Your spouse dies--Do you remarry?

[garbon]

The 2011 New York City Housing and Vacancy Survey had that 34% of renters lived in apts by themselves. If you add in married couples to that (as presumably they live together because they want to and not solely for economic reasons), you've 65% of renters in NYC not fitting what you said.

Oh for god's sake, garbon.  It's like dealing with my fucking teenagers.

That's still 35% of people who live with a roommate, most likely for financial reasons. That's a lot, and I bet it's pretty much on par with the UK; London in particular. Which was, I think you know, the point of the post.

So, it's a lot, okay? Maybe not "nobody" but pretty much everyone knew that, didn't they? Of course, it required the snarky-barely-post-teen-literalist to make a big deal about it.

Actually as I pointed out the numbers are actually slanted to people not living with a roommate - in essentially our most expensive US city. (if 35% living with a roommate is a big number - isn't 35% not living with anyone but themselves?)

I think that's worth 'nitpicking' as you call it as your take seemed to suggest that pretty much everyone was too poor to live alone  - and that's simply not true.  I know that the convenient narrative right now is that everyone is poor and suffering but we shouldn't use that to cloud the realities on the ground or call it nitpicking when one points out something contrary to said narrative.

[merithyn]

Actually as I pointed out the numbers are actually slanted to people not living with a roommate - in essentially our most expensive US city. (if 35% living with a roommate is a big number - isn't 35% not living with anyone but themselves?)

I think that's worth 'nitpicking' as you call it as your take seemed to suggest that pretty much everyone was too poor to live alone  - and that's simply not true.  I know that the convenient narrative right now is that everyone is poor and suffering but we shouldn't use that to cloud the realities on the ground or call it nitpicking when one points out something contrary to said narrative.

*pat* *pat* *pat*

Yes, dear. You're right.

[DGuller]

Taking NYC as a whole is a bit misleading.  Outer boroughs, while still very expensive by American standards, are a hell of a lot more affordable than a box under the overpass in Manhattan.

[garbon]

Actually as I pointed out the numbers are actually slanted to people not living with a roommate - in essentially our most expensive US city. (if 35% living with a roommate is a big number - isn't 35% not living with anyone but themselves?)

I think that's worth 'nitpicking' as you call it as your take seemed to suggest that pretty much everyone was too poor to live alone  - and that's simply not true.  I know that the convenient narrative right now is that everyone is poor and suffering but we shouldn't use that to cloud the realities on the ground or call it nitpicking when one points out something contrary to said narrative.

*pat* *pat* *pat*

Yes, dear. You're right.

What? I'm supposed to just sit by while you spout off your doom and gloom narrative? Tyr is a rather impressionable sort and you're misleading him.

[Eddie Teach]

Well, I can't even afford a trailer in Alabama, so gotta side with Meri even though I know she's wildly exaggerating.

[garbon]

Taking NYC as a whole is a bit misleading.  Outer boroughs, while still very expensive by American standards, are a hell of a lot more affordable than a box under the overpass in Manhattan.

Unfortunately, tables I found didn't cut everything by borough.

[crazy canuck]

The 2011 New York City Housing and Vacancy Survey had that 34% of renters lived in apts by themselves. If you add in married couples to that (as presumably they live together because they want to and not solely for economic reasons), you've 65% of renters in NYC not fitting what you said.

Oh for god's sake, garbon.  It's like dealing with my fucking teenagers.

Shouldnt be too surprising given his age and stage. 

[garbon]

Well, I can't even afford a trailer in Alabama, so gotta side with Meri even though I know she's wildly exaggerating.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-05-02/living-alone/54585114/1

More singles living alone and loving it, despite the economy

Census data released this week says 31 million households in 2010 consisted of just one person, 4 million more than 2000. According to the new data, singles make up 27% of U.S. households; in several large cities, including New York, San Francisco, Atlanta and Washington, D.C., it's more than 40%.

For the first time ever, Census found, less than half of all U.S. homes — 48% — were husband-wife households.

In 1950, 22% of Americans were single, and 9% of U.S. households were occupied by people who lived alone, says New York University sociology professor Eric Klinenberg, author of new book, Going Solo: The Extraordinary Rise and Surprising Appeal of Living Alone.

And in places like Manhattan and San Francisco, more than 40% of all households consisted of just one person, according to the new numbers.

The swelling percentage of single-living people is changing the way cities grow, homes are built and businesses operate. The trend line has been noticed by developers and economic observers in many corners of the country.

[merithyn]

Well, I can't even afford a trailer in Alabama, so gotta side with Meri even though I know she's wildly exaggerating.

Yes, well, when one "wildly exaggerates" to the point that it can't possibly be true (as in "nobody"), I think it's pretty clear that it was said to make a point (in this case about the shitty economy), not to make accurate guesses at numbers. I just forgot that I was in the land of the Autistic Teenager when I made the comment here. 

[garbon]

Well, I can't even afford a trailer in Alabama, so gotta side with Meri even though I know she's wildly exaggerating.

Yes, well, when one "wildly exaggerates" to the point that it can't possibly be true (as in "nobody"), I think it's pretty clear that it was said to make a point (in this case about the shitty economy), not to make accurate guesses at numbers. I just forgot that I was in the land of the Autistic Teenager when I made the comment here. 

And it was your point that I take issue with.

[merithyn]

And it was your point that I take issue with.

You don't think that the economy sucks?

[Barrister]

And it was your point that I take issue with.

You don't think that the economy sucks?

I'm pretty sure the economy blows right now.  And of course, since you can't suck and blow at the same time...

[garbon]

And it was your point that I take issue with.

You don't think that the economy sucks?

I do but I'm not sure that I want to blithely accept that that it sucking means that we can use it as a catch-all to describe phenomena.

For point of reference, I just grabbed the same stats from NYC rental survey in 2002. 67% singles + married, 36% singles alone.

I know all of my stats work is shaky (and we're not taken into account of lot of things) but what I'm trying to show is that I don't think we can just say economy sucks so there are tons of people living together because they can't afford to otherwise. I don't see support for that when I look around.

[MadImmortalMan]

Well it appears in the US where common law marriages still happen - a piece of it is intent / acting like they are married.

And it requires seven years of living as husband and wife before it can be legally acknowledged. In Iowa, now, it's living as husband and husband or wife and wife for seven years. (I love that Iowa includes same-gender marriages in their common law policies now. )

Isn't that a bit annoying though? What if they want to live together but don't want to get married? Can they "split up" and have one of them live in a hotel for a week sometime in year 6 and reset the clock?

[The Brain]

Inspired by a conversation with Mrs. MIM. I mentioned offhand that there's no way in hell I would get re-married if she died. She thought I didn't need to be that loyal, but those were not my reasons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYM7cxxm2i0 ?