30+ Years Old, And They Still Live At Mommy's House...
Coffee's For Closers
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/dec/08/young-adults-
living-parental-home-ons
Quote:
--------------------------------
25% of men aged 25 to 29 now live with their parents. This is
almost double the proportion of women in their late 20s (13%) who
still live at home.
The official statistics also show that, for more than 10% of men
who have reached their early 30s, home is still with the parents;
this compares with 5% for women of a similar age.
--------------------------------
My guess is that, the sex discrepancy is due to deadbeat females
having better prospects for being economically dependent upon a
spouse/partner.
Another reason may be that, single mothers can claim enough
welfare to live on, and are more likely to have custody of the
kids.
I wonder how many of those parents would have been so eager to
have kids if they knew just how long the burden would last? Or
how incredibly entitled the kids would feel and act?
Here's one of those brats trying to justify it...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/09/living-with-
parents
He whines about having to work his way through school, while
getting a degree in art history - not exactly an economically
sound choice of field. And then whines about how he doesn't want
to meet the internship requirements for actually getting a job in
that field. Despite the fact that, living at mommy's house gives
a cushion of time to do it. He just doesn't wanna make tea, and
be the low person in the hierarchy.
And, he has the gall to whine on and on about how mommy's house
isn't nice enough physically. And isn't located in an upmarket
enough area. He actually considers that to be embarrassing,
while his irresponsibility and immaturity aren't.
Being childfree doesn't just save resources for eighteen years.
It keeps saving and saving, way beyond that. And not just
financially, but also mentally, in avoiding an ongoing
relationship with spoilt brats.
--
Get Credit Where Credit Is Due
http://www.cardreport.com/
Credit Tools, Reference, and Forum
Steve Daniels
compelled Coffee's For Closers <Usene...@THE-DOMAIN-IN.SIG>, to
say:
> Being childfree doesn't just save resources for eighteen years.
> It keeps saving and saving, way beyond that. And not just
> financially, but also mentally, in avoiding an ongoing
> relationship with spoilt brats.
Spoiled brats are made, not born. The 'runts in question are
willing to put up with this behavior, so this is what they get.
What do you want to bet that they actually like it this way?
Lenona
> Spoiled brats are made, not born. The 'runts in question are
> willing to put up with this behavior, so this is what they get.
> What do you want to bet that they actually like it this way?
Yes, it's weird.
In the 1981 book "The Best of Dear Abby," she tells a fed-up mother
of a college dropout that in their part of the country (Schenectady,
NY) she has the right to toss out her son when he turns 18 - not 21,
as he claims.
What's strange is that I can't remember any similar letters to advice
columnists since then! (As compared to letters from parents of adults
who leave home and then fall on hard times and take forever to
"recover" at home.) Sure, there are parents who don't need a
columnist's help to deliver ultimatums to their self-spoiled kids (I
DO believe such kids exist, somehow) - but surely not all of the
parents whose adult kids live at home are happy with it?
Lenona.
h
"Lenona" <leno...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cdf169ad-89f4-47d1-93e2-
> but surely not all of the
>parents whose adult kids live at home are happy with it?
Definitely true. I have 3 friends (different parts of the country) who live
with their parents. 40-something woman and her 30-something sister live with
their mother in a small city. Mom needs the rent money and they all get
along well.
40-something male magazine writer lives with his parents in a huge apt in a
large city. He couldn't possibly afford anything as nice as that by himself,
plus it's rent controlled. He pays the entire rent, and it's practically
nothing, since they've been there since he was born. Win-win for everyone,
especially since the 'rents spend the winter in FL.
The last is a 30-something artist who lives in the boonies on his parents'
farm. Again, win-win for everyone - he lives free in exchange for some
critter-care and can spend most of his time painting.
h
"h" <tmc...@searchmachine.com> wrote in message
news:hhakfl$8fd$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Whoops, I meant that not all parents are UNHAPPY about it. I misqoted
Lenona.
Steve Daniels
compelled "h" <tmc...@searchmachine.com>, to say:
> > Definitely true. I have 3 friends (different parts of the country) who
> > live with their parents. 40-something woman and her 30-something sister
> > live with their mother in a small city. Mom needs the rent money and they
> > all get along well.
"Mom needs the rent money . . ."
So the 40-something woman and her 30-something sister are not
freeloading.
> > 40-something male magazine writer lives with his parents in a huge apt in
> > a large city. He couldn't possibly afford anything as nice as that by
> > himself, plus it's rent controlled. He pays the entire rent, and it's
> > practically nothing, since they've been there since he was born. Win-win
> > for everyone, especially since the 'rents spend the winter in FL.
"He pays the entire rent"
So he's not freeloading, either.
> > The last is a 30-something artist who lives in the boonies on his parents'
> > farm. Again, win-win for everyone - he lives free in exchange for some
> > critter-care and can spend most of his time painting.
"in exchange for some critter-care"
Again, quid pro quo is observed.
It looked to me the discussion was adult children either not
leaving or moving back in with parents, and not contributing
anything to the household, much like they would have done as real
children. Your examples are of mutually beneficial living
arrangements among family groups.
>
> Whoops, I meant that not all parents are UNHAPPY about it. I misqoted
Yeah, I got that. No worries.
Lenona
IN.SIG> wrote:
>
> Being childfree doesn't just save resources for eighteen years.
> It keeps saving and saving, way beyond that. And not just
> financially, but also mentally, in avoiding an ongoing
> relationship with spoilt brats.
Speak of the devil.......
http://www.sacbee.com/848/story/2425929.html
(It's a Dr. John Rosemond column.)
Q: What, if any, ground rules can and should parents set for a child
returning to live at home after college graduation. My husband and I
are facing this issue with our daughter in May 2010, and we need
help.
(The answer is full of very interesting details - the first paragraph,
especially.)
Excerpt from second paragraph:
"Just 40 years ago, when a child left home for college, it was assumed
by both parents and child that he or she would not come home after
graduation. Many if not most of today's kids assume the opposite. "
I wonder about that, though - did that apply to young women too? After
all, that was still (barely) the time when single women were often
frowned upon for living away from their parents, if they weren't still
in school. Were they supposed to get married right away so that
wouldn't happen?
Which also reminds me of what women used to say (not openly, I
suppose) before WWII, especially. "I got married so I could leave
home." Not sure if that was more due to the above custom I mentioned -
or to a lack of rent money.
Lenona.
Lenona
Guess what - there's a follow-up to that column.
http://www.sacbee.com/848/story/2489802.html
"A colleague of mine used to say, 'Don't ask a question if you don't
want the answer.' "
(snip)
"I advised these parents to avoid the emotional toll of trying to get
their grown daughter to obey house rules (when her history suggests
she will violate them) by setting her up in a small apartment and
gradually weaning her off their support.
"After said column appeared, I received numerous emails of affirmation-
save one, that is.
"The young lady's mother wrote to express her disappointment in my
answer and remind me that she had written asking for reasonable house
rules.
"Instead, I told them not to let her live at home. My suggestion that
the daughter be slowly weaned off support didn't sit well either
because, says Mom, decent jobs are not to be had.
"I am reminded of my former colleague's maxim."
(snip)
"Setting their daughter up in her own apartment is going to cost them
a bit more than letting her live at home, but the emotional savings
will more than offset that difference. As for the notion that there
are no jobs to be had, that simply isn't true.
"Jobs are not in great supply, but they're still out there. The market
requires that seekers persevere and perhaps even lower their
expectations."
(snip)
Lenona.