Millennials are living at home in greater numbers than ever before. Are they just overly indulged wimps?

You may have heard that millennials are living at home more than young people in previous generations. In 2014, the number of young women living with their parents eclipsed their counterparts in 1940, and last year 43% of young men were living at home, which is the highest rate since 1940.

I'm trying to maintain an open mind about the economic struggles of millennials and not expand my own anecdotal experiences beyond reasonable boundaries, but I can't help but wonder if it's not high expectations rather than economic struggle that is keeping these people at home longer.

Do millennials expect more, and as a result, are less willing to live in substandard circumstances and struggle to survive?

When I think about how my friends and I lived during our post high school and college years, the one thing that marks that time is struggle.

Tiny, cruddy apartmentsCheap, carbohydrate-laden foodMultiple roommatesExceptionally long working hours (often working two or three jobs to make ends meet)Few amenities.

We slept on floors and in closets. We drove dilapidated vehicles. We hung out in parking lots. We took dates to pizza places. It was not uncommon to have our electricity shut off from time to time. 

And this wasn't the case for just me. The majority of people who I was growing up with after high school and college lived this way.

Again, perhaps my scope is limited, but as a young people, we preferred to eat elbow macaroni, sleep on floors, and watch black-and-white televisions rather than living with our parents.     

Are millennials simply unwilling to endure such hardships given the way that the overly-indulged way that so many were raised, or are the economic realities of today truly more debilitating than my generation?

An honest question. 







1 like ·   •  1 comment  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on November 21, 2015 05:02
Comments Showing 1-1 of 1 (1 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Monique (new)

Monique Pearson I think the honest answer is both. I'm 43 and a low income person based on job market and personal circumstances. I live alone with my pets in a crappy apt, live paycheck to paycheck and often go without protein for several days between to insure my chihuahuas has proper food. My partner, on the other hand, is 48. She spent the last 6 years living with her parents after her chosen profession went to the robots and she could no longer afford the life she was accustomed to. Instead of living below her standards and within her means she chose to live with her parents and maintain her way of life. She truly believes that my circumstances are unusual and the majority do not live without a 401k, savings acct with a minimum of 3 months wages and do not need to budget which paycheck goes to which bills. She's has always paid a bill the day it arrives and most are on auto pay. I believe, especially for our generation, she was raised with unreasonable expectations of life. Her worst fear is being poor. Let's face it; there are worse things. As parents we want to give our children everything we never had however, in doing so, we are not preparing them for a life "without." I believe each generation has gotten worse. Parents relive their childhood vicariously though their children; a childhood that doesn't include the word NO. Adults are created with an inability to live without and little skill, if any, to cope with less than ideal lives.


back to top