#once boomers and older gen xers retired | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

tessatechaitea · 5 years

Text

Wonder Twins #7

I didn't realize the Wonder Twins were Gen X.

Oh yeah! Zan had just saved the world by stopping a plot that was going to save the world.

I just realized I hadn't scanned the cover yet and as I did, I noticed the Wonder Twins fist/star emblem marks a striking resemblance to a goat.se riff. Zan and Jayna get taken off of monitor duty at the Hall of Justice now that they've stopped the League of Annoyance. You'd think that doing a good job would get you a promotion but those of use who have always done spectacularly good jobs know better. While everybody else works down to the lowest common denominator (because who wants to do more work than the next guy?! A fool, that's who!), good workers just put on blinders and do the job they were hired for until the time they're being paid for is up. Sure, that sounds like I'm describing a sucker who's been completely manipulated by the man! But I'm also describing a person who fulfills their end of whatever bargain they've agreed to! So when I say Zan and Jayna wind up giving tours at the Hall of Justice because they were too good at catching criminals, you'll understand why I went into the previous digression. Maybe? I don't know. Have you seen what state the U.S. is in?! Why are you picking apart my writing style?! Mark Russell takes a few pages to shit all over hockey fans and now I hate Mark Russell with a burning passion. Even though I'd hardly call myself a hockey fan. I mean, I loved NHL '93 (unless it was '92 (or maybe '94?)) and I loved going to San Jose Sharks games when I was still living in the Bay Area (plus my friend worked equipment for the Sharks and would get us free tickets). But it's not like I follow it much anymore. I just like the feeling of being angry at somebody for writing a satirical critique of sports fans rioting because they're so happy that their team won. Although why would I be angry when I've never done that nor think Russell's wrong in his pointed and humorous critique?! Oh, who cares why! Being angry is just more fun! Oh shit! I finally understand people's attraction to Fox News! I just watched a YouTube clip of somebody's Jeremy Roenick highlights from NHL '94 set to the song "More Than a Feeling" and it was pretty awesome. Also, that was definitely the one we played nonstop back in 1993 and 94 and maybe even into 95. Roenick unstoppable down with the puck while Sharks players lay splayed out on their back all across the ice. To stop the riot, Superman calls in Repulso! He's a guy whose super power is super stink and he's kept in a locked room with a bare table and a microwave and nobody wants to be his friend because he smells like a garbage dumb that vomited on top of the diarrhea it shit out while standing on its head so the stanky muck ran down his body absorbing all of his body odor and then somebody cut up a durian and tossed it in the mix.

Superman is a dick. Get this guy some friends with no sense of smell. Or at the very least, an Xbox Gold account.

After the hockey riots, some "the end of the world" riots take place because Zan and Jayna screw up something or other. Basically what that means is that Repulso gets to be let out of his airtight containment unit again! He's a pretty optimistic guy for being sealed away by Superman (which is just Superman's way! Is somebody a problem? No problem! Put them in the Phantom Zone!). He's so happy and not bitter about his living arrangements that I feel like Zan and Jayna had better figure out a way to give him a better life before this issue ends. Because if Mark Russell fails this character he created before this issue is over and I have to face reality after snot crying about a fictional person, I'm going to be pretty upset when I continue to buy Mark Russell comic books because what other choice do I have? Am I going to stop reading DC's best written comic books because Mark Russell betrayed poor Repulso? Of course not! What am I? A person with integrity?! Repulso winds up getting his ass beat by rioters as Repulso's handlers flee the chaotic "end of the world" downtown riot scene. Luckily the Wonder Twins are headed downtown to save his life and maybe become his friend or something? Please? After Zan and Jayna save Repulso, Jayna goes to Superman to tell him everything sucks. He gives her a big speech about how being a hero is lonely work because you don't always get to fuck the hot chick at your secret identity's workplace and also fuck an Amazon warrior while also getting to fuck anybody at all whose initials are "L.L." and also have a best friend who is the coolest guy in the world with a butler who makes the best pancakes. Sometimes you're a fat jerk who smells who even Superman won't fucking give the time of day because Superman has this speech about how being a hero is lonely and that's a good thing so you should embrace your loneliness because who wants to put up with your super stink, fatty?

Jayna is a way better hero than Superman. At least in this comic book that's all about her and not Superman so of course she's going to outshine him!

Oh yeah, the ant in the above picture is Jayna. It can't smell. Wonder Twins #7 Rating: A+. I should probably be less cynical when reading Mark Russell comic books because he's as earnest and serious as he can be while also providing lots of jokes. He takes writing seriously because what else is there? If your message isn't going to matter, why bother? (is his philosophy. I think. It's not my philosophy! I don't think? Maybe it is! I just write things that matter in a much different way than Mark Russell writes things that matter.) I should probably read Superman's speech and be inspired by the idea that you don't do good because you want adulation; you do good because it's the right thing to do, even if the entire world thinks you're an asshole for doing it. Even if all of the other superheroes think you're a stinky fuck and only keep you around to use as a tool to oppress and manipulate the masses without having to use logic and reason on them (because, let's face it, the people doing terrible things don't understand logic and reason. Or they're do but they're just selfish and greedy so nothing is going to reach them anyway (which maybe is part of Superman's message?)), you're still a hero at the end of the day. You can still be proud of your stinky self. And even if the life is lonely, you should remain positive and upbeat because Superman really doesn't want to be reminded that you exist every time you complain about the lack of reasonable living conditions. Being a hero is a state of mind, says the guy who also looks great and is invulnerable and has the best wife and a cool son and doesn't have to fear death! So inspiring!

#Wonder Twins #Mark Russell #Stephen Byrne #DC Comics #DC

4 notes · View notes

robgabco2-blog · 4 years

Text

Wine Industry Statistics

New Post has been published on https://1q44.com/2020/06/09/wine-industry-statistics/

Wine Industry Statistics

Wine Industry Statistics they’re Favoring The Direct To Consumer Market. Otherwise referred to as DTC wine sales!!! Let me say that the numbers don’t lie, and now’s the time to require this chance. Often literally being within the right place at the proper time. Allow you to remind you I’m rewarded by showing folks that love wine where to seek out Fine Wines At Wholesale pricing!!!

A great business that’s fun and social. I buy to create a relationship with everyone that desires to grow a business opportunity with me. See here you’re not left to your own devices to find out the business. Together with your membership, you get access to a number of the most straightforward training and support within the online space. So KEEP READING AND SEE THE AMAZING OPPORTUNITY HERE!!! JUST check out THE STATISTICS!!!

So beat all I buy paid to share great wine and socialize and tell people where they will get great wine at member pricing or maybe free. Does that sound like you? AGAIN Keep Reading, and you’ll see the fantastic opportunities, and therefore the numbers and common sense don’t lie!!!

Wine Industry Statistics

I want to worry to those that are trying to find that solution or side hustle for and opportunity to form an excellent income; you’ve got found it!!! Take this great opportunity and obtain it in and don’t reminisce because the numbers don’t lie. What an excellent opportunity to be within the right place at the proper time. Just keep reading to ascertain the staggering numbers and predictions for the longer term of the wine industry!!! Now you’ll cash in of the technology shift and, therefore, the way people experience fine wine and convey it to them around the world!!! Yes, that’s right; we are expanding around the globe!!!

The Numbers don’t Lie Direct To Consumer Wine Industry Statistics Strong For The Future!!!

2017 DTC wine sales represent nearly precisely 10% of the U.S. wine retail market: $2.69 billion. At 5.78 million cases that ship to doors across the U.S. last year, volume rises 158% over 2016. Often a reliable statistic to create a business. Direct to the consumer wine industry is on the increase, also as many other immediate to consumer companies. Now show them an excellent thanks to receiving these fine wines from boutique vineyards around the world. They ship to your door complete with tasting notes and food pairing notes!!!

Direct To Consumer Fine Wine

Now you’ll experience these fantastic wines and knowledge the world’s wines in your own home!!! Often Direct To Consumer Wine. We all know these wines are hand-selected excellent and quality fine wines. They’re wines professionals hand select and guarantee you satisfaction. Often absolutely is that the most unbelievable thanks to experiencing the planet of wine reception. you’ll love every shipment!!!

A particularly interesting set of numbers within the info is that in 2017 there have been 9,645 domestic US wineries operational. Of the entire, 42% were limited-production wineries, producing fewer than 1000 cases annually; 38% were tiny wineries, producing 1,000-4,999 cases annually. Meaning 80% of total domestic wineries each produce no quite 5,000 cases annually. Often where DTC shipments appear too concentrated.

The industry is changing, and you would like to act now and take action here!!!

So The industry is here and can be forever. We are just changing the way people get the wine they experience. These are wines that otherwise people would never attempt to now you’ll. Also, your ready to get your wine free once you refer three folks that are active monthly. So fine wine delivered to your door, and you’ve got the power to only be a part of a swing within the way people catch on. SO GET IN GET WINE GET SOCIAL And earn a top income, which will last for years to return. May offer you pay now and for the longer term. Often absolutely the foremost fantastic opportunity that you simply will ever get your hands on, which is why it’s my # one offer of all time.

Baby Boomers & Wine Industry Statistics

It may be new, and it’s going even to be the longer term, but 51 percent of DtC sales attend the older crowd of wine consumers—41 percent to Baby Boomers and 10 percent to their elders. Gen Xers account for 33 percent, and Millennials punch in at 17 percent. And this is often such an excellent opportunity for that generation to urge trough the drought or retirement not last the month. You were having to measure without because you are doing not have the income to try to do the activities that you simply desire. Once you check out these statistics, you realize the facility behind this fantastic opportunity. Just check out these tremendous Direct to consumer wine industry predictions!!!!

Wine Industry Statistics Direct To Consumer Wine Sales is that the Future That Has Arrived!!!!

These are just a few articles about the fantastic opportunity there’s within the Direct To Consumer Wine Market. Now we all know the numbers and, therefore, the statistics. We all know that we’ve got a tremendous opportunity to grow and earn during a shift in an industry hugely established. Now once you add the three for free of charge and therefore the guarantee of satisfaction, you’ll not fail. So now you recognize we have a great solution that brings single vineyard fine wines to your door. Now you’ve got the simplest solution to bring Direct to consumer wine to people, and these are fine fantastic premium wines. You never need to handle the wines or ship anything your self. You only introduce people and to an excellent solution.

0 notes

kiddylanes · 5 years

Text

When Women Choose A Back Seat in Career Path | Why?

It turns out, more women are focusing on the Life Track, too. Someone shared survey results that about 43% of women surveyed say they are less ambitious now than they were 10 years ago; only 25 percent of women are working towards their next promotion. Now, these are women age 35-60, and it would be interesting to see what the 25-35 group would say.

65 percent of college-educated women nationwide prefer to have more free time in their lives than make more money at their jobs. In fact, 40 percent would even take a pay cut for more flexibility.

“Since the 1970’s women have poured into the American workplace - and now we’re at a crossroads,” says More magazine Editor in Chief, Lesley Jane Seymour. “Stymied by our efforts for advancement and confused about how to manage our personal life and a promising career, today’s career-minded women are sacrificing ambition for balance.”

Is it really a sacrifice? Or more like a compromise? I feel that as the dynamics of the workplace change, that as people strive to grow meaningful relationships with their families, this is an effort for employees to say: Let me be present in my family's life, and then I can be present in my job without distraction. It's not that easy, though

With today’s weak economy and high unemployment rate, 33 percent of women believe it’s career suicide to ask for more flexibility at work. Given the demand structure of today’s workplace, 92 percent of women value workplace flexibility, which is up markedly from 2 years ago (73%).

Almost a decade ago, the writer Linda Hirshman exhorted ambitious women to marry men with less money or social capital than they had. In articles and her book, Get to Work, she told women that they should avoid ever taking on more than half of the housework or child care. How to do it? Either marry a man who is extremely committed to equality, or do what she says is the easier route and “marry down.” Hirshman explained in the American Prospect that such a choice is not “brutally strategic,” it’s just smart. “If you are devoted to your career goals and would like a man who will support that, you're just doing what men throughout the ages have done: placing a safe bet.

This was a highly controversial piece of advice at the time, but Hirshman might have been right. A new study of Harvard Business School graduates from HBS’s Robin Ely and Colleen Ammerman and Hunter College sociologist Pamela Stone shows that high-achieving women are not meeting the career goals they set for themselves in their 20s. It’s not because they’re “opting out” of the workforce when they have kids, but because they’re allowing their partners’ careers to take precedence over their own.

The study’s authors interviewed 25,000 men and women who graduated from Harvard Business School over the past several decades. The male graduates were much more likely to be in senior management positions and have more responsibility and more direct reports than their female peers. But why? It’s not because women are leaving the workforce en masse. The authors found, definitively, that the “opt-out” explanation is a myth. Among Gen X and baby boomers they surveyed, only 11 percent of women left the workforce to be full-time moms. That figure is lower for women of color—only 7 percent stopped working. The vast majority (74 percent) of Gen Xers, women who are currently 32-48 and in the prime of their child-rearing years, work full time, an average of 52 hours a week.

But while these women are still working, they are also making more unexpected sacrifices than their male classmates are. When they graduated, more than half of male HBS grads said they expected their careers would take precedence over their partners’. Only 7 percent of Gen X women and 3 percent of baby boomer women said they expected their careers to take precedence. Here’s what they did expect: The majority of women said they assumed they would have egalitarian marriages in which both spouses’ careers were taken equally seriously.

A lot of those women were wrong. About 40 percent of Gen X and boomer women said their spouses’ careers took priority over theirs, while only about 20 percent of them had planned on their careers taking a back seat. Compare that with the men: More than 70 percent of Gen X and boomer men say their careers are more important than their wives’. When you look at child care responsibilities, the numbers are starker. A full 86 percent of Gen X and boomer men said their wives take primary responsibility for child care, and the women agree: 65 percent of Gen X women and 72 percent of boomer women—all HBS grads, most of whom work—say they’re the ones who do most of the child care in their relationships

Of course, marital arrangements aren’t the only force holding women back. Part of the reason these women aren’t advancing at the same rate as their male counterparts is that after they have kids, they get “mommy-tracked.” In many ways, they’re not considered management candidates anymore. “They may have been stigmatized for taking advantage of flex options or reduced schedules, passed over for high-profile assignments, or removed from projects they once led,” the authors note. Other studies support these findings, as they have shown that there is a real, substantial motherhood penalty that involves lower pay and fewer promotions for women with kids, because employers assume they will be less dedicated to their jobs (as do, we now know, their husbands).

Based on these numbers, Hirshman suddenly seems prescient. Take a look at the current crop of female CEOs: A lot of them have husbands who don’t work. Xerox CEO Ursula Burns took a page out of Hirshman’s book and joked at a 2013 conference, “The secret [to success] is to marry someone 20 years older.” Her husband retired as she was hitting her career stride, allowing him to take primary responsibility for their kids. If becoming a CEO and having a family is what you desire, you might want to take that advice.

But apart from talks of individual, the data and trend gives a indication towards what woman is looking for as a change in work culture, and family task sharing, being an equal contributor to the mankind. Not sure how much will things improve in this profit and cost oriented world, but its an area which needs sincere attention to improve. Else this may lead lack of interest in parenting...So not only corporate, governments are also required a sustainable improvement in this regard.

Courtesy: Jessica Grose / slate.com & Emily Jasper/Forbes.com

https://kiddylanes.com/ World’s preferred Online Shopping Store for Kids & Baby Products. Buy baby clothes, footwear and bedding & activity stuffs with our world-wide Free-Shipping.

For more of such news feeds, visit https://kiddylanes.com/blogs/news

#kiddylanes #online store for kids #kids #kid apparel #mom #workingmom #life #career #back seat #working women

0 notes

gracieyvonnehunter · 5 years

Text

“OK Boomer” isn’t just about the past. It’s about our apocalyptic future.

Christina Animashaun/Vox

It’s not really about age — and it’s more complicated than just memes.

For a long time now, the cross-generational dialogue between baby boomers and millennials has been built atop several recurring themes. Boomers — the generation born roughly between 1946 and 1965 — scoff that millennials expect “participation trophies” for doing the bare minimum. Millennials say boomers are “out of touch.” Millennials (born roughly between 1980 and 1996) are “killing” once-stable industries like cereal by saving money, spending less, and “eating avocados.” Boomers have “mortgaged the future” in exchange for hoarding wealth while also voting to end necessary social programs. Millennials would rather complain about student debt than buckle down, work hard, and “get a job.”

If anything, teens have been subjected to even harsher rhetorical maligning. Members of “Generation Z,” born roughly between 1996 and 2015, are portrayed as addicted to their phones, “intolerant” of their elders, and stuck in a “different world” thanks to the internet.

With all this repetitive back-and-forth — seriously, there are bingo cards — it’s no wonder the most polarizing meme of the year is a two-word dismissal of the whole debate. “OK Boomer,” which floated into the internet mainstream and rapidly gained traction this fall, is an attempt by millennials and Gen Z to both encapsulate this circular argument and reject it entirely.

“OK Boomer” is meant to be cutting and dismissive. It suggests that the conversation around the anxieties and concerns of younger generations has become so exhausting and unproductive that the younger generations are collectively over it. “OK Boomer” implies that the older generation misunderstands millennial and Gen Z culture and politics so fundamentally that years of condescension and misrepresentation have led to this pointedly terse rebuttal and rejection. Rather than endlessly defend decisions stemming from deep economic strife, to save money instead of investing in stocks and retirement funds, to buy avocados instead of cereal — teens and younger adults are simply through.

The conversation isn’t through with them, however, not least because the rise of “OK Boomer” has provoked concurrent backlash from baby boomers, many of whom have misread the meme, and feel it is motivated mainly by ageism. But that misreading also feeds the meme — because baby boomers failing to understand the point of “OK Boomer” is, well, the point of “OK Boomer.”

Don’t get it twisted. It’s important to understand that what really lies behind “OK Boomer” is increasing economic, environmental, and social anxiety, and the feeling that baby boomers are leaving younger generations to clean up their mess.

“OK Boomer” is an instantly relatable cry of frustration to many people

The earliest mentions of “OK Boomer” can be traced as far back as 2015 on 4chan, where the phrase was used as an insult by the forum’s anonymous users, aimed at other anons who seemed out of touch. But the phrase really took off this year on TikTok, as a rebuttal to angry rants by baby boomers about kids these days. A song by Peter Kuli & Jedwill known as “OK BOOMER!” — the verses define boomers as racist, fascist Trump supporters with bad hair — became a popular song choice for TikTok sing-along videos this fall. Teens on the platform used the song’s intro and chorus as a rebuttal to annoying run-ins they’d had with seniors policing or judging their behavior:

Sometimes, the complaints teens are referencing in these videos are typical generational conflicts. But more often, they’re politicized, with teens reacting to adults who are judging things like their gender expression, their financial choices, their approach to job-hunting, or their leisure activities. The broader background to all of this resentment is the perceived irony that while boomers nitpick and judge younger generations for their specific choices, it’s the boomers’ own choices that created the bleak socioeconomic landscape that millennials and Gen Z currently face.

“Everybody in Gen Z is affected by the choices of the boomers, that they made and are still making,” teen entrepreneur Nina Kasman told the New York Times in October. “Those choices are hurting us and our future. Everyone in my generation can relate to that experience and we’re all really frustrated by it.”

“[T]he two words [OK Boomer] feel downright poetic after years of hearing my generation blamed for ‘killing’ everything from restaurant chains to department stores to relationships,” wrote Grist’s Miyo McGinn in early November, “even as so many of the challenges people my age face — student loan debt, general economic instability, and, of course, a rapidly warming planet — are the result of short-sighted decisions made by earlier generations.”

This broader socioeconomic aspect seems to have gotten lost as the meme spread throughout the mainstream, however. Many people became aware of “OK Boomer” through the October New York Times article, which focused on teens who had taken the meme offline and were turning it into merchandise and fashion statements. Almost immediately, people rushed to sell “OK Boomer” merchandise and attempted to trademark the phrase, and brands began to use it on social media — completely missing the inherent critique of capitalism that the meme enfolds, which led to more eyerolling.

But millennials who mocked the instant trendiness of “OK Boomer” were drowned out by the meme’s intended targets: boomers. Some began claiming that “boomer” was an ageist slur equivalent to “the n-word,” while others merely discouraged the use of “boomer” in the workplace. Media outlets opined that the meme was “dividing generations.” Gen Xers offered the “both sides” take. In the Washington Post, history professor Holly Scott reminded everyone that boomers were once activists too.

All of this response helped further cement the meme as a dismissive retort to boomer condescension — and as it spread, its political aspects became more pointed. On November 4, 25-year-old New Zealand politician Chloë Swarbrick used the phrase as a rebuttal to one of her older colleagues in Parliament after the man heckled her during a speech about climate change. The moment occurred just as she was discussing the urgency her generation feels to prioritize and deal seriously with the problem, and explaining her frustration that previous cycles of lawmakers have failed to do so.

Swarbrick was castigated for bringing the meme into a political forum — but as she herself made clear in a subsequent essay for the Guardian, the meme represents a wealth of generational political concerns: “My ‘OK boomer’ comment in parliament was off-the-cuff, albeit symbolic of the collective exhaustion of multiple generations set to inherit ever-amplifying problems in an ever-diminishing window of time,” she wrote.

The point of Swarbrick’s climate change speech was that younger generations feel they can no longer rely on older generations to help solve major and daunting environmental and economic issues. And many baby boomers seem to be making her point for her by misunderstanding what “OK Boomer” is about.

What many boomers think “OK Boomer” is about: ageism and entitlement

“As a baby boomer myself, I have mixed feelings about the latest linguistic weapon of generational warfare being deployed against us,” Bloomberg’s Tyler Cowen recently wrote in response to the meme. Cowen touched on what he saw as the meme’s ageism and attempted to reframe it as an ironic compliment to boomers, asserting that boomers are still the boss. “The phrase ‘OK Boomer’ is itself an implicit and indeed somewhat passive admission as to who is really in charge,” he decided.

Cowen’s column was a strange echo of an August essay by former Deadspin editor Megan Greenwell. As she was exiting Deadspin, she wrote about the tone deaf and inexperienced changes the site’s new parent company, G/O Media, had brought to the newsroom. Beyond discussing specific issues at Deadspin, Greenwell’s essay was a larger swipe at the hubris of tech companies and corporate moguls for assuming that they, not the journalists whose media outlets they were ruining, were “the adults in the room.” This attitude prompted an eventual wholesale rejection by Deadspin’s editorial staff, as they chose to resign en masse rather than submit to the whims of the bosses they felt were out of touch.

John Taggart for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Deadspin employees work inside their office in Manhattan, New York, on November 1, 2018.

In a very real sense, that same tension between condescending, older authority figures and younger ones who reject them is at work in the “OK Boomer” meme. Boomers like Cowen are simultaneously anxious about the meme’s ageist implications, and eager to assert their wisdom over younger generations. In response to this line of thinking, the Twitter hashtag #boomeradvice recently went viral — but instead of praising boomers’ knowhow, the point of the tag was to mock the most out-of-touch advice, often about work, job-seeking, and finance, that boomers had given millennials and teens.

"Just call/go in and ask if they're hiring!" #BoomerAdvice https://t.co/1CgnpiHbhS

— Bree! (@iKhaleesi_) November 9, 2019

What’s largely missing from the “elders know best” logic is any acknowledgment that it’s part of the problem, and that younger, well-read adults might also have wisdom and insight into the problems they’re dealing with.

It doesn’t help that studies have found that older people are more likely to judge younger people harshly compared to qualities they have themselves. As Vox’s Brian Resnick recently explained, a study on a phenomenon called “presentism” showed that “adults who are more authoritarian are more likely to say kids today are a lot less respectful of elders than they used to be. Adults who are more well read say kids today are a lot less interested in reading than they used to be. And adults who are more intelligent (as approximated by a very short version of an IQ test) are more likely to say kids are less smart than they used to be.”

So if an older adult sees themself as financially successful, respectful, and job-loyal, the study suggests they might be more likely to view a younger person as a financially irresponsible and insolent job-hopper.

This is all arguably a new iteration of the “kids these days” generational cycle that every era experiences — at the very least, the backlash to the “OK Boomer” meme underscores the belief held by many millennials that boomers have never understood their generation. But because of the cultural and political moment we’re in, the stakes feel much more fraught and high-risk than other generational clashes.

What “OK Boomer” is really about: economic anxiety, the threat of environmental collapse, and people resisting change

“I talked to my dad about it and he said the reason the ‘boomers’ get so mad is because they feel as if they earned the right to say such things to us kids because they worked hard for what they have,” said Adriana Lepera, who talked to Vox via Instagram. Lepera, a popular TikTok teen with over 120,000 followers, made a viral “OK Boomer” TikTok reacting to a conversation she had with her grandfather. She used the meme to respond to his assertion that she should be working — even though she doesn’t even have a driver’s license yet, which she says makes it harder for her to find a job.

“After my [“OK Boomer”] video, I got a few comments from ‘boomers’ explaining how many jobs they had and how hard they have to work, proving the joke to be true,” she told Vox.

Lepera admits that today’s teens do have it easier than boomers did in some ways. “Today’s kids are getting things handed to them and that’s not what the boomers like to see so they make cocky comments because they believe that they are ‘superior,’” she said.

But she also argues that boomers miss the point — that crucial things are a lot harder. “We are working hard to get fewer jobs,” she said. “That’s why we’re mad, because all of the boomers made it to be like that.”

Teens like Lepera understand that “OK Boomer” is driven both by their generation’s deep economic and environmental anxiety, and by progressive values that are only getting firmer over time. Younger generations are more diverse, less religious, and, crucially, more directly impacted by economic inequality than their forebears. “Ok, Boomer, millennials actually earn 20 percent less than you did,” GQ declared last week. Millennials who value work culture, advancement possibilities, and quality of work over quantity are finding their paths to promotions blocked by baby boomers — but when they change jobs or careers in search of these things, they find themselves branded with the false stereotype of being disloyal job-hoppers. All the while, jobs remain scarce, student debt remains high, and the economic scandals of the Aughts have led to millennials being more cynical than their elders about the benevolence of corporate overlords.

But many of those offended by “OK Boomer” seem to understand very little of this. They’re instead sticking to their guns about the workplace, according to the teens who don’t trust them. “I feel as if they aren’t changing with the times,” Lepera told Vox. “They believe that how they did everything when they were younger, we should do as well.”

Whether it’s justified or not, boomers are largely perceived as resistant to progressive change. In 2016, boomers were more likely to vote for conservative options like Brexit and Donald Trump than younger voters; statistically, boomers are less concerned about climate change than younger generations. And even after overseeing decades of financial prosperity that’s arguably wrecked the economic future for decades to come, the richest baby boomers continue to amass wealth for themselves in the face of debilitating economic inequality.

Baby boomers, however, also have to contend with their growing obsolescence. Boomers as a voting bloc are outnumbered by millennials, and there’s an advancing push among millennials for greater voter turnout; in the 2018 election, Gen Z, millennials and Gen Xers collectively edged out the voter turnout of everyone older than them.

So the older generation is being told its advice is out of touch, and that boomers are out of touch, at a moment when their views have less traction in the current economic and political landscape than ever. Perhaps that’s why so many of them keep misunderstanding the meme — thereby strengthening the meme’s basic point.

The debate around ‘OK Boomer’ is a new spin on the old debate over millennials — and an even older debate about kids these days

We all know the immortal cry that parents just don’t understand, but in this case, the media and the cultural narrative around the meme isn’t helping — especially since attempts by the media to “explain” the meme or “clap back” keep missing the point about why millennials are mad. Some attempts to “explain” the meme have come across just as out of touch as the meme’s targets.

We desperately need younger editorial voices at places like WaPo. Imagine thinking millenials give a shit about “expanded entitlement programs.” https://t.co/mnbYCfLdqQ

— Carlos Maza (@gaywonk) November 5, 2019

In an attempt to provide a retort to the meme, Myrna Blyth, the senior vice president of the senior advocacy group AARP, stated in an interview that boomers are “the people that actually have the money.” This widely shared quote came in for massive criticism and ridicule, and the AARP quickly apologized, reminding everyone that ‘isms that divide us are not ok’.

But Blyth’s statement is a peak example of boomers missing the point. A big cause for the resentment toward boomers is the perception that boomers are hoarding wealth. (This perception is accurate; the average baby boomer has a net worth that is 12 times more than the average millennial.) In particular, her quote highlights the pattern of boomers failing to realize that the perceived ageism of the meme, even as a joke, is a stand-in for rational economic anxieties.

Still, expressing this frustration through the meme seems to make boomers less inclined to listen, which just leads to doubling down on all sides. As novelist Francine Prose put it in an op-ed for the Guardian:

The accepted explanation and justification for all this is that the old have ruined things for the young: we’re responsible for climate change, for income inequality, for the cascading series of financial crises, for the prohibitive cost of higher education. Fair enough, I suppose, though it does seem unjust to direct one’s anger at the average middle-class senior citizen struggling to survive on social security rather than raging at, let’s say, the Koch brothers the Sacklers, the big banks, and the fossil-fuel lobbyists who have effectively dismantled the EPA. OK, Morgan Stanley, have a terrible day.

But to the TikTok teens, the boomers’ sensitivity to the meme just makes them hypocritical. “They feel as if they can say whatever they want about our generation and no repercussion,” Lepera told Vox, “but when we make a joke about them it’s the end of the world.”

In the end, the debate around “OK Boomer” might be another iteration of the endless parade of internet-fueled ideological debates in which neither side is listening to the other. For frustrated millennials and teens, “OK Boomer” is an emotionally valid response to boomer condescension, but to frustrated baby boomers, the retort is insolent and disrespectful. You say, “OK Boomer,” and I hear, “your entire generation has irrevocably destroyed human civilization.” Let’s call the whole thing off?

Perhaps, in the future, it’s worth eschewing the meme altogether and having one more conversation across the generation gap. Or, if you’re a boomer, you could take Lepera’s advice:

“Just like take a joke and calm down boomer ”

from Vox - All https://ift.tt/2KABlQK

#Vox - All

0 notes

timalexanderdollery · 5 years

Text

“OK Boomer” isn’t just about the past. It’s about our apocalyptic future.

Christina Animashaun/Vox

It’s not really about age — and it’s more complicated than just memes.

“OK Boomer” is an instantly relatable cry of frustration to many people

What many boomers think “OK Boomer” is about: ageism and entitlement

John Taggart for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Deadspin employees work inside their office in Manhattan, New York, on November 1, 2018.

"Just call/go in and ask if they're hiring!" #BoomerAdvice https://t.co/1CgnpiHbhS

— Bree! (@iKhaleesi_) November 9, 2019

What “OK Boomer” is really about: economic anxiety, the threat of environmental collapse, and people resisting change

“After my [“OK Boomer”] video, I got a few comments from ‘boomers’ explaining how many jobs they had and how hard they have to work, proving the joke to be true,” she told Vox.

The debate around ‘OK Boomer’ is a new spin on the old debate over millennials — and an even older debate about kids these days

We desperately need younger editorial voices at places like WaPo. Imagine thinking millenials give a shit about “expanded entitlement programs.” https://t.co/mnbYCfLdqQ

— Carlos Maza (@gaywonk) November 5, 2019

Perhaps, in the future, it’s worth eschewing the meme altogether and having one more conversation across the generation gap. Or, if you’re a boomer, you could take Lepera’s advice:

“Just like take a joke and calm down boomer ”

from Vox - All https://ift.tt/2KABlQK

#Vox - All

0 notes

shanedakotamuir · 5 years

Text

“OK Boomer” isn’t just about the past. It’s about our apocalyptic future.

Christina Animashaun/Vox

It’s not really about age — and it’s more complicated than just memes.

“OK Boomer” is an instantly relatable cry of frustration to many people

What many boomers think “OK Boomer” is about: ageism and entitlement

John Taggart for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Deadspin employees work inside their office in Manhattan, New York, on November 1, 2018.

"Just call/go in and ask if they're hiring!" #BoomerAdvice https://t.co/1CgnpiHbhS

— Bree! (@iKhaleesi_) November 9, 2019

What “OK Boomer” is really about: economic anxiety, the threat of environmental collapse, and people resisting change

“After my [“OK Boomer”] video, I got a few comments from ‘boomers’ explaining how many jobs they had and how hard they have to work, proving the joke to be true,” she told Vox.

The debate around ‘OK Boomer’ is a new spin on the old debate over millennials — and an even older debate about kids these days

We desperately need younger editorial voices at places like WaPo. Imagine thinking millenials give a shit about “expanded entitlement programs.” https://t.co/mnbYCfLdqQ

— Carlos Maza (@gaywonk) November 5, 2019

Perhaps, in the future, it’s worth eschewing the meme altogether and having one more conversation across the generation gap. Or, if you’re a boomer, you could take Lepera’s advice:

“Just like take a joke and calm down boomer ”

from Vox - All https://ift.tt/2KABlQK

#Vox - All

0 notes

nightmare-afton-cosplay · 5 years

Text

Millennials Are Resorting to This Questionable Tactic to Buy Their First Homes

sturti/iStock

Millennial home buyers are going to some troubling lengths to foot the bill for their first homes, according to a new survey.

Millennials are more likely than their older counterparts to fund their down payment and closing costs by dipping into retirement savings (13%, versus 8% of Generation Xers and 7% of baby boomers), saving money by moving in with family or friends (14%, versus 5% of Gen Xers and 2% of boomers) or selling personal items (12%, versus 5% of Gen Xers and 2% of boomers), a recent Bankrate survey of 2,582 U.S. adults found.

‘They’re trying to exhaust all their options, and they’re certainly doing that at higher levels than the other generations.’

—Bankrate mortgage analyst Deborah Kearns

Their most common funding sources for home-buying costs included saving their own money (53%, versus 47% of Gen Xers and 45% of boomers), receiving a gift from family or friends (33%, versus 23% of Gen Xers and 14% of boomers) and using a down-payment assistance program (33%, versus 27% of Gen Xers and 15% of boomers).

“[Millennials are] having to be very creative and diversify the ways that they’re coming up with their down-payment and closing-cost money,” Bankrate mortgage analyst Deborah Kearns told MarketWatch. “They’re trying to exhaust all their options, and they’re certainly doing that at higher levels than the other generations.”

Some financial experts urge would-be homebuyers to prioritize saving for retirement over saving for a home down payment. But others suggest it’s fine for cash-strapped individuals to place greater emphasis on home buying temporarily, as long as they redirect savings to retirement after meeting their house-savings goal.

It’s possible that millennials, who are now aged 23 to 38, feel that “time is on their side” when it comes to drawing from retirement savings, Kearns said, and are more likely than their older counterparts to feel they can make up the difference over time. And the older a person gets, the less likely he or she is to have parents in a position to help out financially, she said.

Millennials’ sometimes-questionable funding streams underscore the rising cost of living, Kearns added. She highlighted a National Association of Realtors calculation that found home prices had far outstripped wage increases between 2012 and 2018 (47% compared to 16%).

Meanwhile, non-home owning millennials who want to own a home are most likely to say their income isn’t high enough (52%), the cost of living is too high (45%) and they have student-loan debt (23%).

Here are tips from Kearns on how to responsibly save for your home down payment:

• Do everything in your power not to sacrifice your retirement savings. “That’s the last thing you should ever touch, in my opinion,” Kearns said. “You want to have a secure retirement.”

• Figure out how much house you can afford. Use a home-affordability calculator to get a ballpark estimate, and then be even more conservative, she said.

“Make sure you’re focusing on what the monthly payment looks like for that mortgage, versus the overall loan amount,” Kearns said. “You may qualify for a $300,000 mortgage, but your personal budget may not handle the monthly payment that comes with that once you take into account all these personal expenses that don’t get included on a credit report.”

• Keep an eye on your credit report and score, as well as your debt-to-income ratio, to see what kinds of loan programs for which you might be eligible. Looking at this earlier gives you some breathing room to get your credit score in shape, Kearns said.

• Create a separate savings account for your house fund, independent of your emergency fund or checking account, Kearns said. “It’s really just saving as much as you can, as early as you can,” she said. “Build out a long term plan and save early and often.” Millennials in the survey tended to need three years to save up for the down payment and closing costs, she said, a bit longer than Gen Xers (2.75 years) and boomers (2.5 years).

The post Millennials Are Resorting to This Questionable Tactic to Buy Their First Homes appeared first on Real Estate News & Insights | realtor.com®.

from https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/millennials-are-resorting-to-this-questionable-tactic-to-buy-their-first-homes/

0 notes

newstfionline · 7 years

Text

Why it’s becoming cool to live in your car—or a 150-sq. ft. apartment

Jessica Mendoza, The Christian Science Monitor, August 21, 2017

SEATTLE; AND LOS ANGELES--When Shawna Nelson leaves her office in Seattle’s suburbs, she does what 28-year-olds often do: dines with friends, goes out dancing, or sees a show. Sometimes she hits her swanky gym.

But at the end of the night Ms. Nelson always returns to Dora, the dusty Ford Explorer she calls home. In the back, where a row of seats should be, lies a foam mattress covered with fuzzy animal-print blankets. Nelson keeps a headlamp handy for when she wants to read before bed. Then, once she’s sure she won’t get ticketed or towed, she turns in for the night.

“I still strive to have some sort of routine,” says Nelson, who started living in her car about a year ago. “Would I rather spend $1,200 on an apartment that I’m probably not going to be at very much, or would I rather spend $1,200 a month on traveling?”

For her, it was an easy choice.

She’s not alone. As housing costs soar, US communities have faced ballooning homelessness, declining homeownership, and tensions over gentrification. But the rising expense of homes, when combined with the demographic, cultural, and technological trends of the past decade, has also prompted a more positive phenomenon: smaller, leaner living. This conscious shift, mainly among portions of the middle and upper classes, springs from a desire to live more fully with less.

For some it means choosing tiny homes and “micro-apartments”--typically less than 350 square feet--for the chance to live affordably in vibrant neighborhoods. For others, like Nelson, it means hitting the road in a truck or van, communing with nature and like-minded people along the way. Proponents range in ages and backgrounds, but they all share a renewed thirst for alternatives to traditional lifestyles like single-family homes, long cherished as a symbol of the American dream.

“I think fundamentally it comes down to a shift in perception about the pursuit of happiness--how it doesn’t require a consumerist lifestyle or collection of stuff,” says Jay Janette, a Seattle architect whose firm has designed a number of micro-housing developments in the city. “They’re not really living in their spaces, they’re living in their city.”

John Infranca, a law professor at Boston’s Suffolk University who specializes in urban law and policy, says the phenomenon is driven largely by Millennials, who have been the faces of both the affordable housing crisis and the shift to minimalism.

Research shows that the 18-to-35 cohort continues to rent at higher rates than previous generations: 74 percent lived in a rental property in 2016, compared to 62 percent of Gen Xers in 2000, according to the Pew Research Center. And while the Millennial desire to not buy homes tends to be overstated--studies suggest many want to own, but often can’t afford to--they do prioritize experiences over stuff.

They aren’t the only ones. Spending on experiences like food, travel, and recreation is up for all consumers, making up more than 20 percent of Americans’ consumption expenses in 2015. (In contrast, the share for spending on household goods and cars was in the single digits.) Baby-boomer parents, downsizing as they enter retirement, find that their grown children are uninterested in inheriting their hoards of Hummels and Thomas Kinkade paintings. The same “live with less” logic has begun to extend beyond stuff to the spaces these older adults occupy.

“There is some cultural demand for simpler living,” says Professor Infranca. “And by virtue of technology, we are able to live with a lot less.”

It’s a distinct moment for a culture that has long placed a premium on individual ownership and a ‘keeping up with the Joneses’ mentality, Mr. Janette and others say.

“I think the recession changed the playing field for a lot of people,” notes Sofia Borges, an architect, trend consultant, and lecturer at the University of Southern California. “Job security, homeownership--a lot of that went out the window and never really returned. When a change like that happens, you have to change your ideas a little bit too.”

That was certainly the case for Kim Henderson, who was a marketing manager making more than $80,000 a year before the recession. “I never again found a job like I had [before 2008],” says Ms. Henderson, now in her 50s. “When they were available, they went to younger people.”

Today Henderson makes about $37,000 a year as an executive assistant to a bar owner and lives in the Bristol Hotel, a mixed-use apartment building in the heart of downtown Los Angeles. Her studio, which she shares with her small dog Olive, is 175 square feet--the equivalent of about four king-size beds. The walls are covered in framed artwork that Henderson collected from thrift shops and friends. An apartment-sized fridge and a fold-out couch are her largest possessions.

“It’s the same exact lifestyle [I used to live], just with less things”--and more money in her pocket, she says.

Henderson pays $685 a month including electricity--a bargain for Los Angeles, where studios average $1,500. She can save money and still have enough disposable income to eat out and travel, she says. But at least as important is the sense of liberation. “There’s an energy you get from purging,” Henderson says. “You don’t need six towels. You don’t need a ton of dishes. You pick the things out that you really want to keep in the ‘useful’ category.”

The sentiment is in keeping with a growing culture of minimalism. Marie Kondo’s “The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up,” which urges people to keep only those things that “spark joy,” has sold 1.5 million copies in the US alone. Joshua Fields Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus, also known as The Minimalists, have also helped take the notion mainstream with a podcast, website, bestselling books, and documentaries.

There are other forces at play, too. Digital access to resources makes living lean more feasible, says Infranca at Suffolk. Henderson, for instance, doesn’t own a car, relying instead on ride-sharing services or her own two feet to get around. And because she lives downtown she’s closer to the amenities and establishments she loves.

“It’s a value proposition,” says David Neiman, whose Seattle design firm focuses on small-efficiency dwelling units, which start at 150 square feet. “I could live for the same price in a central location in housing that’s clean, has internet, and I can walk to work and exciting things. Or I can live farther away, have more space, and it’s in a secondary neighborhood and I have to drive.”

Instead of renting a micro-unit in an urban center, filmmakers Alexis Stephens and Christian Parsons decided two years ago to build their own 130-square foot house and load it onto the bed of a U-Haul. They then set off across the country in a bid to live more simply and sustainably, travel, and invest in their own place--all while documenting the experience.

The Tiny House Expedition has since become a thriving enterprise. Ms. Stephens and Mr. Parsons have interviewed tiny house advocates and dwellers across 30,000 miles and 29 states. At a sustainability festival outside Seattle in July, they sold T-shirts and copies of the book “Turning Tiny,” a collection of essays they contributed to. They gave tours of their home. And they answered questions about building and living in a tiny house, touting its potential as an affordable, sustainable, and high-quality alternative lifestyle.

“People are empowering themselves to build housing options that work for them that are not available in the market,” Stephens says.

Tiny homes can range from about 100 to 300 square feet and cost between $25,000 to $100,000, give or take. Stephens and Parsons built theirs using reclaimed material for about $20,000, and it comes with a loft for a queen-sized bed, a compost toilet, walls that double as storage, and shelves that turn into tables. For those with more lavish tastes, vendors like Seattle Tiny Homes offer customizable houses--complete with a shower and a washer and dryer--for about $85,000.

“You aren’t downgrading from a traditional home,” says founder Sharon Read. “It can have everything you want and nothing you don’t want.”

Those who would rather not lug around a whole house while they travel, however, have turned to another alternative: #vanlife. The term was coined in 2011 by Foster Huntington, a former Ralph Lauren designer who gave up his life in New York City to surf the California coast, living and traveling in a 1987 Volkswagen Syncro. His photos, which he posted on Instagram and later compiled in a $65 book titled, “Home Is Where You Park It,” launched what The New Yorker dubbed a “Bohemian social-media movement.”

The hashtag has since been used more than a million times on Instagram. “Vanlifers” drive everything from cargo vans to SUVs, though the Volkswagen Vanagon remains the classic choice.

“It’s definitely found a renewed zeitgeist,” says Jad Josey, general manager at GoWesty, a Southern California-based vendor of Volkswagen van parts. “The fact that you can be really compact and mobile and almost 100 percent self-sufficient in a Vanagon is really attractive to people.”

People like freelance photographer Aidan Klimenko, who has been living off and on in vans and SUVs for three years, traversing the US and South America.

“The idea of working so hard to pay rent--which ultimately, that’s just money down the drain--is such a hard concept for me,” says Mr. Klimenko. Vanlife, he adds, “is access to the outdoors and it’s movement. I’m addicted to traveling. I’m addicted to being in new places and meeting new people and waking up outside.”

Still, the movement to live smaller may not be as extensive as social media makes it seem, some housing analysts say. Zoning regulations--especially in dense urban areas--often restrict the number and size of buildable units, slowing growth among micro-apartments and tiny homes. Constructing or living in a tiny home or micro-unit can still pose a legal risk in some cities.

And by and large, Americans continue to value size. The average new home built in the US in 2015 was a record 2,687 square feet--1,000 square feet larger than in 1973, according to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

Living mobile isn’t all grand adventures and scenic views, either. Van dwellers say they’ve had to contend with engine trouble, the cold and the heat, and unpleasant public restrooms. And Henderson in Los Angeles says she once lived in an affordable micro-housing development that had a pervasive drug-dealing problem.

Still, those who have embraced leaner living say what they might lose in creature comforts, they gain in perspective and experience. In crisscrossing the country, Stephens and Parsons opened themselves up to the kindness of strangers. “It’s a nice reminder that as Americans we have so much more in common than we realize,” Stephens says. They also spend more time connecting with others, instead of closeting themselves at home.

“Whether you’re choosing a van, a school bus, a tiny house, or a micro-apartment, you get a lot of the same benefits,” she says. “We need more housing options, period, in America. We’ve boxed ourselves in a very monolithic housing culture. We’re showing it’s OK to venture outside of that.”

#minimalists #smaller homes #tiny homes #leaner living #micro apartments #living mobile

1 note · View note

kathleenseiber · 4 years

Text

Will unsellable houses leave older homeowners high and dry?

Millions of American homes could become unsellable, or sold at significant losses to senior-citizen homeowners, between now and 2040, researchers report.

A new study predicts that many baby boomers and members of Generation X will struggle to sell their homes as they become empty nesters and singles. The problem? Millions of millennials and members of Generation Z may not be able to afford those homes, or may not want them, opting for smaller homes in walkable communities instead of distant suburbs.

Baby boomers are people born between 1946 and 1964, Gen Xers were born between 1965 and 1980, millennials were born between 1981 and 1997, and Gen Zers between 1998 and 2015.

The study predicts that the change in home-buying behaviors of younger generations may result in a glut of homes that could grow as high as 15 million by 2040, with homeowners selling for far below what they paid—if they can sell them at all.

“What if you pay off your mortgage over 30 years, and nobody buys the home?”

Most seniors will be able to sell their homes, the study says, but it may become especially difficult in smaller, distant, and slow- or non-growing markets.

Arthur C. Nelson, a professor of urban planning and real estate development at the University of Arizona College of Architecture, Planning and Landscape Architecture, calls his prediction “The Great Senior Short Sale” in a paper in the Journal of Comparative Urban Land and Policy.

An expert in urban studies, public policy, and land development, Nelson has spent a large part of his career studying the changing demand for suburban homes, since long before the housing market crash of the Great Recession.

His newest prediction, if it plays out, would undermine one of the “big promises” of homeownership for millions of seniors, Nelson says: that a home, after it’s paid off, can be sold for a retirement nest egg.

“What if you pay off your mortgage over 30 years, and nobody buys the home?”

Market mismatch

Nelson’s prediction comes from synthesizing data from sources such as the US Census Bureau and the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies. The Harvard center is a leading source of data for those in academia, government, and business to make sense of housing issues to inform policy decisions.

Using those data, Nelson mapped how the ages of homeowners would change between 2018 and 2038. Looking at three age groups—over 65, 35-64, and under 35—he came to the projection at the center of the study: that there may be fewer homeowners under 65 in 2038 than there were in 2018, even though the vast majority of people over 65 in 2038 will own their homes.

“There’s the mismatch—if those over 65 unload their homes, and those under 65 aren’t buying them, what happens to those homes?” he asks.

Nelson is careful not to overstate his findings; millions of people will buy the homes that older generations are selling, he says.

“But the vast supply is so large and the demand for them is going to be so small, in comparison, that there’s going to be a real problem starting later this decade,” he says.

Nelson says he expects the phenomenon to reveal itself not all at once, but gradually over the next couple decades, at about 500,000 to 1 million homes every year. It’s not likely to have much impact in growing metropolitan areas such as Phoenix or Dallas where “growth will solve all kinds of problems,” he says, but it will matter in thousands of suburban and rural areas—including some parts of Arizona.

“The people who own homes now in thousands of declining communities may simply have to walk away from them,” he says.

What to do to help homeowners?

Nelson’s study urges action from lawmakers, and he offers some ideas of his own.

Among those is a program in which the federal government would buy back homes that have or may become unsellable. The Federal Emergency Management Agency already does something similar with homes that have been or are likely to be damaged by natural disasters.

By bearing the cost of buying those homes, Nelson says, the government could help seniors avoid turning to federal social support programs after losing their homes. Those programs are costly to taxpayers, and the cost is even greater when programs need to be administered in rural or suburban areas—where homes are predicted not to sell, Nelson says.

“If you have millions of seniors spread all across the landscape costing a fortune to serve, we might be better off finding ways to induce many to sell their homes,” he says. “And we could actually then save potentially billions in public money that would otherwise be used to serve people in very distant and remote locations.”

Nelson also proposes programs at the state level that would allow younger people to live with older empty nesters, single people, and others who live in homes larger than they may need, but who do not want to move.

By sharing homes, Nelson says, older people would not have to sell them, and younger housemates could act as caregivers and property managers.

Cities such as Minneapolis and Seattle and the state of Oregon are already testing the idea, Nelson says. Those areas passed laws last year that allowed owners of single-family homes to divide them into multiple units.

Nelson completed his study just before the coronavirus outbreak became widespread, but the pandemic doesn’t make the housing issue any less urgent, he says.

“We’re going to wake up in 2025—give or take a few years—to realize that millions of seniors can’t get out of their homes and that it’s going to get worse in to the 2030s,” he says.

“We must start doing things now to reduce the coming shock of too many seniors trying to sell their homes to too few younger buyers.”

Source: University of Arizona

The post Will unsellable houses leave older homeowners high and dry? appeared first on Futurity.

Will unsellable houses leave older homeowners high and dry? published first on https://triviaqaweb.weebly.com/

0 notes

victorparker1-blog · 6 years

Text

Every Generation has Investment Challenges

Does the millennial generation have it worse off than previous generations? The answer depends on who you ask. Even the millennials themselves can’t come to a consensus with this complicated and nuanced question. It’s hard to judge quality of life, financial freedom, and success across the board of a certain group of individuals because everyone experiences life differently. There are certainly a fair amount of challenges for generation Y, but every generation usually endures some kind of unique hardships when it comes to finance or careers.

In the 1980s the baby boomer group had to contend with extreme economic conditions where inflation was high and interest rates were rising. At one point a 30 year mortgage would cost over 15% annual interest rate. Even though the home price to income ratio was more affordable back then compared to now, the expensive cost to borrow money made it challenging for homeowners in other ways. The generation X group of people also had their own headwinds to deal with. The tech crash of the early 2000s caused a lot of investment losses for people in the stock market. The Nasdaq dropped by more than 50% from 2000 to 2002 and the broader stock market also took a large hit. The job market for previous generations in their 30s was also less favorable in some sense than for millennials today. The unemployment rate in the United States is 4% as of January 2019. But rarely did the rate fall this low in the past. For example, from 1970 to 1997 the U.S. unemployment rate fluctuated between a low of 5% to a high of almost 11%. In fact a 7% unemployment rate was considered pretty normal for the previous generation workforce.

Another advantage that many millennials will have which their predecessors didn’t have is that young adults today are next in line to inherit massive amounts of wealth that has been accumulated by their aging parents and relatives. According to Toronto-based research firm Strategic Insight between 2016 and 2026, the largest wealth transfer in history is expected to take place as older generations pass on their used financial assets to younger generations. As a result, many millennials are likely to “push for things such as increased estate taxes in order to ensure that some of the wealth that is transferred from older generations is redistributed throughout all of society. The idea is being spearheaded in the United States by recently elected Democrat Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Ocasio-Cortez who at 29 is also a millennial, is lobbying for the introduction of a tax on the wealthiest Americans in the country. She believes that every dollar of income over $10 million should be taxed at 70 per cent. Whereas the age 65 was once marked by a person’s announcing their retirement, today’s senior citizens are opting to soldier on. The idea of freedom at 55 seems long forgotten.”

Gen Xers and the Boomers group up in different times with different problems. They dealt with war, the energy crisis, and several recessions. Many people see their own generation’s struggles as exceedingly more difficult than other age groups. But in a world that is becoming smaller, we would all need to understand each other to work better together. Gene Marks from the ChicagoTribune explains that “the average age of small business owners in the U.S. is 52, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, and the millennial generation now makes up the largest chunk of the U.S. workforce. Chances are if you own a business, you will need to hire millennials.” The business owners and managers can give millennials training, career advancement, and financial opportunities. And the millennials are what the Gen Xers need to grow their business and attract younger customers. All age groups would benefit by respecting each other’s hardships and understanding where they come from in order for everyone to better meet their needs and feel productive in society.

check-out this web-site for additional information about investing in precious metals

from victorparker https://www.modestmoney.com/every-generation-investment-challenges/43278

0 notes

derrickgilesten · 6 years

Text

American Funds: Why Talking About Money Is The Ultimate Taboo

An argument about the government shutdown is less likely to ruin an American’s dinner conversations than a discussion of their household debt: Once again, money is the ultimate taboo. Americans are still more comfortable talking about their marriage problems, mental illnesses, drug addictions, racial issues, sex, politics and religion that their finances, according to a survey of more than 1,200 adults by Los Angeles-based Capital Group. In fact, only around one-third of the survey’s respondents – 30 percent of men, 40 percent of women – reported discussing financial topics with friends and peers within the last month. That may be because the most commonly identified taboos – household earnings, named by 39 percent of the survey, retirement savings, named by 28 percent, and debt, named by 32 percent, all surrounded money. Fewer respondents named issues like politics, 17 percent, drug use, 14 percent, and racial issues, 8 percent, as taboos. Women were more likely to consider financial topics as taboo than men – but they were also more likely to discuss finances with their spouse or an advisor. When Capital Group look across generations, millennials, aged 21 to 37, were more likely to seek financial advice from family and friends than older generations – while Gen Xers, aged 38 to 52, and baby boomers, aged 53 to 71, were more likely to seek the assistance of a professional advisor or discuss their financial problems with a significant other than millennails. To break the taboo, Capital Group recommends four courses of action: Open up the discussion of family finances at home between spouses, parents and children; Seek professional financial advice; seek financial assistance through employers; and visualize retirement lifestyles to encourage goal-setting and planning. For its survey, Capital Group polled 1,202 American adults online in April 2018. . from FA News https://www.fa-mag.com/news/americans-would-rather-talk-drugs--sex--or-donald-trump-than-money-42678.html

#FA News

0 notes

gillespialfredoe01806ld · 7 years

Text

Forever Homes: The 10 Best Places in America to Age in Place

AngelMcNallphotography/iStock

The math is inescapable: There are about 75 million baby boomers growing a little older every day. They’re the largest generation ever to retire, whenever they get around to it. And following right behind are 65 million Gen-Xers, the oldest of whom are already well into their 50s. (Yikes!) They’re all going to need places to live as they age. But where?

Their children may not have the space, because their grandkids refuse to move out. (Damn millennials!) Housing prices are continuing to rise in desirable areas, making it difficult to downsize on a fixed income. And sending the boomers out on ice floes might seem like an attractive solution—until little Humbert asks where grandpa is going. The ice caps are melting anyway, so room may be limited.

But boomers changed the world—and now they’re changing the concept of getting older, too. They’re popularizing the idea of “aging in place”: buying homes for the long haul, and modifying them as time goes on, so they can continue to live independently for as long as possible. So-called “universal designs” allow such flexibility, and owners are adding bathroom rails, hands-free faucets, and downstairs den-into-bedroom conversions when they need them. And everyone, it seems, is on the prowl for places to live that can fit the bill from middle age all the way to the bitter end. Or darn close to it.

That’s where realtor.com®’s data team comes in. We figured out the best metros for middle-agers who may just be starting to slow down—or, now that the kids are gone, just starting to rev up. “Our current generation of boomers don’t want to do those for-old people things,” says Jana Lynott, senior policy adviser on livable communities for AARP. “We encourage [people to consider] neighborhoods where you can walk to a variety of services you access on a daily basis, like banks, public transportation, shopping, restaurants.”

To determine the best places to age in place, we took the 300 largest metros and evaluated them for affordability and health services, and then made sure these were locations people would really want to spend their golden years. To ensure geographic diversity, we limited the list to one per state. Here are our final criteria:

Number of homes already adapted for seniors, looking at realtor.com listings with keywords like “universal design,” “ground-floor master suite,” “senior-friendly,” and “no-step entry”

Percentage of residents older than 65*

Low cost of living*

Number of home health aides per senior*

Number of hospitals per capita*

Number of senior centers per capita*

Number of singles 55 and up*

Number of sunny days*

Number of golf courses per capita*

One shocker: Florida did not come out on top. Miami—once known as “God’s Waiting Room,” for its preponderance of elderly residents—ranked only as the 113th best U.S. city to age in place. The very worst to age in place is Burlington, VT. But we didn’t make access to Ben & Jerry’s ice cream one of our criteria. Our bad.

Best metros to age in place

Want to know more? Put on the designer spectacles and keep reading.

1. Florence, SC

Median home list price: $165,200

Michael Miller, head of Florence’s Chamber of Commerce, concedes that this city was once known as the “Denture Capital of the World.” But don’t be put off: This has become a lively and diverse place. Since 2010, the city has been hard at work on redeveloping its downtown area, which now boasts an $18 million library and a new art, science, and history museum—just the thing for folks with increasing amounts of time on their hands. The area is also a regional medical hub, with one of the nation’s highest concentrations of hospitals and home health aides. And more than 22,000 of its housing units have been designed or modified to accommodate older residents. This may be why several of local realtor® Laraine Stevens‘ clients in their 50s have relocated to the area from the oh-so-much-more-expensive Northeast. More of her buyers are seeking single-story homes or residences with ground-floor master suites.

“The cost of living is very affordable, and our taxes are lower compared to bigger cities,” says Stevens, of Berkshire Hathaway Home Services. “You have a more temperate climate. You’re not fighting the snow and the blizzards.”

2. Macon, GA

Median home list price: $156,600

Charming Macon, GA

SeanPavonePhoto/iStock

Maybe it’s the Southern hospitality that lands Macon—and other metros below the Mason-Dixon Line—on our list. But the lower expenses and steamier weather probably play an even larger part. Macon is experiencing an economic upswing that has filled once-empty storefronts with restaurants, shops, and even a few upscale markets.

Proximity to Mercer University gives the region a nice cultural boost, and there’s even a thriving museum district that includes the new Tubman Museum, devoted to African-American history.

But most importantly for lonely divorcées and widowers, Macon is one of the best places in the United States for single seniors. Almost half of its residents older than 50 are unattached. Let the hijinks begin!

3. Lake Havasu City, AZ

Median home list price: $254,900

The famous London Bridge in Lake Havasu.

Jerry Moorman/iStock

The metro near the junction of the California, Nevada, and Arizona borders is a tourist-friendly spot known as the home of the original London Bridge—yep, the one in the song, moved from the United Kingdom to Lake Havasu in 1968. But the real attraction here is the 290 days of sun a year, making the place a magnet for spring breakers and older Americans alike. In fact, Lake Havasu City boasts one of the highest percentages of senior citizens in the nation.

“It’s an active community,” says local real estate broker Liz Miller of Keller Williams Arizona Living Realty. She’s seeing more and more California refugees move in due to the year-round recreational activities. “Anything you want to do with water, you can do it here. And right now is an exciting time here.”

4. Vero Beach, FL

Median home list price: $299,500

Aerial view of Vero Beach, FL

CG-Photos/iStock

Finally, Florida shows up on our list.

The Sunshine State has long been a destination for seasonal refugees who trade high taxes and snow (a four-letter word for many older Americans) for no income tax and plenty of rounds at the golf course (which frequently involve more four-letter words). And indeed, Vero Beach’s impressive number of golf courses is what earned it a spot here. The city, located about halfway down the state’s Atlantic coast, has at least 16 golf courses, or one for every 9,500 residents. Plus, about half of its residents are older than 50. Put it all together, and you’ve got one heck of a lot of seniors hitting the links. Better reserve those tee times early. Fore!

5. Texarkana, TX

Median home list price: $159,500

The affordably priced metro, which straddles the border of Texas and Arkansas, has one of the highest percentages of residences adapted for those seeking to age in place. But that doesn’t mean folks here are housebound. Far from it! The city is home to Spring Lake Park, which offers disc golfing, fishing, and a primo walking and biking trail. And the local schools, Texarkana College and Texas A&M-Texarkana, offer a slew of free lectures and programs.

Oh, and there’s a ton of interesting/weird stuff to check out here, too. The Draughon-Moore Ace of Clubs House is a popular museum featuring furnishings going back to the early 1700s. The State Line Post Office is the only federal building in the U.S. that sits between two states. And the Texarkana Municipal Auditorium, site of some of Elvis’ best-known early concerts, is still going strong. Keep it real, Texarkana!

6. Saginaw, MI

Median home list price: $114,400

Looking for a bargain? Move to Saginaw. Those on a fixed income love this area’s low, low home prices. The metro, which was heavily dependent upon the automobile industry, fell on hard times when the American manufacturing economy began its slow collapse in the early 1980s. But it’s been aggressively coming back in recent years.

It now has a thriving downtown arts scene that includes a Japanese cultural center, tea house, and garden. Those seeking a bit more of an escape can explore the Shiawassee National Wildlife Refuge and participate in the many 5,000-meter runs held there.

The area is also a regional center for health care, boasting one of the highest ratios of home health aides in the U.S.

7. Redding, CA

Median home list price: $317,500

Shasta Lake, a popular location for Redding, CA, residents

4kodiak/iStock

The largest metro in northern California is also the highest-priced on our list. But the cost may be worth it for the most adventurous of boomers. The area is known for its abundance of outdoor recreational opportunities. Whether it’s rafting down the Sacramento River, touring the 300-acre Turtle Bay Exploration Park, or admiring the Sundial Bridge, which stretches across the Sacramento River, Redding has remade itself, from a sleepy logging town to a genuine destination.

Did we mention nearly nine out of 10 days in the California city are sunny? That may be why the region has a reputation as a cyclist’s haven. The League of American Wheelmen began weekly rides in the city way back in 1896.

8. Dothan, AL

Median Home List Price: $156,400

The Dothan area has emerged as the “Peanut Capital of the World” and is the home of a peanut festival that draws 120,000 visitors annually. Good luck beating those bragging rights.

On a slightly more pertinent note, Dothan has also emerged as a regional hub for health care and a way station for snowbirds traveling between the upper Midwest and Florida. It ranks high for its senior-friendly housing stock: More than 5% of its homes, or roughly 20,000 housing units, have been modified or built with aging-in-place features. These include perks like ground-floor master suites, wide hallways and doorways, and wheelchair ramps.

9. Shreveport, LA

Median home list price: $186,700

Tulip lights at Riverfront Park in Shreveport, LA

Beka_C/iStock

You don’t have to be a riverboat gambler to enjoy the Shreveport area. But it might just help pass the time. There are no fewer than a half-dozen casinos in the area, as well as Louisiana Downs, one of only three horse-racing tracks in the state.

Although Shreveport’s biggest employer is Barksdale Air Force Base, the city on the banks of the Red River has emerged as a regional center for health care. Shreveport also boasts the sixth-highest percentage of single people older than 50, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Local Realtor Jessica McGee wanted to give those singles something to do. She helped start up a singles group for locals in their 40s, 50s, and 60s. The group does movie nights, Mardi Gras cruises, and wine tastings. And McGee plans to organize a trip to a local escape room, where participants must find clues to unlock the door to a room and “escape.”

“There are a lot of activities here,” she says. “And you can get way more for your money here than you can in most states.”

10. Hickory, NC

Median home list price: $217,500

This furniture manufacturing hub may not spring immediately to mind when folks are thinking about places to retire. But hey, why not?

The city is a three-time winner of the National Civic League’s “All-American City Award,” an honor bestowed on places that attempt to solve the most important issues in their communities. There’s plenty to do here, including the requisite golf outings, the cool and inviting bars and restaurants, the Zumba classes. But we’ll focus on the awesome Furniture Mart, a sprawling year-round showcase where local artisans show off their craft. And you can buy the stuff! Can 500,000 visitors a year be wrong?

* Data comes from the U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, GolfNow Course Directory, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The post Forever Homes: The 10 Best Places in America to Age in Place appeared first on Real Estate News & Insights | realtor.com®.

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2wzsKo7

#DIYS

0 notes

healthpolicymaven · 7 years

Text

How America Co-opted the Future of Generation X and Y and How We Can Fix It

Bernie Sanders was no fluke, his appeal to the youth of Generation Y and to some extent Gen Xers is marked by real evidence showing how their futures have been muted by financial decisions made by Congress. The President of the nation, theoretically, is elected by us, although recent elections have shown the arcane electoral vote, meant to secure the democracy when many voters were illiterate, has called this into question. It turns out the electoral college is just another version of the “old boys club”. This article examines the social contract for Social Security which the United States has made with its working class and what that means for the future for your children and grandchildren, in other words, those whom will be paying the tab.

Payroll tax rate is based on wage income and is split evenly between the employer and the employee

In 1940- The Social Security tax was 1% capped at $3,000; Medicare did not exist then

In 1977- The SSI tax was 5.85% of wages, capped at $16,500; Does not include the Medicare tax

[1]

In 2017, the SSI tax is 12.4% of wages, capped at $127,200; Does not include the Medicare tax, which is separate

When Social Security was enacted, it was meant as a pension for those whom would otherwise be destitute. Retirement age, at which a beneficiary could start to draw benefits was age 65, when the law was enacted on August 14, 1935, by President Franklin Roosevelt. [2] Life expectancy at the time was 62.9 years, so as you can see, only the lucky ones received any benefit. Fast forward to 2017 and life expectancy is dependent on where you live, and other factors, some women will live past 86. But the mean life expectancy for all people living in the U.S. is 79 years.[3] This ranks the U.S. 49th in the world, below all countries with national health plans and at the bottom of all industrialized countries. South Korea, Jordan, and Hong King residents all live longer than Americans living in the U.S.

Currently, residents whom have met the minimal ten years of contributions under include-able wages are eligible to start drawing benefits as early as 62, with a reduction, or age 66 ½, depending on their birthdate. The government has an incentive, of 8% per year in increased benefits to delay until age 70.

Mean income is the earnings amount by which an equal number of workers are above and below this value

In 1940, the mean income was $1,368, with an unemployment rate of 18.26% and no unemployment benefits[4]

In 1977, mean incomes was $12,224, with an unemployment rate of 7.5%, with unemployment benefits

In 2017, the mean income is $44,980, [5] with an unemployment rate of 4.3% as of May [6]

Though the unemployment rate is certainly low in 2017, it was just a few years ago when the nation’s banking system collapsed due to junk bond deals packaging subpar mortgages as investments, and provided to people who could not afford them. This fraud was conducted by all levels of banks (Lehman Brothers) and the insurance industry (AIG), many of whom went bankrupt, but not until thousands of American homeowners lost everything first.

Purchasing Power-to maintain the same value this is how much you would need

$1 in 1940

Would need to be $4.33 in 1977

And $17.47 in 2017

Earnings needed to maintain equivalent value of mean wage in 1940

$1,368 in 1940 would need to be

$5,921.49 in 1977 and

$23,893.49 in 2017

Though gross wages have increased over the years, real purchasing power has not kept up, as this table shows. Americans are only making a little over twice the 1940 per worker mean wage, when you adjust for inflation. The mean wage for all working Americans, which isn’t the average, but the midpoint, with an equal number of workers falling below the standard and above it, is currently $44,980 annually. So, for 77 years, this is not a lot of progress for workers, mainly because they have fallen behind since the 1970’s. Rising productivity of American workers has not resulted in a commensurate rise in wages for most workers, so the Republican trickle-down theory hasn’t worked. Real rise in wages, adjusted for inflation has been stagnant since 1980, the Reagan era.

Change Social Security to a Farer More Secure System

Currently, a worker in the United States must accumulate forty quarters or ten years with earnings of at least $1,260 a quarter or $420 a month, to be eligible to apply for full social security benefits, depending on their age. Wow, what a deal, all you must do is work for a week each quarter, based on the current U.S. wage and you will have a pension! We can all think of our aunties and grandmas who took advantage of this benefit, by working part-time low-wage jobs, not because they needed to, but for spending money. I can’t think of any other part-time low wage job that comes with a lifetime pension.

Change #1 Social Security Benefits should be based on fulltime earnings for at least 10 years, not part-time. Working part-time does not guarantee you a pension.

Change #2 Social Security should pay more to workers who work longer, for example, workers who work unceasingly for 40 or 50 years, should get a larger benefit than those who work only 10 or 20 years, it is the time value of money. This would change the incentive from “do your bit to get minimum benefits’, to contributing longer for a proportionally greater earned reward. Though currently, Social Security offers a sizeable benefit increase to those who wait until maximum retirement age of 70, it does not look at the length of service.

Spousal benefit provisions under Social Security allow full benefits to inure to persons who marry multiple times, ala Donald Trump. Though the worker’s tax contribution to the social security fund was capped, apparently the benefits which may be paid out are not. For example, a spouse, either male or female can elect to claim 50% of the partner’s social security benefits. Essentially, this means the value of the Social Security payout has increased by 50%, without paying additional taxes. And here is the real pot sweetener, anyone who has been married for ten years and has not remarried before age 60, gets this extra windfall election. The ex-wife can claim a benefit of 50% of her husband’s social security benefits, years after the divorce, but this doesn’t reduce his take, it is just a bonus to her from the federal government. And, the current wife (male or female) is still eligible to claim her share of the spouse’s social security pay out as well.

Change #3 You are welcome to marry as many times as you can stand, but the government is under no obligation to support your multiple wives/husbands. The total spousal benefit needs to be revised and social security benefits paid to ex-betrotheds should come out of a limited benefit based on the working spouse’s contributions. In other words, if $300,000 is allocated for spousal benefits, that amount must be allocated between all the former “love-of-my-life’s,” not increased exponentially because of salacious decisions.

Survivor benefits can be collected by widows or widowers as early as age 60 and this means, if your spouse has died and was collecting Social Security or was eligible to collect, you can elect to collect full benefits, based on your spouse’s social security. Later, you can decide to switch to your own benefit, if it would pay more money.

Change #4 This seems like gambling against the house and holding the aces; once you start drawing your social security benefits, you don’t get a do-over. If you select your half of his benefits at age 60, that is what you get.

Survivor benefits for children, are only payable for unmarried children until age 18 or 19, if they are still in high school. Children of a disabled or deceased social security participant are eligible to receive benefits if the parent had paid enough into the system, which we discussed, is a mere ten years of earnings. Since it sucks to lose a parent, or to have a disabled one, let’s leave this as is.

Social security taxes have doubled in the last forty years and are not keeping up with the benefits which will be paid out to baby boomers, whom are now starting to enjoy their unreduced benefits. Since the younger generation will most assuredly be expected to pay higher taxes in Social Security and of course, Medicare, we need to shore up their future. It is time to have a national pension or Individual retirement account for those under age 45. Designate part of what they contribute to Social Security to their own private account, ideally 50%, but I will leave that up to U.S. Treasury and Social Security Administration to discern. The money contributed to Social Security, would not be able to be borrowed against and hence, safe from creditors, could not be used for medical care, and would not be accessible until age 62.

Change #5 Let Gen Xers and Generation Y start their own government protected individual retirement accounts. At least they will have some money for their future and they won’t have to feel so bad about paying those extra taxes for boomer benefits.

It is time for older Americans to wake up to the debt we have left our youth, who will be paying for our bad decisions for a lifetime. If I hear one more senior citizen, enjoying their social security checks and Medicare complain we can’t have socialism, I am going to remove your dentures. And this is the healthpolicymaven signing off encouraging you not to sign blanket releases when you are admitted to a hospital, please add the line, “I agree to pay for services of in-network providers,” as recommended by Dr. Elizabeth Rosenthal in her book, How Healthcare Became Big Business and How We Can Take It Back.”[7]

This article was written by Roberta E. Winter, a freelance journalist and author of https://www.amazon.com/Unraveling-U-S-Health-Care-Personal/dp/1442222972

[1] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/cbb.html

[2] https://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html

[3] http://www.geoba.se/population.php?pc=world&type=15

[4] https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2012/spring/1940.html

[5] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t19.htm

[6] http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/national-employment-monthly-update.aspx

[7] http://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/book-review/sickness

#Reforming Social Security for Gen Y and Gen Xers

0 notes

realtor10036 · 8 years

Text

Guess Which Generation Is Making the Biggest Comeback in Real Estate

20th Century Fox; realtor.com

Doc Martens are back in fashion, this time on the shelves at Nordstrom. Hollywood starlets sport ’90s choker necklaces and Nirvana T-shirts. And guess what? Generation X home buyers are making their comeback, too.

Gen X may not be getting as much attention these days as the (forever) up-and-coming millennial generation, but it’s making its mark on the housing market as the only generation to buy more homes last year than it did in the previous one, according to the latest National Association of Realtors® Home Buyer and Seller Generational Trends survey. Nearly 5,500 home buyers who purchased a house between July 2015 and June 2016 answered the 132-question survey. Their responses were compared with results from the previous 12-month period.

The folks once labeled as slackers, now aged 37 to 51, went from making up just 26% of home buyers to purchasing about 28% of properties.

“That group suffered the most” in the last recession, says Chief Economist Jonathan Smoke of realtor.com®. “They were entering homeownership at the peak of the housing bubble and were also the ones most likely to suffer job losses.”

So when the housing market crashed, many of their homes were suddenly underwater. And since many Gen Xers owed more than their homes were worth, they were stuck.

Why Gen Xers are back big-time Generation X is buying more homes.

Stewart Cohen/Getty Images

But with a stronger economy, housing values, and job market, the tide has begun to turn. The generation of Americans forever enshrined in iconic ’90s flicks like “Reality Bites” and “Singles” is storming back into the home-buying market.

“Now, they’re actually in their prime earning years,” Smoke says. “And they’re also far more likely to have families. It makes complete sense that they’re coming back.”

In fact, Gen Xers are the largest generation with the kids still living at home, says Jessica Lautz, NAR’s managing director of survey research. So “they may be moving for a better school district or into a home that just has an extra bedroom to accommodate their children,” she says.

And they also happen to be the group making the most money these days. All the better to be able to afford that four-bedroom, 2.5-bath stunner with killer views and a hot tub out back.

Gen Xers raked in a median $106,600 a year, according to the survey. In comparison, younger boomers (aged 52 to 61) earned about $93,800 and millennials (36 and younger) brought home about $82,000. The typical buyer, across all generations, made a median $88,500.

In addition, low mortgage interest rates have also spurred Gen Xers (along with everyone else) into the market, says Realtor® Judy Dooley of Nebraska Realty, based in Omaha, NE.

“We’re seeing people get out of their current houses and shopping around to get a bigger and more expensive house,” she says. “Their children are getting older and maybe moving on to college. They might be wanting to … move into something like a ranch-style house or maybe a smaller house with more amenities.”

But Gen X still isn’t the generation buying the most homes

Gen Xers may be the only age group buying more homes than they did a year ago. But they’re not buying the most homes. That distinction goes to millennials, who make up a much larger swath of the population.

The whippersnappers scooped up about 34% of the homes on the market, similar to the 35% they nabbed a year earlier. Their homes were also the cheapest, at a median $205,000. That’s compared with a median $261,000 for Gen Xers and $230,000 for younger boomers.

“The millennials are a sleeping giant,” says public policy professor Dowell Myers at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. “They should be big home buyers over the next five years as long as the credit markets are willing and the supply [of available properties] exists.”

Boomer buyers also saw a very minor dip from 31% to 30% year over year, according to the survey. Similarly, the so-called Silent Generation, aged 71 to 91, went from 9% to 8%.

Who’s buying where? The answer just might surprise you Surprise, surprise! More millennials are buying homes in the suburbs.

Mari/iStock

Despite all the buzz about millennials loving big-city life, more are trading their cramped urban apartments for life in the suburbs. It’s actually baby boomers who are buying the most urban abodes. They’re the ones with the most accumulated cash to be able to pull it off.

Only about 15% of millennials bought homes in urban areas, according to the survey. That’s down from 17% the year before and 21% the year before that.

Meanwhile, 57% of them bought homes in the suburbs (as distinct from small towns or rural areas), compared with 51% a year earlier.

Better get used to this stark fact: Millennials are growing up.

“They act differently when they’re 30 than when they’re 25,” says Myers. “When they’re younger, they’re happy living in a two-bedroom apartment. When they’re 30, most have partners and have kids—or they’re planning to. That totally changes their housing needs.”

It’s also worth noting that many of the suburbs that they’re moving to aren’t what they used to be.

“Increasingly we’re seeing suburban communities transforming to include more urban-style amenities, because they want to attract the millennials,” says Lynn Richards, president and CEO of the Congress for the New Urbanism, a Washington, DC–based group focused on helping communities become more walkable.

In addition to walkability, these younger homeowners are on the prowl for “a choice of transportation and cultural amenities like fields for kickball, softball, and ultimate Frisbee as well as bars and music venues,” adds Richards.

Meanwhile, 22% of boomers bought homes in urban areas and 49% purchased homes in the suburbs. Older buyers are increasingly seeking to downsize from their bigger, single-family homes out in the sticks once their kids fly the coop and move into fun urban areas with tons of things to do as they veer toward retirement.

Boomers buying homes for themselves—and their (extended) families

Another emerging trend: Baby boomers are now more likely to buy homes not just for themselves—but also for their aging parents and adult kids saddled with student debt.

About 20% of boomers bought a multigenerational home in the past year compared with 16% a year earlier. This is often a home with separate living quarters for their loved ones.

“With rising rents and rising home prices, it becomes increasingly difficult for the younger generations to live independently,”says NAR’s Lautz. “But living with parents could be a very good opportunity to save for their own down payment for a future home.”

And it makes more than just economic sense, says John Graham, co-author of “All in the Family: A Practical Guide to Successful Multigenerational Living.”

“The whole notion of two parents, a kid, a dog, and a white picket fence is going away,” he says. “Grandparents help with childcare. Teenage children help with elder care.”

The post Guess Which Generation Is Making the Biggest Comeback in Real Estate appeared first on Real Estate News & Advice | realtor.com®.

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2mXoJsV

#DIYS

0 notes

realestate63141 · 8 years