This used to be an acceptable practice. Now, if you have more than two ppl stacked in a room, so more than 4 total ppl for a two bed house, it's a fire hazard and you can be evicted. Also, DHS can get involved if you have 2 or more children of differing sex sharing a room, or a child sharing a room with an adult, parent or not, it's a problem, and Child protection services can charge you with neglect.

What problem do they have with two children of different sexes sharing a room? What do they expect the children to do? Where is this a thing?

After a certain age they need their own bedrooms. It's a things everywhere. Nobody thinks the kids are doing anything. It's about privacy

More government overreach for sure.

You can tell your colleague LA's population density is 3.849M, compare that to Toronto, which as ample selection of public transit (subways, Go Train, Trolley Trains, buses) with 2.93M pop., Calgary that also has good public transit with a 1.336M pop, and Winnipeg that has What is the population of 841,000 with a decent transit system that actually should have more buses on the busiest routes.

LOL! Times change...sometimes a lot!

Childcare can be really expensive in the US (not to mention the quality if you want to give your child a better start in life). It‘s still often better for a mother to work. People keep forgetting that a mother will only need to stay home until the kid starts school. That‘s around 6 years? And what then? If she has not worked in her field for 6 years, then she might not get in anymore or at a way lower level. Or she will have to get some low pay job. So, in the long run, it benefits the womans career and therefor the household income, if the mother stays in her job and profession. As a houswife by the time the kid goes to school she will be likely forced to do a minimum wage job. As a working Mom she might get promoted multiple times during that time. And THAT is the hard decision they DO MAKE, because no Mom WANTS to be away from her little child!

my sister was on gov assistance while her husband worked, so she could look after the kids. when she graduated college, she started working at a hospital as a nurse, but that put her over the govt assistance and she had to pay for child care. she ended up LOSING money in this situation, so she quit her job and went back on assistance. when jobs are paying you so little, and childcare costs so much, that staying home and getting assistance is a better deal, there is something seriously wrong with the job and childcare system.

Most moms actually want to be away from their little child's, just like how dad's do and no one bats an eye That you have a baby doesn't make a woman suddenly not want to do anything else and have zero other interests of aspirations . Again, just like, you guess it, men Like seriously how many moms do you know that would say no if you offered em a day where you'd take care of their child? Very few

I guess it would depend on the parent. Many mothers, though, feel guilty being at work and missing milestones. Offers of a few hours for a break now and then are great to recharge and feel like a human. That's perfectly normal. It would still be on how maternal the mother is and how paternal the father is. Some fathers also feel a sense of regret working when they could be playing with their kids, while some mother disdain the idea of being with their kids all the time. I was scared I was going to be an alien to my daughter or that I wasn't doing enough to help her with her development. I still feel that way, even though I know she was with an early childhood educator and speech therapist. But still, whenever I was at work and saw parents taking their dressed up daughters to events, I felt that I should be doing that as well. Not at work in a stuffy office.

Dude! You're so right! People should just become robots to mindlessly churn out productivity. Screw personal lives. Soooo selfish of them. Put the company first. The executives need you to make sacrifices like never seeing your children or spouse to optimize profits.

Well the system should not force those people to make those hard decisions, the system should work to help satisfy everyone.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

You also don’t need Netflix, YouTube tv, hulu and all the other paid programming, don’t need doordash and other he food delivery services, don’t need “smart” phones, don’t need the latest car, 10-15 yr old used car is just fine, cook at home and not expensive steaks either. Yes I get tightening your belt isn’t fun but if you want money for the future, you have to learn how to save it. Look at those people who are doing the “early retirement” programs, they’ve cut all all the fluff and have saved buckets, living in today’s world in today’s economy. There is no excuse for most, especially if you’ve been educated.

My husband and I have one 12 y/o car I bought used 3 years ago, we don't go to restaurants or get food delivery, we get basic cable/wifi free from our apartment building. We are very careful with money. After working 60hr weeks at multiple part-time, entry-level jobs for several years to "save buckets" I became disabled following a traumatic event less than a week after our wedding, and all those savings went to medical expenses. So now I'm taking college classes online to hopefully get a job someday I can actually do with my disabilities. My amazing husband works 50+ hour weeks in retail management, a job he was only able to get because he has "been educated" and has a degree: aka thousands of dollars in debt from 5 years commuting to a state college despite also working the whole time. He makes about 1 income bracket over the poverty line after bonuses. The bills get paid. And no, tightening belts isn't fun. But MANY do. Stop blaming us for being born into a broken world.

So in order to buy a house we should remove every bit of happiness from our lives?

I think the key is balance... and living within your means. Prioritising is NOT a dirty word.

Why do you assume that people aren't doing these things? Why is it easier for you to assume that people are stupid or lazy or entitled than it is to believe that the system is messed up? And, have you questioned whether those early retirees are exceptions or rules? What does the data say?

The cheap, run down apartments on the bad side of town around where I am average out to about $1200/month. The new, safer ones can go anywhere from $2k to $7k, depending.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

So rent the old ones, you don’t need new. Stop allowing government to kowtow to criminals. You can’t have a society where you say drug use is ok and then complain about the crime as most crime is tied to drugs. In places where some of it has been legalized the homeless population and crime is skyrocketing thus making cheaper housing all that more unsafe. Life requires hard decisions. Doing without to save and enforcing the laws for the safety of the citizens.

Your correlations are backwards. Crime is tied to poverty, because it's a quick way to make money. Drug use is also tied to poverty, but as a form of escapism. Drug use exists in all tiers of society but it's used as scape goat with poverty. The reason crime is increasing is not because drug use is increasing but because poverty is increasing. The poverty situation is worsening because the government panders to criminals - white collar criminals who have manufactured inflation for their personal profit. I'm guessing based on your various rants on this page you part of the problem and impede those who try to fix anything in your community.

That what I get a month for SSDI. Wife gets SSI and they lowered hers because she living with me. Can't make more than 1391 a month.

Effen ridiculous

No, they're a product of their generational wealth. The vast majority of those were put through schooling on their parent's dime (including college), didn't want for consistent housing/food, don't have health issues. + The statistics on the "get rich quick" scheme is that it's random and rare. There are people who have been living their whole lives as spendthrift and miserly as possible and have nothing to show for it. Where's the "work for it and don't spend frivolously and you'll be fine" for them?

“On our parents’ dime” my college was $120 a quarter for 21 hours. A meal ticket cost more. Dorms were $120 a quarter. Add a refrigerator, tiny, was $25 a quarter. Books were close to $400. And I was on work study so that helped. I didn’t vote in student loans so colleges and universities could then up their fees to such exorbitant amounts. Homes were MUCH smaller. My family of 7 lived in a 1000 sf 3 br home. 3 boys in one room, my sister and I in another. We didn’t eat out. We rarely went to movies and then it was to the drive in. We drove EVERYWHERE. Vacation? My dad was military and we went “home” every year to East Tennessee, 2 weeks at one grandparents and 2 weeks at the other. First time I flew for something other than moving was when I went home from college. After my first year I was given a car. Sad paid $600 for it and fixed it up. Mom made all my clothes except my underwear. My 2 formals in college and my wedding dress. My wedding was under $1000.

I don't know the date so I guessed-- $120/quarter would've been about $460 in current dollars. The current average cost of tuition for a semester is over $10,000. That would be over $5,000/quarter. If you convert that back to 1980 dollars, that would be over $1,300. Do you believe that you would've been able to afford college if it cost you more than 10x what you actually paid? I didn't even factor in the dorm, meal plan, books-- those have also increased and would be many times what you paid, even when adjusted for inflation. And, they also now often require those smart phones and computers that you get to be "done with" as you ebb into your golden years. I could also go into the rising costs of food (even groceries), cars (even used ones), gas (even for trips to Granny's), housing (even small homes)-- all of which even when adjusted for inflation are multiple times higher than what you would've paid in 1980. Not to mention that wages are stagnant. Maybe you're just wrong...

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Part 2. We didn’t have a honeymoon because he was an E-3 in the AF. We didn’t have credit cards. We went to the library. We shopped at the thrift store and yard sales. Even now, the only furniture we have that was bought brand new is our bed and our living room furniture. Everything else was bought at yard sales. I cook at home. I can and freeze for the weeks/months ahead. We’re so done with cell phones and the way they trap people into more debt. The only reason we keep them is to FaceTime our grandchildren. I tried Door Dash once to send food to a friend’s family. 2 pizzas from Papa Murphey’s ended up costing over $50. I don’t do nails, eyelashes, tans, Botox, eyebrows, etc. I quit wearing makeup but do skincare. There are hundreds of ways to cut costs, but you have to be willing.

Maybe it doesn't add up because your understanding about the world is wrong.

Should be, sure. Isn't, though. Not by far, especially since the vast majority of those jobs that have that pay also require degrees and college is not free or cheap. Housing is not free or cheap. Healthcare is not free or cheap.

How would you know?

There are literally millions of families who still do that and barely can afford rent. Your argument doesn't hold water.

So very like my own upbringing, Fenchurch. We had to rent a TV from ColourVision until early nineties. Didn't go on holidays. Sharing bathwater with the whole family and the like. My parents are retired now, no car, no holidays and still scrimping and saving. I think most of these "boomer" stereotypes come from US as they in no way resemble the lives of my parents or myself (Gen X) in Northern England. My parents dont lecture me on saving money as they damn well know how hard it is themselves.

They don’t resemble the lives of Americans either. Yes some live very well but it is because they were extremely successful in their working years as you have in the UK as well. Those that lived through the Great Depression and war years have always lived differently, have always saved because they still don’t believe that they can be without at any given time. I would tell you that most of these whiners on social media would never have survived 80-100 years ago.

This!

Isn't the government there to take care of its citizens?

Yeah, the consequences were that lots of people died. Look up survivor bias.