Most Millennials are not living in the dense urban cores. (apartments, house)

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by hautemomma

Even those preferences or inclinations are informed by parenting and culture, not a default setting because of the years in which one was born.

Also, you are suggesting that an urban setting automatically confers more social and greater life experiences. That is presumptuous and shaded by your own preferences. Lots of smaller communities are known for closer-knit, more substantive social networks, and life experiences encompass lots of room for interpretation in terms of what is good or valued.

For younger millenials, oftentimes yes. That might change once they get older and start a family however.

[hautemomma]

Good points, SedimenJerry.

Few people fit neatly in a box (I know I don't!). The narrative about Millennials seems to focus on only one demographic, usually white, in or near a major metro area with educated or relatively affluent parents. This leaves a lot of peopl out, many for whom a home in the suburbs, settling down with kids or living in the boonies is idyllic. We must always consider the source(s).

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by cqholt

They can't afford to live there. 35% live in older, neighborhoods. Which in Atlanta would equate to intown, streetcar suburbs, but even those are getting expensive.
Millennials Are Living in Cities, But Can't Afford to Rent Downtown - CityLab

In other words, a lot more Millennials are living in Old Fourth, Virginia-Highlands, Brookhaven, etc. than they are in Buckhead, Downtown, or the heart of Midtown.

That jives very well with my personal observations.

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by hautemomma

Good points, SedimenJerry.

Few people fit neatly in a box (I know I don't!). The narrative about Millennials seems to focus on only one demographic, usually white, in or near a major metro area with educated or relatively affluent parents. This leaves a lot of peopl out, many for whom a home in the suburbs, settling down with kids or living in the boonies is idyllic. We must always consider the source(s).

This too.

[atltechdude]

Quite honestly, as a millennial, I'm getting a bit uncomfortable with what seems like this intense focus on what millennials want, as if we're the only people that matter anymore.

[Gulch]

Originally Posted by atltechdude

Quite honestly, as a millennial, I'm getting a bit uncomfortable with what seems like this intense focus on what millennials want, as if we're the only people that matter anymore.

It's called kotowing to the 18-34 demographic, and it's been happening for decades.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by bu2

There is. I took programming courses back in the stone age in college when we used key punch machines and carried around boxes of cards with our programs. I did a lot on the computer and did some programming of my own related to work when most people were just beginning to use computers and "luggables." But I am not nearly so connected with all this social media as the people nowadays. I have different ways of connecting. I don't feel the need to access the internet anytime, anywhere.

A lot of us older folks have discovered that we don't have to be checking the Facebook everywhere we go.

We are okay with old technology like writing on paper and actually talking to people in person. It's wireless and you don't have worry about battery life.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

lol

really though, let me give my reasoning for why i disagree, and see if you can see where i'm coming from:

to be quite honest i think the 1980 date is chosen primarily because it's from when the most census data is available. they do similar statistics with 20 year age groups like 1940-1960 that they refer to as "baby boomers", even though nobody born before the end of the war in 1945 can even be classified as such.

i tend to see the generations like this, give or take a year or two of course:

1905-1925: GI / Greatest Generation, ending in 1925 because few born after that date (my grandpa was an exception, 1927) would have been old enough to fight in or participate in the war effort. the people born in the middle of this generation (1910-1920) would absolutely qualify as being in this category, with the later and earlier years being a bit more fuzzy.

1925-1945: Silent Generation: means the "strong, silent" children born during the great depression. obviously children born after 1945, which is also the date of the major switch over to suburban development, would have not had the experiences of the great depression. the people born in the middle of this generation (1930-1940) would absolutely qualify as being in this category, with the later and earlier years being a bit more fuzzy.

1945-1965: Baby Boomers. it's pretty clear that the baby boom started post-war, but the end of the generation is a bit less clear. what is clear is the massive amount of social change that occurred in the mid 60s, with the civil rights movement, the hippies, and the de-censorship of the media, changed the world forever. i would imagine that children born after this change would very much have a different experience than those born before. the people born in the middle of this generation (1950-1960) would absolutely qualify as being in this category, with the later and earlier years being a bit more fuzzy.

1965-1985: Generation X. actually originally called "generation 10", and then shortened to the roman numeral X. the 1985 end date, i think, is important. the main reasons behind this are that a child born in 1980, or even 1982, would have been a teenager by the time the internet became a common mode of communication (AOL was started in 1994). any child born up to at least 1983 would be able to remember ronald reagan being president, the challenger explosion, and the cold war. however, a child born in 1985 or later would probably not remember any of these things, and would likely have a different world view. as with the others, the people born in the middle of this generation (1970-1980) would absolutely qualify as being in this category, with the later and earlier years being a bit more fuzzy.

1985-2005: Millennials. markedly different traits of millennials include being introduced to computer and internet technology in childhood, all having been in grade school or younger when 9/11 occured, and being the generation to bear the brunt of the recession. think about it, a child born in 1980 would have graduated high school in 98 or 99, graduated college in the mid-2000s, and would already have been in a career by the time the recession hit. a child born in 1985 might be able to make the same claim, but not as likely. any child born between 1990-2000, the middle of this generation, would have all of these traits.

i've thought about this quite a lot and i still don't understand the 1980 starting date. i was born in 1990 and i really only barely feel like a millennial, as i had graduated high school by the time the recession hit, and i remember not having a personal computer or cell phone in the house. i can't possibly imagine someone born in 1980 being classified as a millennial. it's not that i'm trying to be exclusionary, but someone born in 1980 by definition has had a radically different life experience than i have, and i truly think the 1980 date is way too early.

Interesting analysis. I've seen breakdowns like this before.

However, all the 1980-1985 people I know consider themselves Millennials. Complete, die-hard Millennials.

I've even met several 1978/79ers that call themselves Millennials.


I don't know...

[aries4118]

"Generation" on @Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation?wprov=sfii1

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by Pemgin

I think what some of you are failing to understand about millenials is that many of them value social and life experiences over money or things. You can live for several hundred dollars cheaper in, say, Lawrenceville than you can in Inman Park, but at a high social cost. Being 20 something and socially isolated like that sucks. If you can afford intown COL and value being where the action is, you're going to be way happier than putting all of it in savings and living somewhere that makes you extremely unhappy.

i think this hits the nail on the head. people my age would rather be able to live as close in as we can get, and be right next door to friends, be able to get beers after work a few times a week, and eat out more often. this comes at the cost of spending less on the traditional luxuries our parents enjoyed like expensive cars, a fancy kitchen or big screen TV, and expensive clothing. it's not that we have more money (we actually have less), it's just that we prioritize things a bit differently.