[sholanozie]

I shudder when I think about the strain that will be placed on millenials when we inevitably become our parents' safety net. It's a perfect storm: a housing bubble that will pop when everyone tries to sell their house at the same time, unreliable pensions, non-existant retirement savings, high levels of undischargable student debt, and dwindling job prospects for young people.

It's not going to be pretty.

[devonkim]

The children will likely end up moving into their parents' homes and paying off their parents' medical bills with reverse mortgages leaving the once young at mid-life or later with nothing to inherit and no job prospects in these areas typically away from major metro (and increasingly, employment-availability) areas. This will leave most Americans in the positions before WW2 about given there will be few assets in the hands of most Americans again.

I'm seeing housing prices in suburbs, exurbs, and rural areas dropping as lack of viable jobs in these areas combined with crushing commutes to cities makes these locations terrible for those still needing to work. There's an alarming number of people I've heard of commuting from West Virginia into DC and from Richmond into DC enduring 3+ hour commutes as cities that used to be self-sustained economies now become suburbs of the largest cities, and the trend is going to continue with a few deviants that buck the trend like remote workers or homesteaders.

Where I live, the local economy is driven by two demographics - tourists and local retirees sprinkled with some of the wealthiest households in the US living here part time to avoid paying state income taxes. Much of the US is eerily similar to this pattern and it's extremely depressing to think of a way out of the spiral where almost all of our money will go into paying outrageous mortgages / rent with lower-paying jobs and the few in the middle class are in finance, tech, or healthcare.

[losteric]

Whats even more fun is there other major problems approaching on roughly the same timeline...

- Less developed nations will be transitioning to a population crunch (WSJ 2050) with huge ramifications on global economics/politics

- fossil fuels (especially oil) reaching depletion or becoming too expensive to extract

- climate change impact in full swing, serious disruption to even domestic agriculture

- Ubiquitous AI, and all the associated social unrest of a deprecated generation of workers

Ultimately there's just too many people. Society doesn't need 8 billion humans anymore, the US doesn't even need 300 million... Arguably what youre describing is an emergent solution to that problem. Now we've reached the point where the next generation will need to support their parent's slow death instead of raising the next generation of children... That's going to wreck society's ownership of the future in a big way.

(Mobile, excuse the poor formating)

[jsprogrammer]

>Society doesn't need 8 billion humans anymore

This is self-contradictory. Society is exactly the humans that exist.

[kyllo]

It think it's more like, human society is collectively deciding that optimum human population size is less than current size, and adjusting reproductive behavior accordingly.

[jsprogrammer]

Isn't the human population increasing?

[kyllo]

It is still increasing, but the slope of the curve is decreasing. It will peak in the next few decades and then start to decrease if current reproductive trends continue.

[jczhang]

Right, the issue of overpopulation is huge. It's going to need a different kind of society with very different values than the ones we have today. Capitalism can't grow like it has been once we realize the issue of overpop and work to reduce it. We have a crazy new world coming. And the transition has be fast.

[cmdkeen]

Or alternatively human ingenuity adapts and overcomes - Malthusians have been consistently proved wrong in their constant cries of overpopulation. There is still plenty of land, plenty of ability to grow food to feed us and plenty of advances being made in areas which will allow that to increase. We've already seen a vast decrease in the number of people living on less than $1 a day across the world enabling many countries to start reaping a demographic dividend.

If the pessimists can quote fossil fuel depletion then surely I can optimistically promote fusion, carbon capture etc. Capitalism has been one of the greatest success stories of humanity.

[Spooky23]

I never understood how one could embrace prophecies of doom in this day and age. We live in a near golden age of plenty, and the train hasn't slowed down yet.

[timr]

"We live in a near golden age of plenty, and the train hasn't slowed down yet."

If by "we", you mean "citizens in the most prosperous cities of the world", then yes.

If you mean "people in most of the USA", then I have some news for you: the train's wheels are locked, and sparks are flying while everything skids to a stop. It's absolutely shocking how much of the country has declined in prosperity in my lifetime. The smaller cities near where I grew up -- places that were thriving small towns as recently as the 1980s -- are nearly all trapped in downward spirals of poverty, debt and addiction.

If you mean "the citizens of this planet", well...for most people, the train never left the station. Even in modern "success stories" like China, you don't have to try very hard to find appalling levels of poverty and despair. A few have become incredibly wealthy, but mostly, people are struggling to keep up. In the third-world? Forget it. Yeah, people can pay for cellphones now, while they're dying of preventable diseases due to filthy water.

Optimism is one thing, but it takes a Silicon Valley (aka Leibnitzian) view of the world to claim that this is a "golden age". Mostly, a select group of people are getting richer, while everyone else stagnates (or just barely inches forward).

[MaysonL]

Bucky Fuller outlined the problems facing us in his book Critical Path.

To quote Abebooks's description: "Critical Path is Fuller's master work--the summing up of a lifetime's thought and concern--as urgent and relevant as it was upon its first publication in 1981. Critical Path details how humanity found itself in its current situation--at the limits of the planet's natural resources and facing political, economic, environmental, and ethical crises.

The crowning achievement of an extraordinary career, Critical Path offers the reader the excitement of understanding the essential dilemmas of our time and how responsible citizens can rise to meet this ultimate challenge to our future."

[subsection1h]

In the US, the median retirement age keeps rising, and it's rising far faster than median life expectancy. My idea of a Golden Age of Plenty isn't one in which people punch a time card until they drop dead.

[sixQuarks]

You know that famous YC question "What is something you feel most people are wrong about?"

Kevin Kelly, founder of Wired Magazine, believes the answer is overpopulation. He says it would be a disaster to stop population growth. Read more here:

https://edge.org/response-detail/23722

[losteric]

The WSJ 2050 series of articles supports that. However population is shrinking in many parts of the world, despite government attempts to force growth... This is going to have a tremendous impact on the global economy and political unrest.

On the other hand, thats a good way to reduce humanity's contribution to climate change

[gotchange]

> This is going to have a tremendous impact on the global economy and political unrest.

Why do you associate the decline in population numbers with political unrest? Are you referring implicitly to the phenomenon of immigration to make up for the falling numbers and the typical and usual problems that come along with this development?

[javajosh]

Or the kids will say, "I'm sorry, but I'm moving where the jobs are, and I'm going to have a life of my own. I'll come visit you once a year, but I'm not giving up my life for yours."

The good parents will say, "Good! Don't sacrifice your chance for happiness for me. I'll make it through."

[icebraining]

And where are the jobs?

[khuey]

The coastal urban areas and Texas, not the rural south or midwest or rust belt cities.

[devonkim]

This is a terrible comment in hindsight given I made it on Christmas but spending the holidays in rural Appalachia for years makes me ponder how oblivious people in tech are to the realities of their countries. Enjoy the holidays, folks and go talk to everyone - get out of your comfort zones and experience something completely crazy perhaps. We have the best living standards worldwide in the history of the planet but we have a long way to go before we can achieve the humanist dream of providing the opportunity for each person to work hard for their dreams and realize them. I hope that during the holidays as a time of reflection we look for our common struggles and work towards creating human consensus rather than the every day popular rhetoric of creating division and controversy out of their own desperation to put food on the table.

[sholanozie]

You pretty much hit the nail on the head here. It really is alarming to think that we have not started to plan for this almost inevitable scenario in ~20 years time. We need to begin re-thinking our role as humans in an economy which increasingly does not require us.

[partisan]

How do you plan for the collapse of the economy?

[losteric]

Start by having level-headed discussions about the value of life.

I know a lot of families taking on massive debt to help pay for their parent's old age. Five-Six figures here and there to extend their parent's lives by a decade or two, saddling themselves with debt and leaving the next generation with no assets... Likely after moving the entire family to a decaying suburban city. All so the previous generation can stick around with a much poorer quality of life.

Health care has a far larger impact than the number on the bill. We need to openly talk about life and accept the inevitableness of death.

[mhurron]

I wonder if you'll be so ready to give up your life right around retirement age instead of trying to have it extended 'by a decade or two.'

It's so incredibly easy to say when you're simply throwing others lives away, rarely do people do it with their own.

[losteric]

I'll fight tooth and nail for every minute of my own independent life... But I would never dream of crippling my children's future just to exist in an "assisted-living" retirement home. Personally, that's an undignified life that's not worth living... modern day vampires.

Again, this is just my personal position regarding my life's value vs my descendants. I'm advocating the questions, not my answer.

This is a hard problem, which means the questions are hard to ask and the answers are difficult to accept... Death has never been easy. However it's a conversation that families and society at large need to have.

Culturally, we are lagging behind what science can do... We can do so much but never stepped back to ask if we should. Society needs to make conscious decisions instead of blindly following our biological instincts.

[sholanozie]

The first step is to invest, as communities, into producing as much food as possible locally in order to lessen our dependence on the global economic system. We have the technology to turn all those shuttered Targets and malls into indoor farms powered largely by renewable sources. An ironic side effect would be the creation of jobs and a reduction in the net cost of feeding a city.

[hueving]

Locally grown food is an unsustainable luxury that doesn't work for large portions of the US because there is not year round farm worthy land close enough by to sustain the population.

[douche]

You could do what people always did, and grow crops that keep through the winter. You're not going to be eating fresh kale and tomatoes in January, you'll be eating your turnips and beets and potatoes and apples out of cold-storage, and making bread with your oats and corn and wheat that you harvested in the fall.

[sholanozie]

Did you read my comment? I propose using currently-available technology to grow food indoors.

[icebraining]

Why not just move somewhere with arable land?

[sholanozie]

That's what most people will do. This current refugee "crisis" is nothing compared to the vast migrations that climate change will instigate.

[nine_k]

How about job availability?

[cryoshon]

Yep, not to mention these people who are struggling to take care of their parents are dealing with medical bills and debt slavery of their own. They can forget about owning a home or car. They can forget about having children, as the money is needed to care for the old. They can forget about retiring, as they have no savings. Wages have been stagnant since their parents' careers were at their start.

The banks will be extracting wealth from the fading boomers until their last breaths, leaving their children with no inheritances and a large debt of their own.

[branchless]

I hear this "inherit housing riches" a lot and I'm glad to see you aren't fooled by it. Housing isn't wealth. The value of land represents the ability to make use of it.

If the support ratio slips (ratio of working to non-working) then if we are to maintain the living standards of the non-working we either have to have a big productivity leap or lower living standards for those in work.

Reverse mortgages aren't going to cut it. And as you say, what then when the millenials have to hand over the keys to their parents' house?

Land isn't a thing of value in and of itself if we can't work it.

The only use ramping land value has is as an inflationary tax by private banks on workers.

My $0.02 on this is we give the boomers+ a massive haircut right now. Just pull the rug right out from under them, their politicians and their banks.

[nugget]

Wyoming?

[paulddraper]

Florida, I assume.

[phyllostachys]

I would have guessed Las Vegas.

[devonkim]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina_locations_by_pe... 2. Biltmore Forest, North Carolina $85,044

Buncombe county rank in state and per capita income: 19 Buncombe $25,665

The Vanderbilt family, descendants, and close associates have strong ties to Asheville and its economy, where the Biltmore estate is located.

[cmarschner]

your statement implies a conflict-ladden connection with your parents. Family can also mean: safety net, love, time. My wife's family comes from a mid-sized town where grandmothers, aunts and cousins live in vicinity. This means houses where built without any loan from a bank and parents could go to work with their children being watched and cared for when they were sick. On Christmas eve family gathers at a large table and there is more food than anyone can eat. We are the only ones who live abroad and need to spend a good chunk of money to buy the services we would get from a family for free. Sometimes I think we should de-economize our lives.

[sholanozie]

I agree with your conclusion, but disagree with your suggestion that you have any insight into my relationship with my parents. I also advocate a shift back to "family-orienting" living, and live my life accordingly. I'm just looking at big picture trends and simple demographics.

[hkmurakami]

Look no further than Japan to see exactly what you describe in action.

[jmspring]

I am still forming my opinion on this as a Gen-Xer, but I hear a lot of people concerned about when millennials become the majority/the responsible ones and have a greater impact than the baby boomers on this country (the US). On the other side, I also hear people talk about how entitled and shallow the baby boom generation has been and the enormous burden this group will bring upon the social net (social security, etc) because they didn't plan (in general), don't have the savings to survive major health issues, etc.

I hate labels, but as someone from Gen-X, I've already got obligations supporting family, pretty much plan on making sure my immediate family is not dependent upon others, etc.

For saving up, moving to Europe isn't really an option (in another thread, someone indicated the huge difference in upper end engineering salaries between Europe and the US); however having an EU national spouse, we are definitely looking at retiring in Europe down the road.

It is going to be interesting to see how it plays out over time.

[tw04]

That seems like a pretty gross overgeneralization. An entire generation that hasn't saved any money for retirement? Seriously? I guess I can count almost every one of my family members as "unique" then. I can think of only 1 of them I would expect to be in financial trouble post retirement.

[atom-morgan]

I would say your family is unique in this case based on this article I read earlier this year.

"Approximately 62% of Americans have no emergency savings for things such as a $1,000 emergency room visit or a $500 car repair, according to a new survey of 1,000 adults by personal finance website Bankrate.com. Faced with an emergency, they say they would raise the money by reducing spending elsewhere (26%), borrowing from family and/or friends (16%) or using credit cards (12%)."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/most-americans-are-one-payc...

[tw04]

That says nothing about whether or not they have a retirement fund. When I was fresh out of college for the first few years that described me to a T, but I still had money going into a 401k every month.

[superuser2]

Nope. Retirement savings are typically in 401k and IRA accounts, which are untouchable (without enormous penalty) until age 59.5. It's entirely possible (though irrational) to have six or seven figures in retirement savings but no emergency fund.

[nommm-nommm]

People who go broke if they had a $1000 emergency are not the same people maxing out their 401(k)... plus about half of Americans have no retirement accounts at all.

[superuser2]

Not maxing it out, but many people have an automatic 5-15% payroll deduction that may even be on by default. That money is already out of sight and out of mind, same as tax withholding. Whereas not draining the checking account requires more deliberate discipline.

[tbrownaw]

GP's family being in a 38% "minority" hardly makes them unique.

[kiiski]

That 62 % was "people with no emergency savings", not "people without enough savings to retire". The latter number would be somewhere above 62 %.

[sholanozie]

I could argue that making the opposite claim is a pretty gross overgeneralization. It's good that your family is prepared for retirement, but most people aren't.