U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-30-2014, 08:14 AM
 
20,083 posts, read 11,142,800 times
Reputation: 20121

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
How big was this movement? I certainly haven't met many people whose families were farmers and moved to the burbs.
It was freaking huge. It began during the Depression (which, remember, was combined with a massive drought in the Great Plains--the Dustbowl Era) in which thousands of farmers lost their farms and began moving to the city to find jobs. That had an even greater impression on their children--the kids who would become the War Generation. But even during the Depression, industry was growing in the North East and Midwest, and there was far more job potential than on the drought-striken farms.

Industrialization took an enormous leap during WWII. The industry demands pulled even more people into the cities (those who didn't go to war).

Then after the war, contractors began marketing the housing concepts they'd developed for the federal government during the war. The Federal government VA Loan program was directly pointed toward subsidizing veterans buying into those suburban tract developments rather than renting in the city.

Combined with the GI Bill that fully paid the cost of a former-farmer veteran to learn an industrial skill, everything was set to grow the suburbs.

 
Old 07-30-2014, 03:54 PM
 
Location: St. George, Utah
756 posts, read 883,053 times
Reputation: 1971
I don't know the difference in size between the Millennials' and Boomers' generation, but I really think that is the only solid consideration in this whole conversation re: precipitously falling values of larger Boomer homes. Perhaps the argument that the current generation of young workers is having a harder time getting established will be relevant as well, time will tell.

As for "the younger generation prefers a more urban lifestyle", "Millennial's don't share the 'ownership' value" etc. etc.--these are pretty broad assumptions being viewed through some apparently hipster glasses. I don't think we can make predictions on the long-term real estate market based on current trends (and I do mean trendy trends) and style preferences of what would be in my experience the minority of people that age in any case.

As mentioned above, young families will nearly always seek more space for less money balanced with a livable commute. I don't see this changing. The young clients I work with as a Realtor are not really looking for the hip urban apartment (yes, we have those here). Or they do look, and then they buy the tract house. Because they get real. And then they have a child or two, and they're back looking for something bigger, or deciding to build an addition. So I have a hard time seeing these same clients sniffing at the size or location of a Boomer's suburban home. The mauve carpet, yes. The watercolor-brushstroke wallpaper, yes. The pickled-oak kitchen cabinets, definitely.

Who knows what people will want, what it will cost to heat a house, what family sizes will look like in 20 years? No one. Just like no one predicted that not ALL retiring Boomers would want to downsize into a 2 bedroom one bath condo. Just like no one predicted that a housing boom predicated on buyers borrowing money with no ability to pay it back would end up...oh, wait, some of us did predict that one...lol

All this predictifying is a little silly. (Of course, I hope it's true, and I'll buy me a big 'ole house to grow old in for cheap.)

It's interesting to discuss, and I'll be interested to watch it play out, but that's about it. No one knows.

As for driving (the, uh, topic at hand) I do think the Boomer demand will do us all a big favor (oh, finally!) in speeding along the development of self-driving cars. So there's one thing my generation will thank them for.
 
Old 07-30-2014, 04:46 PM
 
4,125 posts, read 3,777,519 times
Reputation: 11318
Oh, it's gonna be scary! This is the generation that has always thought the world was made entirely and exclusively for them - and it has been! When they were little kids, and needed stay-at-home mothers, virtually no women worked outside the home. When they hit their teens and wanted to play irresponsibly, we had the sixties hippy era. When they hit their late teens and wanted to have sex, we had the sexual revolution. When they were tired of wandering around with no possessions, they became the most materialistic generation the world had ever seen - the "yuppies". There is no way in hell that they are going to give up driving just because they might kill someone else.

Agreed, the aging of the Boomers is what's going to bring about an explosion of self-driving cars. But it will probably follow after the bulge of the Boomer generation has passed on.
 
Old 07-30-2014, 05:31 PM
 
12,289 posts, read 15,184,803 times
Reputation: 8100
I forgot to mention: in States where drunk driving laws are strictly enforced, some elderly parents are driving their adult children around. Of course this compounds the problem when they lose the ability or desire to drive.
 
Old 07-30-2014, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Tucson for awhile longer
8,872 posts, read 13,543,222 times
Reputation: 29032
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140 View Post
... This is really not a problem.
Oh yes it is. Many elderly people live nowhere near their children or grandchildren and, even if they do, their relatives may be unable or unwilling to act as chauffeurs. Most seniors don't want to lose their mobility and they fail to recognize (or refuse to acknowledge even if they do recognize) the fact that their driving skills have worsened. So they don't ask for help. They may reduce the number of miles they drive (or stop driving at night) but they are still on the highway with their limited mobility and reduced reaction times and cognitive abilities. Just because many of your relatives drove well into their 90s doesn't mean it's a good idea. The fatality rate for drivers over 85 years old is nine times as high as the rate for drivers between 25 and 69 years old.

According to a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study, senior citizens only account for 9% of the population, but are involved in almost 14% of fatal traffic accidents and 17% of fatal pedestrian accidents. Statistics show the as age increases, so does the likelihood that an elderly driver will be involved in an accident, especially those involving serious injury. While drivers age 60 have nearly an identical accident rate to drivers age 30, once a person is over 70 the accident rates climb quickly.

The actual numbers of accidents experienced in elderly drivers may seem small, but not when measured (as they should be) in comparison to NUMBER OF MILES DRIVEN. In that case, elders have about the same accident rates as teen drivers. A 2000 study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology reports, "an 80-year-old male driver has a 121% higher death rate per licensed driver and a 662% higher death rate per mile driven than a 40-year-old male driver." Similar differences were collected on female drivers.

Driving After the Age of 70: Higher Car Accident Rates for Elderly Drivers | Trolman, Glaser & Lichtman, P.C. | New York, New York
https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/...DriverRisk.pdf

As our population ages, the number of elderly drivers on the road will continue to rise.
 
Old 07-30-2014, 06:46 PM
 
Location: Nescopeck, Penna. (birthplace)
12,351 posts, read 7,501,291 times
Reputation: 15950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
It was freaking huge. It began during the Depression (which, remember, was combined with a massive drought in the Great Plains--the Dustbowl Era) in which thousands of farmers lost their farms and began moving to the city to find jobs. That had an even greater impression on their children--the kids who would become the War Generation. But even during the Depression, industry was growing in the North East and Midwest, and there was far more job potential than on the drought-striken farms.

Industrialization took an enormous leap during WWII. The industry demands pulled even more people into the cities (those who didn't go to war).

Then after the war, contractors began marketing the housing concepts they'd developed for the federal government during the war. The Federal government VA Loan program was directly pointed toward subsidizing veterans buying into those suburban tract developments rather than renting in the city.

Combined with the GI Bill that fully paid the cost of a former-farmer veteran to learn an industrial skill, everything was set to grow the suburbs.
The picture is clouded by a lot of variations in just how the children of farmers left the farm. My grandfather raised four sons and two daughters. The daughters "married out", and three of the sons built houses on the farm property. My Dad took over the farm, and one of the three houses when one son moved to the Philadelphia suburbs. The other two remained in their on-farm houses for the res of their days.

In addition, many medium sized cities in the Upper Midwest/Great Lakes area hired local farm boys as apprentices -- Lima, Ohio was a good example. When the market for heavy industrial goods collapsed, the farm boys returned to the old homestead and subsisted on farming and odd jobs until the economy recovered.

Finally, many former farm households still grow a "cash crop" of corn or soybeans while one or two partners also hold down jobs, or they lease the land to someone who farms it. This practice can continue for generations.
 
Old 07-30-2014, 06:50 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,987 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Ok, however what I was referring to, the parents of people I know moved in the 80s or late 70s.
As we all know, statisitics don't mean much regarding individual people. There is no question the movement to the suburbs hugely accelerated in the post war years, and I don't mean post Vietnam or Desert Storm, I mean WWII. We've only talked about this for the past 4 years of this forum, with people posting supposedly horrifying pictures of the first Levittown, etc. Taking a look at Pittsburgh's population, the city's population reached its peak in 1950. Pittsburgh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The metro area, however, continued to grow until 1970,when the steel industry started to decline. In fact, the metro grew about 50% from 1950 to 1960.
Historical Metropolitan Populations of the United States - Peakbagger.com

Denver, which experienced no such economic crisis, though it did see a few recessions in the 80s, grew until 1970, then declined until 2000. Denver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Over those 30 years, the MSA grew every year but one, and that decline occurred during a severe recession.
Denver-Aurora, CO MSA Population and Components of Change -- Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University Home
 
Old 07-30-2014, 07:15 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,987 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
People saying "it's none of your business" are people who are fearful of their own situation and in my opinion will only hurt themselves. Having a child as thoughtful as you to be thinking of their well-being and ability to enjoy their later years without being restricted is a wonderful thing. IMO our society would be so much better off if people were responsible enough to be open to discussing these sorts of things collaboratively to make things better for everyone.
Oh, for Ford's Sake! Can the armchair psychology, Dr. Sigmund Fraud. rwiksell's parents do not have dementia. They are in their 60s! They're probably still working. Surely you have co-workers in their 60s who you consider your colleagues. Adult kids regularly tell their parents to "MYOB", and we parents have learned to NEVER offer advice. These people have managed their affairs successfully for 40+years. Why do they need some whippersnapper telling them to sell their house b/c the whippersnapper, not the parents, thinks it's too big? The whipper also thinks there's going to be a housing crash. Well, maybe there will be and maybe there won't be. The parents are still likely to get way more back than they paid for the house.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jukesgrrl View Post
Oh yes it is. Many elderly people live nowhere near their children or grandchildren and, even if they do, their relatives may be unable or unwilling to act as chauffeurs. Most seniors don't want to lose their mobility and they fail to recognize (or refuse to acknowledge even if they do recognize) the fact that their driving skills have worsened. So they don't ask for help. They may reduce the number of miles they drive (or stop driving at night) but they are still on the highway with their limited mobility and reduced reaction times and cognitive abilities. Just because many of your relatives drove well into their 90s doesn't mean it's a good idea. The fatality rate for drivers over 85 years old is nine times as high as the rate for drivers between 25 and 69 years old.

According to a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study, senior citizens only account for 9% of the population, but are involved in almost 14% of fatal traffic accidents and 17% of fatal pedestrian accidents. Statistics show the as age increases, so does the likelihood that an elderly driver will be involved in an accident, especially those involving serious injury. While drivers age 60 have nearly an identical accident rate to drivers age 30, once a person is over 70 the accident rates climb quickly.

The actual numbers of accidents experienced in elderly drivers may seem small, but not when measured (as they should be) in comparison to NUMBER OF MILES DRIVEN. In that case, elders have about the same accident rates as teen drivers. A 2000 study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology reports, "an 80-year-old male driver has a 121% higher death rate per licensed driver and a 662% higher death rate per mile driven than a 40-year-old male driver." Similar differences were collected on female drivers.

Driving After the Age of 70: Higher Car Accident Rates for Elderly Drivers | Trolman, Glaser & Lichtman, P.C. | New York, New York
https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/...DriverRisk.pdf

As our population ages, the number of elderly drivers on the road will continue to rise.
The sky is falling, isn't it? The OLDEST Boomers, the oldest mind you, are turning 68 this year. Most of us are still working. Some Boomers are at the height of their careers, in their 50s.

And a link from a group of PI lawyers? Here's what the CDC, which I consider a more reliable source, says:
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafet...factsheet.html
**Per mile traveled, fatal crash rates increase starting at age 75 and increase notably after age 80. This is largely due to increased susceptibility to injury and medical complications among older drivers rather than an increased tendency to get into crashes.4**

Your anti-elderly bias is amazing!!!

Last edited by Katarina Witt; 07-30-2014 at 08:17 PM..
 
Old 07-30-2014, 09:02 PM
 
Location: Pacific Northwest
56 posts, read 27,493 times
Reputation: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by luzianne View Post
If they are too feeble to drive, they most CERTAINLY would be too feeble to walk or take mass transit.
Not necessarily. People don't just stop driving because they're "feeble". They also stop driving (or, hopefully, they do) because their eyesight diminishes and/or their reflexes become too slow to drive safely. But they may still be in good shape otherwise, and capable of walking and using mass transit. This has been the case with my dad, who's now in his 90s. He hasn't driven a car in 20 years, but he has remained vital and active and gets around quite well.
 
Old 07-30-2014, 09:14 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,987 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemissa View Post
Not necessarily. People don't just stop driving because they're "feeble". They also stop driving (or, hopefully, they do) because their eyesight diminishes and/or their reflexes become too slow to drive safely. But they may still be in good shape otherwise, and capable of walking and using mass transit. This has been the case with my dad, who's now in his 90s. He hasn't driven a car in 20 years, but he has remained vital and active and gets around quite well.
Your dad is one person. I'm glad he's getting around. However, having worked with many elderly as a visiting nurse, it's more likely that by the time they can't drive, they can't walk to the bus stop or down the street to the coffee shop, either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top