• ahornsirup
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Uh, I’m 31, I have a job and a home (no kids though, don’t want any either). I still think that the idea of charging your kids rent is ridiculously heartless, especially when they’re still in education.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It depends on what the parents do with it, IMO. My parents charged us all “rent,” till we moved out, provided we had gotten a job to begin with. What we didn’t know is they were just stashing it in a savings account for us, for when we graduated. AFAIK, I got every penny I gave them back in a lump sum. Wish I had been a little smarter with that money, but oh well. Have to have some regrets I suppose.

    • SpookyUnderwear@eviltoast.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed, but at a certain age it’s time to pay up or move out. Certainly wouldn’t charge my kids rent while they were furthering their education.

      • shneancy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        that notion seems ridiculous to me in general. For the entirety of human history generations have lived in one shared home, all providing for the home in their way. Why the fuck has it suddenly become socially unacceptable to live with your parents? Why would a child need to pay rent to their parents for the “privilege” of continuing to live with them? It’s more financially sound nowadays to share a home with other people, your parents, your friends, even strangers. The only time I can think of when that wasn’t the case was 50-90s in first world countries when buying a house by a single income working class individual was, like, possible

        • SpookyUnderwear@eviltoast.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Society changes over time. It’s been a long, long time before multiple generations lived with each other, permanently. It’s been the norm, that sometime between a person’s early to mid twenties they leave the nest.

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You just said that about 1/3 of the world’s population doesn’t have a society. Anywhere that grows communal crops, such as rice that require multiple families to tend the crops, they still frequently live with their parents, and then the parents move in with the eldest child and live with them.

            Western societies didn’t even start moving away from these communal societal structures until the start of The Protestant Revolution. It also cause us to stop marrying our cousins, but that was unintentional. The intentional effects were a focus on individualism rather than a focus on family. Even then, it really took until the Industrial Revolution before we really embraced the idea. The Nuclear Family is a concept that’s less than 100 years old.

            These ideas are far newer than you think.

            AFAIC, the not marrying our cousins was the only real benefit of us moving away from societal structures that forced a closer community bond. At least that’s the only goal they succeeded in that didn’t almost immediately bite us in the ass.

              • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Society changes over time. It’s been a long, long time before multiple generations lived with each other, permanently. It’s been the norm, that sometime between a person’s early to mid twenties they leave the nest.

                This implicitly discounts that at least 1/3 of the world’s population that currently live in exactly that model of society exist, or they just don’t count because they don’t have a society, your pick.

                • SpookyUnderwear@eviltoast.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I was referring to my own society. Also, that’s not me saying what you claimed I said. That’s your interpretation of my statement. Huge difference.

                  A third of the world’s population is approximately 2.7 billion. While possible, I doubt the number of multigenerational households is that high. Though I would be interested to read any material you may have on the subject. Espein comparrison to twenty years ago due to the skyrocketing costs of apartments/houses.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        19 is a bit low but just say the aforementioned 31 year old was still living with parents… Pay up lol

        • ahornsirup
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t live with my parents. I just wanted to make it clear that it’s more than stereotypical basement dwellers who think that charging rent to your kids is fucked up.