This! Recently I had a discussion here on HN with a young person who wants to move into Palo Alto and finds the prices astronomical.(it was very enlightening conservation and if HN had a messaging system I would invite him to listen in here) Society blames seniors for ‘taking up spaces meant for ‘young growing families’. In CA, it’s usually their frustration over how they pay little taxes and live in big homes. The frustration is valid but misplaced. The solution is not to punitively tax them that would end up driving them out of their towns or homes and into isolated retirement communities.

I place the blame entirely on the govt that is squeezing and squeezing young working people for taxes and turning everyone against each other. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the undignified fight for land. Everything is instigated by the dissatisfaction of what do I get in return for the taxes I pay.

The govt should work for US. We are working for the govt. In California, this is gaslighting of the public at a state level. I want to shake people out of this stupor and show them that they are being abused by the politicians in Sacramento.

It starts at the public school level where children are indoctrinated to be sheep and follow the ‘leader’ because they are most vulnerable. It carries on to university level especially if the students are not in brain cell burning hard subjects or even anything that completely consumes them and suffuses them with concentration for the love of learning. They end up with too much time on their hands and go out in the world to tilt windmills.

Your last line: yes! There is an easy fix for this. Multigenerational family homes. This is high density living that is sustainable without any of the cons associated with it. And your are living with people you like. And still able to meet a variety of diverse people outside your home. Because communities that are multi generational have people of all ages. Older people have experience but not working productively. Young people can work but not as wealthy as older people. Children have nothing and have the all kinds of help from a multigenerational family..not just mothers, uncles and aunts along with grandparents but also siblings and cousins.

Having a huge compound that shares resources like water, electricity, micro grid, gardens, play spaces and shared vehicles. Home schooling is possible and most importantly childcare. Ideal family size would be 6 and can be as much 18-25 depending on how big the compound is...this is a lesser footprint.

The advantage of multigenerational families vs a large family is that the former has many people covering diff roles but in a family only the parents do every thing. There is more work distribution and allocation. Multi generational families frees women from the traditional chokehold of household duties by distributing it and they can go to work or study more because they know uncles or aunts or grandparents are around for caregiving of children.

I grew up in such a family, so I also know the downsides of it. In my generation, most families were multigenerational and like like. And I have thought long and hard about this and I think it comes down again to resources. When families are forced to be multigenerational due to necessity or tradition, it comes with its own set of issues. But if it’s a planned family with guidelines agreed upon by the family members themselves, it can function efficiently.