248
submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Layla Ahmed is, by any measure, a responsible adult. She works at a nonprofit in Nashville helping refugees. Makes 50k a year. Saves money. Pays her bills on time.

But there’s another measure of adulthood that has so far eluded her. Ahmed, 23, moved back in with her parents after graduating college in 2022. 

“There is a perception that those who live with their parents into their 20s are either bums or people who are not hard-working,” she told the Today, Explained podcast.

Being neither of those things, Ahmed and her situation actually point to a growing trend in America right now: More adults, especially younger adults, are either moving back in with family or never leaving at all. 

According to the Pew Research Center, a quarter of all adults ages 25 to 34 now live in a multigenerational living situation (which it defines as a household with two or more adult generations). 

It’s a number that’s been creeping upward since the early ‘70s but has swung up precipitously in the last 15 years. The decennial US Census measures multigenerational living slightly differently (three or more generations living together), but the trend still checks out. From 2010 to 2020, there was a nearly 18 percent increase in the number of multigenerational households.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I don't think it's that simple in a sense. You risk crashing the housing market which will leave a lot of people that "just barely made it" into the housing market far worse off if you just rapidly mass-build housing.

There also just aren't that many builders/contractors that do good work available so you run the risk of building a lot of housing that's in a state of disrepair soon after construction/never built properly. There are plenty of housing inspectors on youtube speaking out about housing developments and how ridiculously bad a lot of the modern builders are.

You also need to find the land to build on in a time when land conservation is increasingly recognized as important/there's little public land left. That means buying up even more (likely) good farm land.

You can start buying people out of their inner city neighborhoods in disrepair and start revitalizing them, but that's gentrification that often leaves the people that were living in those homes worse off. Where I am in Akron there are plenty of houses, just lots of them folks don't really want to live in them (they're in disrepair in "high" crime areas) or they're being rented for absurd prices. I think revitalizing these neighborhoods and forcing a cap on rental properties is the most promising, but it needs paired with a general economic support system for those already living in the neighborhood.

I don't think there's an easy fix here.

[-] joel_feila@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

For your first point. Yeah we can't make affordable housing woth out making new homes cheaper. It will bring the price of other hones down. So pick your poison unaffordable houses or cheap homes for new buyers.

It would be nice to have both but with houses as investments well...

this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024
248 points (96.6% liked)

News

23266 readers
3424 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS