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.
This is part of the problem with American culture. Everything goes according to this dumb time line society created and the people are dumb enough to believe in it. No wonder we are the nation with the highest number of people depressed and we are one of the nation's with the highest rape, child molestations, drug use, etc.
People can't keep up. And it drives them to do dumb things. If we just became laid back and chilled up. The better we all would become. I don't see what is wrong with a 28 yr old living at. So long as he or she is doing chores and not mean with the parents.
I never said there's anything wrong with a 28 year old living at home. I was just saying it's not as socially acceptable as a 20 year old living at home. And I was pointing out how 22 is a minimum to support yourself. Before 22 is just completely unrealistic in this day and age. Ok, maybe 21. But no lower. I think the much older posters have a hard time grasping this concept of how times have changed.
Just because an 18 year old could support themself in the 1950s doesn't mean they can today
I left home at 19 and never went back. My parents were lovely liberal people for the most part and I loved them, but I could not wait to leave. Living on the bones of my a$$ was better than living at home.
I like to call this generation the leech generation. They stay at home mooching a fair bit and refuse to take too many responsibilities for being an adult. "I'm only 26, I'm too young to be completely responsible for myself...and if I leave and have to pay for my rent and food I won't have any money for the latest 4G phone and all the other electronics I can't live without".
I usually just read, and don't respond to things on CD, but lumping all folks age 20-28 into a group and calling us "the leech generation" really sets me off. As a member of what you call "the leech generation" I really resent what you're saying. Sure some of us in this age bracket are leeches...but that's true of people in any and every age bracket. People mooch off others and take advantage of the system b/c that's how they're raised, and it happens all the time, not just to young folks.
I've lived on my own since I was 19, and while my parents helped me some when I was in college and grad school and such, I've been taking care of myself largely by myself, since I was 22 and done with my undergrad. I am 26 years old, and am completely responsible for myself. I have a 24 year old sister who, not going to lie, the "leech generation" title is perhaps a bit more descriptive of, but rather than have her stress my parents out when she needs money by bothering them for it, I have her come to me and I help her (while also sending a small "allowance" to my mom--her term, not mine, to start repaying her for all the money and help she gave me when I was a struggling college student, which she really appreciates now that she's retired). I have some nice and new things, but I know how to budget and ensure that all my bills are paid (including a hefty student loan payment) before splurging on luxuries (b/c the latest and greatest phone and all that other fun stuff are luxuries, not necessities and there are some people, young and old, who understand this).
Sorry for the rambling, moral of the story is that not all young people deserve to be called members of the "leech generation", b/c a lot of us work VERY hard to provide for ourselves and do not mooch off of others, and your sweeping generalizations are absolutely ridiculous.
I never said there's anything wrong with a 28 year old living at home. I was just saying it's not as socially acceptable as a 20 year old living at home. And I was pointing out how 22 is a minimum to support yourself. Before 22 is just completely unrealistic in this day and age. Ok, maybe 21. But no lower. I think the much older posters have a hard time grasping this concept of how times have changed.
Just because an 18 year old could support themself in the 1950s doesn't mean they can today
where did you come up with this line of horse shoot??? this one almost takes the cake
can we have a thread "dumbest statement of the day"?
I never said there's anything wrong with a 28 year old living at home. I was just saying it's not as socially acceptable as a 20 year old living at home. And I was pointing out how 22 is a minimum to support yourself. Before 22 is just completely unrealistic in this day and age. Ok, maybe 21. But no lower. I think the much older posters have a hard time grasping this concept of how times have changed.
Just because an 18 year old could support themself in the 1950s doesn't mean they can today
where did you come up with this line of horse shoot??? this one almost takes the cake
can we have a thread "dumbest statement of the day"?
Ok, why don't I revise what I said: Just because an 18 year old could support themself in the 1950s doesn't mean they can today. Unless they happen to be a celebrity or have a lot of money for some reason. Or they have completely neglectful parents.
we now have a nominee for the second dumbest statement of the day
come on city boy , do you think people believe this line of horse hockey your spewing??--- your losing every speck of credibility you ever had
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.
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.
this one almost takes the cake
