it still is sane but much less of them than historically and concentrated in areas with very little population.

RTO throws a wrench in most of those plans. As does the bleak reality that the opiod crisis or similar is often the reason for the low price.

Is it worth $500k to not have your kids live in fear of loonies on their steet? Hard to say it isn't if you can possibly manage.

Investment idea : buy a bunch of homes in troubled areas and then build a mental health facility. Resell them as a safe neighbourhood.

I tried to focus on office jobs because I realize it’s a privilege to work remotely that most people can’t do.

If you were a teacher, do you think it would be easier to find a nice home in Brookton South Dakota or San Francisco California?

And I’m not trying to come across as being pro or anti rural America. I’ve lived in major metropolitan areas my adult life. But I’m from and still visit family in south GA.

On the other hand, drugs are endemic everywhere in the US. I know a few middle class families with teenagers and their relatives struggling with heavy drugs - not just weed.

Expand your horizons. Home ownership rates are very high in states like Vermont, Minnesota, and Idaho. Outside of a handful of bad neighborhoods those are nice places to live and hardly overrun with loonies. That fact that you would even mention that as a concern indicates a weird, insular attitude and disconnection from objective reality.

RTO or lack thereof isn't very relevant one way or the other. Fully remote work is a great option for some employees but it simply isn't possible for the vast majority of jobs. Most employees have to occasionally be in a certain physical place it order to interact with other people or use specialized equipment or follow security rules.

Your comment seems a bit weird as it implies a whole generation owns corporations.

Who do you think the shareholders are?

What demographic are they?

Do you think it's a generational issue, or a class issue?

Exactly. It's not the fault of the youths and it's not the fault of the old. Both it and mine are obviously false claims yet one is accepted as a WSJ article and one is pointed at as silly.

My "alternately" was not to say that the alternate was an accurate description of reality but only to highlight how silly such broad statements are when you look from the other end.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com