Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, February 08, 2014

In January, the U.S. Department of Education released a kind of "Where Are They Now" report on Americans it had begun surveying a decade ago when they were high school sophomores. The approximately 13,000 participants in the 2012 follow-up survey were around the age of 26. The data on "current living arrangements" were particularly interesting: 22.6 percent were living with their parents, compared with 42.3 percent living with a spouse or partner, 18.9 percent living alone, 10 percent living with roommate(s) and 6.2 percent in an "other" living situation. According to a Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data 16 percent of 25- to 31-year-olds were crashing with mom and pop -- up from about 14 percent in 2007 and 10 percent in 1968.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

MUSTANG

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

[snif] shedding a small tear of pride...

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Not at all surprised.

#1 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-02-07 04:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

The new normal.

#2 | Posted by KBM at 2014-02-07 04:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

3 in 6 DR posters live at home with their parents.

#3 | Posted by paneocon at 2014-02-07 05:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Counts Afkababbles out..he lives in yesterday

#4 | Posted by drewinnj at 2014-02-07 05:13 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

3 in 6 DR posters live at home with their parents.
#3 | POSTED BY PANEOCON

What a lazy statistic. You could have just have easily, and more appropriately, said it's 1 in 2.

Public school, right? Yeah, me too.

#5 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-02-07 05:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

There was a time this was normal in America.

Of course it predates WWI.

The big question is are they looking for good work?

#6 | Posted by Tor at 2014-02-07 05:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

public school must suck outside of connecticut.

#7 | Posted by klifferd at 2014-02-07 05:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is a glaring statement about where our nation is heading for our future.

#8 | Posted by moneywar at 2014-02-07 06:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's a good way to save some money if you're still single.

#9 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-02-07 07:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Let's see here, so we send 5 million jobs overseas and let 11 million Mexicans cross the border during the housing bubble and then you expect different results?

Definition of stupidity.

Now they want to pass TPP with Fast Track....if we let them then our kids will be living with us when they are 50. Or, more likely, we'll be living with them in a homeless shelter.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2014-02-07 07:26 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

It's a good way to save some money if you're still single.
#9 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

I concur, if they are working....... but for some reason I don't think thats the case.

Let's see here, so we send 5 million jobs overseas and let 11 million Mexicans cross the border during the housing bubble and then you expect different results?
Definition of stupidity. - Danni

I agree completely with the numbers, the 11million have been accumulating over a much longer time, but this is a minor sticking point.

But when did you turn the corner on illegal immigrants? I recall you pushing the idea that they add to the economy.

#11 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-02-07 07:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's a good way to save some money if you're still single.
#9 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

That's what I was thinking. More and more people are putting off marriage. I'm sure the cohabitation variable is at play here.

#12 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-02-07 07:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

I concur, if they are working....... but for some reason I don't think thats the case.

Don't bother expounding on that reason, or anything.

:-P

#13 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-02-07 07:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Haven't had this problem. My kids are gainfully employed and supporting themselves.

#14 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-02-07 09:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

"But when did you turn the corner on illegal immigrants? I recall you pushing the idea that they add to the economy."

My contention is this, the 11 million illegals (approximately) came here mostly during the housing bubble when Dubya was saying " they're only coming here to do jobs Americans won't do" while he was being encouraged by the US Chamber of Commerce to allow as many illegals to enter as wanted to. Then the housing bubble collapsed and these people are now unecessary labor so the same people who encouraged them to come here now want Obama to deport them, which he actually has done, and I just can't go along with this inhumane effort because these people have nothing to return to (because of NAFTA) and they haven't done anything wrong here except work for a living. I'm just not as willing to go along with the current view which seems to be...when we wanted cheap labor for houses and roofing illegals were great but now that we don't ---- them. And, I'm sorry, but that is exactly what is happening in America today.

#20 | Posted by danni at 2014-02-07 10:20 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Every time I read something like Danni's last post my opinion that even Bush was more progressive than Obama gets reinforced.

#21 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-02-07 11:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

One in four 26-year olds live at home; "and are pathetic."

There that's the end of that.

It's a good way to save some money if you're still single.
#9 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

Its a good way to STAY single too. The panties do not really come flying of when you have remind your date:
"Hey be quite when we go in the back, my parents are in bed and we don't want to wake them up...."

#22 | Posted by GotTruth at 2014-02-08 03:42 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'll bet some of these 26-year-olds are home because they have enormous student loan debt. One reason people are marrying later and buying homes later is because their twenties are being spent getting out from under college debt.

If you compare what I had to pay for college in the late '80s to what a student is charged today, it's appalling.

#23 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-08 10:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

Rcade,

i'm guessing that progressives cheered the idea of getting the govt involved with subsidizing tuition to the extent that they have. My cynicism would have predicted this outcome as education skyrocketed in price, due to the govt price supports.

#24 | Posted by eberly at 2014-02-08 11:02 AM | Reply | Flag:

Eb the price supports are part of the problem but not the whole thing. Grants max out at just over 5k a year. That won't even cover an in-state college.

The real problem is the job market. You virtually have to have a degree anymore to get a job and so colleges can charge whatever they want. It is not like a young person has a choice any longer.

Yes without the subsidies it would not be as bad but tuition inflation will be nuts as long as employers demand a degree for even basic jobs.

#25 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2014-02-08 11:29 AM | Reply | Flag:

i'm guessing that progressives cheered the idea of getting the govt involved with subsidizing tuition to the extent that they have.

I'm guessing millions of conservatives used student loans.

There's nothing wrong with the loan program that tuition maximums for loans couldn't fix.

#26 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-08 11:29 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

India joins list of 135 countries in making education a right

www.thehindu.com

The US? Not so much.

If it were a right here, the contribution that a more educated populace would make to the economy would more than pay for it.

#27 | Posted by Corky at 2014-02-08 11:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

The US? Not so much.

#27 | Posted by Corky

India is not making guarantee of a college education. I'm not aware of anyone in the US who cannot receive a primary education unless they pay for it.

If your point is that higher education should be easily available to anyone in the US who wants it, I agree.

#28 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-02-08 12:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm guessing millions of conservatives used student loans.
#26 | POSTED BY RCADE

If the government supports it why can't Americans use it. But fundamentally disagree with it.

For instance, I can't stand our Federal debt problem, but only pay as much as I need to in taxes.

The influx of cheap student loans is what is causing tuition rate increases. Remove customers with money, and watch the prices drop.

There's nothing wrong with the loan program that tuition maximums for loans couldn't fix.
#26 | POSTED BY RCADE

There is plenty wrong with it....

Every time price controls have been implemented it makes things tighter, and quality drops. Just don't pass out so many loan dollars..... Not everyone deserves a college education, trade schools are good too.

#29 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-02-08 12:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

-If your point is that higher education should be easily available to anyone in the US who wants it, I agree.

Yes, and that the US can't even be bothered to join the Right to Education movement, muchless provide free or subsidized higher education for anyone who is willing to get a degree.

Young people who are willing should always have the ability to pursue a higher education.... which would change our country in a generation.

#30 | Posted by Corky at 2014-02-08 12:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

If the government supports it why can't Americans use it. But fundamentally disagree with it.

The student loan program has made it possible for millions of Americans to achieve a college degree. I don't know how anyone could be opposed to it, given the need for an educated populace to compete with the rest of the world.

I wouldn't have been able to get a degree without student loans. The amount of money I contribute to the U.S. in taxes is probably three- to five-times as high as it would be without my education.

#31 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-08 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Young people who are willing should always have the ability to pursue a higher education.... which would change our country in a generation.

The problem is that many who are encouraged to pursue higher education in this country aren't willing and they haven't been encouraged to explore any options other than racking up loan debt to find themselves.

#32 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2014-02-08 01:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't know how anyone could be opposed to it, given the need for an educated populace to compete with the rest of the world.

I'm opposed to it because there's no means testing like there is in the European model. Not everyone goes to college in countries where it is "free".

#33 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2014-02-08 01:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm not against any of these things.....loans, grants, or need based scholarships.

RCADE, you called the cost increases "Appauling". I'm just explaining a huge reason for it.

universities, IMO, are not held very accountable for their tuition increases, salaries, etc....that is a by-product of huge govt subsidies.

yes, I benefitted from aid as a student.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2014-02-08 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Posted by MUSTANG at 11:32 AM | 29 COMMENTS
[snif] shedding a small tear of pride...

Uh, that 6.9% of other are homeless, btw.

#35 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2014-02-08 01:52 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

#35. ..and showing up at OWS rallies

#36 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2014-02-08 06:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

#20 | Posted by danni

Always had a problem with that line of BS from Bush and company. They were doing construction which used to be very well paid jobs Americans wanted to do. I used to laugh at how hard they didn't work while I was living in an apartment complex under construction in Denver and at very places under construction around town. I don't think they don't work hard - most do but when it comes to construction I think American's work just as hard if not harder in certain jobs.

#37 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2014-02-08 06:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

The College argument is stupid. Instead of limiting student loan amounts, we need to stop having student loans for liberal arts degrees. America doesn't need anymore philzifizers. We need more engineers. I say student loans from the govt only for hard science degrees or math related degrees. You want to be a new agey, thinking type person with a degree? Pay for it yourself.

#38 | Posted by boaz at 2014-02-08 09:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Dude, I don't think you can advertise your website here - it's against the rules.

#40 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2014-02-09 01:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

"...higher education should be easily available to anyone in the US who wants it, I agree."

i'd amend that to anyone who wants it who has the aptitude. i managed, thru fits & starts, to become independent. i have not missed having kids because lots of friends / acquaintances have had bad problems; and i couldn't deal with an adult kid who could not achieve independence, or decided to be a gangster at 14. (i KNOW this is not the younger generation's fault in all or in many cases; i hope the economy doesn't get worse.)

#41 | Posted by kenx at 2014-02-09 03:41 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'm opposed to it because there's no means testing like there is in the European model.

An incoming college student generally doesn't have money. His or her parents do.

But when parents don't pay for college -- like my parents didn't after the first semester -- why should I be denied a student loan based on their income?

#42 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-09 11:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

"But when parents don't pay for college -- like my parents didn't after the first semester -"

Too much party? Crummy grades? Wasted semester? Nawww, not our RCade....:-)

#43 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-02-09 11:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's a good way to save some money if you're still single.

#9 | Posted by BruceBanner

Can't let go of that sweet teat, can you? At some point in your life you have to quit being a leach.

#44 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-02-09 11:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

Too much party? Crummy grades? Wasted semester?

Nope. I got 24 credit hours my first semester at Stephen F. Austin. One of my classes was a six-hour English class that offered an extra six hours of credit.

My folks wasted their money on stupid stuff instead of my education, like their mortgage payments and food and clothing for my younger siblings.

#45 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-09 12:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

rca, your parents responsibility for you ended when you turned 18.

#46 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-02-09 02:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I got 24 credit hours my first semester at Stephen F. Austin."

Maybe we're related? I once attended Stephen F. Austin High School in El Paso many moons ago. That was long before the "Great Society" and rampant "progressivism" though.
Nawww, we can't be related, but unfortunately I DO have some corrupted relatives in CA.

#47 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-02-09 02:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

rca, your parents responsibility for you ended when you turned 18.

You won't get any argument from me on that. I got student loans and grants and paid my own way through college after that first semester.

#49 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-09 02:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

We opened an investment account [mutual fund] when our son was born and it paid for his Bachelor's Degree. We helped out a little and he worked to pay for his Masters. The only time he used student funds 84k for his law degree from Rutgers. He applied himself [lived frugally] and paid off the entire student loan in 4 1/2 years.

#50 | Posted by MSgt at 2014-02-09 03:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

My wife and I are funding our kids' college with Florida Prepaid Tuition for around $840 a month, which we've been paying for around 6-8 years, it covers four years of tuition and fees and one year of dorm residence.

#51 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-09 07:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

But when parents don't pay for college -- like my parents didn't after the first semester -- why should I be denied a student loan based on their income?

Means testing in Europe is about grades. If you don't have the grades, you don't go to college. Which gets us to the point: "Free college" in Europe doesn't mean "everyone goes to college".

#52 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2014-02-09 07:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't think anyone was suggesting free for everyone Ben. Most people I have seen suggest free college have assumed free for those who have the grades for it.

#53 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2014-02-09 08:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

Means testing in Europe is about grades. If you don't have the grades, you don't go to college.

That's not means testing. Means testing is about denying government aid to people who have the means not to need it.

As for blocking students from all colleges based on grades, I don't see the point of that. If someone gets into college despite bad high school grades and succeeds in college, how is that a problem?

#54 | Posted by rcade at 2014-02-09 08:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

" If someone gets into college despite bad high school grades and succeeds in college, how is that a problem?"

I don't think it is but, by the same token, students who aren't prepared for college (and really most aren't from what I can see) might benefit from honest counseling about their future. A journeyman electrician might be a good future for someone who can't write a good paragraph or be able to do Calculus. Right now I know of a company willing to hire men for $20.00 per hour who are willing to be trained in appliance repair and also willing to travel within one state and do warranty repairs and they can't find qualified applicants. To me, a job like that would be great for young folks who might spend miserable years trying and failing in college only to gain a worthless degree and no job at the end of the tunnel followed by years paying off student loan debt.

#55 | Posted by danni at 2014-02-09 08:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"23% of 26-Year Olds Live at Home"

Yeah, but dey done have Obamacare now!

#56 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-02-10 01:04 AM | Reply | Flag:

Means testing is about denying government aid to people who have the means not to need it.

Call it admissions testing. The government decides who goes to college based on academic performance and general aptitude. Therefore they are limiting the amount of people going to college. The Europeans certainly don't embrace the model of "everyone who wants to go, should."

As for blocking students from all colleges based on grades, I don't see the point of that. If someone gets into college despite bad high school grades and succeeds in college, how is that a problem?

I live in a city that has a University with a 37 percent graduation rates with over 90 percent of students taking loans. So more than half the government loans spent on college at this University is thrown to the wind. That's the problem with the "everyone goes to college" mantra.

#57 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2014-02-11 08:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort