Savings ? comment!

[lovestruck818]

I agree. Who said a young person has to move out on their own. Get roomates, work more than one job until you get on your feet. That's what I did. Also no one says that just because you were born in NY/NJ/CT that you can't move to another state and live.

 

well when I refer to people moving out, I generally mean "with roommates" and just b/c someone has a roommate doesn't mean it'c necessarily cheap either. I work with people who have roommates and they pay at least $1,600 a month...just for their share. Rents like that are not uncommon here.

 

And to to just pack up one's stuff and move to another state is not really a reasonable or easy request. People have ties and things that hold them back.

[lovestruck818]

Well, with roommates you can do what you want. Suppose you want a guy you just met to stay overnight or you stay out all night. Roommates won't care but parents will. Parents will always be your parents and will look at you as their child. Roommates won't.

 

but there is still going to be that need to compromise and adapt no matter who one is living with. Don't want to do that, live alone, otherwise you really can expect to not have your way all the time and face decisions in which you are going to have to compromise and adapt.

[climbergirl]

yes but parents can also be looked at as 'roommates' and you also sometimes have to compromise and be adaptable to them. What is the difference? My parents didn't let me do everything I wanted and I often had to compromise and sacrifice a lot of things with them...same as with a roommate who is not your parent.

 

 

I think there is a difference. You grow up being adaptive to your parents-for example cleaning, noise level, cooking etc. You've lived your whole life with the same daily routine and dictated by the same people. And it's not equal footing living with your parents, or at least it shouldn't be.

[lovestruck818]

I think there is a difference. You grow up being adaptive to your parents-for example cleaning, noise level, cooking etc. You've lived your whole life with the same daily routine and dictated by the same people. And it's not equal footing living with your parents, or at least it shouldn't be.

 

but adaptation is adaptation and compromise is compromise, no?

[climbergirl]

but adaptation is adaptation and compromise is compromise, no?

 

 

It isn't on equal footing. There can't be any true compromise or adaptation if one side is always dominant over the other.

[Trialbyfire]

As Trialbyfire pointed out, pages ago, it can be the fiscally responsible thing to stay at home. If you have the choice between barely scraping by on your own, or saving some money by staying with your parents...why shouldn't you? Granted that you don't abuse this.

 

There is a huge difference between an adult who is doing his part of the chores, chips in for gas, groceries etc and somebody who pays for nothing and mooches off their parents.

 

As long as they are happy, and it seems that OP's parents are, let them be happy.

I think it assumptive that people feel everyone is abusive or displays prince/princess behaviour from living at home. Living on your own ain't rocket science if you've either learned the skills at home or are capable of learning and adapting. Most of it is common sense, including financial responsibility.

 

eg. You net $2000/month. Your bills equal $2500/month. You're in deep kimchi!

[vonerik012]

Some people have a yearning for independence. I am one of them. I will NEVER relate well to a man or woman who lives at home with mommy and daddy, and then actually sucks off of them. Mexican immigrants come here at 16 to work , live, and actually send money back home to their parents.

 

And you are telling me 25 yr old Americans just can't afford to be self sufficient? If you are making 6 dollars an hour for more than 3 months in your life in the USA, you are a loser. I don't think this person will be saving much for a home by living at home either.

 

Sure, why not live at home until retirement age? Or wait for your parents to die and give you the house, so you never have to pay rent or interest on a mortgage. Those would be smart financial decisions!

 

If you are the type that has your parents support you until your 30's, I feel you are pathetic. And so will millions of others. But if it works for you, keep doing it. Maybe find a man who also lives at home, and you can make a good couple. Or just move the husband into your home. That would save more money too. I mean isn't that why we are on Earth? To save money?

[Shygirl15]

If you are the type that has your parents support you until your 30's, I feel you are pathetic.

 

True.

 

I, for one, lived with my parents until I got married, but then i married at 22. Even then, it didn't feel right at all staying with them at that age. But for a 35yo to live with their parents and actually defend their decision?? Madness.

[Trialbyfire]

I left home at 17, when I graduated highschool and went to University. Does this make everyone else who left home at age 18+, pathetic? Especially those who didn't get an education? Or for that matter, does that make everyone who didn't skip grades, stupid? Ummm...I think not...

[Krytie TV]

Hey Art, in response to your question umpteen hundred posts ago, it's not that there's anything worng with it. However, one that lives in that skewed reality must try to understand that with that fiscal advantage can very likely come a romantic disadvantage. Not just from how men might view her, but also because she sees what many of us would be as normal as almost freakish (having no tremendous savings at 35), thereby further limited her compatibility factor.

 

In her case, the monetary comfort comes at an interpersonal cost. That's what I think is really the point here. It seems she has a backup plan to be a single mother, and that's great that she accepts that as a possibility, because the odds are in favor of that happening.

[vonerik012]

I left home at 17, when I graduated highschool and went to University. Does this make everyone else who left home at age 18+, pathetic? Especially those who didn't get an education? Or for that matter, does that make everyone who didn't skip grades, stupid? Ummm...I think not...

 

Yes, you are right. People who leave home at 18 instead of 17 are not pathetic.

 

People who live at home until 30 or 40, are. Unless of course they are taking care of a sick parent, etc.

[Trialbyfire]

Yes, you are right. People who leave home at 18 instead of 17 are not pathetic.

 

People who live at home until 30 or 40, are. Unless of course they are taking care of a sick parent, etc.

Applying your logic, actually I have every right to consider everyone else pathetic, that doesn't believe or do what I do, as such. Is it possible that different people are happy living a different way than you?

 

So all other cultures that have an extended family living at home are totally pathetic, right?

[vonerik012]

Yes, you can apply your logic however you wish. And you can consider anyone you want to be pathetic. Who is stopping you? You just might not find many people that agree with you.

 

Other cultures are other cultures. They have their reasons. Usually poverty is the main one. Or people get married at a much younger age. I don't know of any other culture in which people live at home until 35-40 to buy a new Cadillac.

 

If you are so open minded, then why don't you marry a guy who lives at home until 35 or 40, and then maybe move into his parents house. Sound good?

[Trialbyfire]

Yes, you can apply your logic however you wish. And you can consider anyone you want to be pathetic. Who is stopping you? You just might not find many people that agree with you.

 

Other cultures are other cultures. They have their reasons. Usually poverty is the main one. Or people get married at a much younger age. I don't know of any other culture in which people live at home until 35-40 to buy a new Cadillac.

 

If you are so open minded, then why don't you marry a guy who lives at home until 35 or 40, and then maybe move into his parents house. Sound good?

Is agreement always necessary? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Everyone is also entitled to dispute that opinion, like I'm disputing your opinion. Is popularity that important to you that your opinion is only meaningful if everyone validates you?

 

Not necessarily. Italians aren't poor and you'll find that there are a substantial population of asians that are also very, very wealthy. This doesn't stop them from living in an extended family unit under one roof. I suspect you're not current as to the living conditions of both China and India. They've embraced technology and have taken away many North American jobs from outsourcing, living the high life within extended family units.

 

So, who's in better financial shape? Think about it.

 

As for personal preferences, those are my preferences, not a blanket generalization of what constitutes a pathetic person or someone who isn't pathetic. Everyone needs to partner with someone they're happy with, who has the same or similar core values and life goals. If two people want to live at home until they get married, more power to them. If two people want already self-made partners, more power to them.

 

Do you finally understand what I'm trying to communicate to you?

[Shygirl15]

Other cultures are other cultures. They have their reasons. Usually poverty is the main one. Or people get married at a much younger age. I don't know of any other culture in which people live at home until 35-40 to buy a new Cadillac.

 

Veery true.

 

I'm of a different culture obviously, and the average age for girls to marry is 24, for men is around 26. And of course poverty is all around, so it's not news when people stay with their parents forever. Some, even marry their wives/husbands and move them in with their parents.

 

Perhaps OP comes from one of these cultures... maybe?

[vonerik012]

No, ALL Italians are not poor. But in their country, incomes do not match the cost of living. Thats why 60% of children between 18-35 live at home. I believe that is where the term "mammas boy" also originated.

 

Each country has acceptable norms. Wearing a halter top is ok in Miami. It is not ok in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 30 people living in one house is ok in New Delhi, but I believe it would be against city ordinances in Atlanta, Ga. Women can't drive in many nations. They can drive here.

 

I am German. We all tend to move out early. Our parents raise us as strong men and women, and we can fend for ourselves easily. The idea of sacrificing life experience to save money is silly. The parents typically do not center their entire lives around kids, as they have their own lives they like to live in peace.

 

Through my experiences, children in the USA that live at home until 35- 40 are not normal, ambitious, strong, or self sufficient. They are not doing it to help their parents financially. They are not doing it because it is socially accepted and well respected as in poor parts of China and India. They suck off their parents. They never grow up. The parents are also co dependent, and allow this behavior.

 

Go to Brazil and ask a girl if she likes living at home until marriage. THEY HATE IT. But they don't have a choice.

[vonerik012]

I think you also might be a little hypocritical.

 

Take a stereotypical family living in Italy, since you like that example.

 

Man is 30ish works about 15-20 hours a week. His mom cooks for him. He spends his time playing soccer during the day with friends, working a few hours at night, going out afterwards with some family members and friends to have a few drinks, then sleeping until 12 the next day, etc. I agree, not a bad life.

 

But if you met a man in the USA with this lifestyle, you would call him pathetic. Or at least 90% of American women would. Part time job, little money, no goals, no high education or "status" job. Living life care free with parents, and having fun.

 

What is fine in one culture, is not fine in another.

[Trialbyfire]

Not hypocritical, just not going to call a different personality type or culture, pathetic because they choose to live life a different way, one which can be advantageous to both the child and the parents.

 

Of course abusive behaviour isn't acceptable by any party.

 

Learning how to self-support once again, isn't rocket science. If anyone feels it's rocket science, perhaps they need to take a few night courses to learn a little more about how to survive. I do mean this in a non-facetious way.

 

Anyone can be proud of their accomplishments in life, be it financial self-sufficiency or otherwise. To posture at the expense of another, that it's pathetic because someone chooses a different way to live, is to me...pathetic.

 

The OP and her parents are happy with this arrangement. I won't posture, at her expense.

[vonerik012]

I never said living on your own is rocket science.

 

I never said other cultures are pathetic.

 

I said if you are living off of your parents dime until 35, or 40,(being a taker) you are pathetic. Especially if you then brag about buying a new car, or brag about your parents then giving you more of their money.

 

I know guys that are in their 30's that live in their parents basement and smoke pot all day everyday. Also pathetic. I can make judgments about what i feel is pathetic or not. If you feel all lifestyles are equal, then good for you.

 

I didn't say the above person is bad, or horrible, or a menace to society. Just pathetic.

 

Pathetic

1 : having a capacity to move one to either compassionate or contemptuous pity

 

I also seriously doubt you are this open minded when choosing whom you date.

[Trialbyfire]

Are you contemptous or envious/resentful of her good fortune? What if her parents are very wealthy individuals who can afford to have their child remain at home and benefit from her company? What if she's a trust fund baby?

[vonerik012]

Contempt can be defined as having a lack of respect. Pity= feel sorry for.

 

I am not sure where you get envious from.

 

I would say her parents are co-dependent in a damaging and selfish way if they need their child around to keep them company.

 

If she is a trust fund baby, then she is really pathetic as she has so many possible opportunities open to her, and yet she chooses to simply stare at the same 4 walls her bedroom her entire life.

[Trialbyfire]

What's more contemptible, a person who works but lives at home and saves money or a brazilian g/f who never works, lives off her father and LDR b/f, who can't cook or clean, nvm getting up in the mornings to be with her supporting LDR b/f when she visits?

[Touche]

What's more contemptible, a person who works but lives at home and saves money or a brazilian g/f who never works, lives off her father and LDR b/f, who can't cook or clean, nvm getting up in the mornings to be with her supporting LDR b/f when she visits?

 

The person who works but lives at home and saves money is less contemptible.

 

Oh...uhm, was that a rhetorical question?

[Trialbyfire]

The person who works but lives at home and saves money is less contemptible.

 

Oh...uhm, was that a rhetorical question?

Not at all but yes, it does seem that way, due to the no-brainer answer!

[vonerik012]

Neither are optimal, trust me.

 

I would choose neither, unless some serious changes were made.

 

The only excuse for the Brazilian girl is the same type of culture issue you site for Italians. Rich girls in Brazil who do not have to work do not. opportunities are scarce, and menial jobs are generally looked down upon by many who have money. Especially if they are only children. However she never lived at home past 18, as she lived in Paris and Geneva. So at least she was someone that had a more worldly view.

 

However, she admits she would be far happier if she had to go it alone, as she is very depressed. Her father selfishly did not allow her to work, so that she could be there for him to hang out and travel with. He did this by giving her a certain lifestyle, and then threatening to take it away every time she tried to show some independence. It is almost impossible to work and live on your own in Rio de Janeiro. Salary is 400 a month, and a small apartment is 1000.