Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The socio-economic landscape in the US means where it is cheaper/easier to setup families and have kids is rarely correlated with economic opportunity. And in the US, people can move easily.

So kids usually have a a choice - either stay where they grew up, and live with reduced economic opportunities (actually very common, but those folks aren’t usually posting all over the Internet about it).

Or move to where the economic opportunity is good, but then be isolated from prior friends and family. Those people talk a lot more, and tend to stick out. That is also more expensive, so those folks tend to have more economic backing and/or stronger ‘resumes’ which correlates to more education, getting more opportunity, etc.

If folks from the second group have issues and need to retreat to a more comfortable economic situation, they’ll also return to where they tended to grow up, usually.

One of those two groups is more often to be called ‘losers’. Which one do you think it is?

Oh, did I say the US? This is actually many countries, minus ease of moving around.






> cheaper/easier to setup families and have kids is rarely correlated with economic opportunity

That's the problem. Due to car culture and zoning policies etc.


It’s likely always been that way. Cities are crowded and more expensive, but have more jobs and opportunities. Rural areas are boring, but cheaper.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: