[user3939382]

All IMHO of course: we'd be better off if it was 9 of 10. The family is the most important institution we have, it is the backbone driving the most valuable members of our society. The stronger and more cohesive it is the better.

There's a countervailing factor which is that more earnings and economic output arise from jobs in urban areas, which historically can only happen if some members relocate.

Hopefully the trend towards remote work helps alleviate this conflict.

[babelfish]

[Citation required] for almost every sentence in your post - most importantly "it is the backbone driving the most valuable members of our society". What a ridiculous assertion.

[rayiner]

Given that virtually every human is raised in a family, I think you’re the one that needs to prove your outrageous statement to the contrary.

[tsol]

It's not that crazy. Even economically, the people that are gonna support us when we are old and senile are currently being reared as part of families

[user3939382]

I guess you missed the first two words of my comment.

[chrisco255]

Citations aren't required for opinions.

[grumple]

It's easy to verify that married people make more money than unmarried people: https://bigthink.com/smart-skills/married-wage-gap/#:~:text=....

It's easily verified by data you can find in many studies, and presumably the census itself. Of course it doesn't technically prove causality - it could be that the type of people who are successful just happen to be the same type of people who get married. Or maybe they get married precisely because they are successful - or unsuccessful people have a harder time finding spouses.

[abeyer]

But that's totally orthogonal to the statistic under discussion about people living near their blood-relations. You can move across the world and still get married, or live nearby and never.

[rayiner]

I live about an hour away from where I grew up, but my family moved nearby so they’re just a few miles away. Modern economic trends that rip families apart have many downsides. It’s much harder to raise kids without family nearby. Likewise, people who don’t have family close are much more likely to fall through the cracks if they don’t have family around.

[hnthrowaway7518]

I get kind of why you could think this, but honestly I think it's far more important to leave your circle and experience something new as a young adult. It becomes increasingly difficult to move as you age, the longer you stay tied to your familiar environment that you were raised in, the harder it is to take the plunge and explore something different.

I am the only person in my direct family that lives outside of the county (very rural) or neighboring county that I grew up in. I really absolutely cannot fathom living my (probably) only life worrying about social cohesion or economic value of society. I live like 2500 miles from my family, and it used to be a lot further (I lived in east Asia for a while). Despite the distance, technology has allowed for me to keep in close contact with my family.

Taking the chance to explore new cultures and really immerse myself in them, and also live through the crazy Bay Area tech bubble before deciding it wasn't for me, really has provided a lot of excellent life experiences and perspectives. I wouldn't trade these opportunities for anything and strongly encourage younger people to try and leave the nest, at least for a bit, while it's still easy to do so and before they have to decide on things like staying near their parents once they become elderly.

[p0pcult]

I think we would be better if it was 3 of 10; Americans are too clustered into tribes. Urban people would benefit from understanding rural lifestyles and vice versa.