Obviously if your life is not matching the expectations built into you from before you were aware it was happening it is because the expectations are bullshit. I am looking forward to a return to communal living and away from these ridiculous status markers being labeled independence and success.

Where do you get the idea that we'll return to communal living?

For hundreds of years, we've been taught that it is "I versus Everyone Else" in economically liberal societies. To think that will go away, and not go into hyperdrive, when people are desperate, cold and hungry seems unrealistic to me.

I truly want my assumption to be proven wrong, though.

Having a standard of living is a status marker? If you want to live in a commune, why don't you convince 10 other people to go live with you out on a farm?

I did not downvote, but I really disagree with this sentiment. Financial independence for young people is probably the most revolutionary concept in Western culture and is definitely the reason behind so much innovation not just in technology, but in society as well.

What skills do you have? What are you doing to improve them?

What job do you want? What's preventing you from getting a position somewhere in that field?

I'm assuming you're putting a lot of work into achieving your goals, what are the obstacles you're coming up against?

Based on his profile, he might live in Brazil which is now an economic basket case.

So that might be his biggest obstacle.

There are so many substandard developers making $100k in the u.s. that would never be able to find job elsewhere in the world, those of us who live in the U.S. should really be grateful despite all of its shortcomings.

The distribution of substandard developers making a purchasing-power equivalent of $100K (allowing for free healthcare, college education, lower housing costs) is probably similar in most countries with a well-developed IT sector.

What kind of tasks do you need a computer for? From that you could determine how much you need to spend on a replacement one (probably a free one or a cheap second-hand one).

My generations biggest fear was that there would be a global thermonuclear war that destroyed civilization, and those few that survived would have short miserable lives picking through the ashes ala 'the road'. Being 50 and renting a house instead of owning it doesn't sound that bad to me.

> "My generations biggest fear was that there would be a global thermonuclear war that destroyed civilization"

That may still happen, Generation X doesn't get to claim that one as solely their own.

It was a much more real threat in the 80's and early 90's, though. I highly doubt students are still forced to watch bullshit educational "duck and cover" videos on how hiding under their desks will somehow save them from a nuclear explosion.

That being said, kids have something else to replace that fear with nowadays: the constant potential threat of a possible school shooter.

There is a considerable area that is far enough away from a nuclear explosion to not be obliterated, but close enough that buildings may collapse, windows may be converted into deadly projectiles, and so on. Duck and cover would in fact save many many lives in that area.

The Wikipedia article has details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_and_cover

> "It was a much more real threat in the 80's and early 90's, though. I highly doubt students are still forced to watch bullshit educational "duck and cover" videos on how hiding under their desks will somehow save them from a nuclear explosion."

I agree that it was more prominent in the public imagination, and you're right that "duck and cover" videos and similar were part of what kept it there, but I would dispute that the threat is any less 'real' now than it was in the 80's.

Looking around the world, I'd say there are currently three regions of instability that could lead to nuclear weapons used in anger (I'd add a fourth one if Trump is elected US President, and I'm not joking about that, the guy has already called for killing innocent people to further his own goals (killing the families of terrorists), and I could see Trump and Putin being a toxic combination in terms of diplomatic action).

The three regions I'm referring to are:

1. North Korea.

2. Middle East.

3. India and Pakistan.

North Korea are clearly threatening to develop nuclear weapons, and have a powerful ally in China, which allows them to get away with it so far. Even if the weapons are developed as a form of self defence, the question is what the leadership sees as valid threats, and considering their somewhat ruthless approach to their own people, I wouldn't put it past the North Korean government to do something reckless beyond their own borders.

The Middle East appears to be a huge mess, I'm sure I don't need to explain how chaotic the region is. Isreal are the only country in the region with nuclear weapons at the moment, but with the activity in the region it never seems far from disaster. Even if Isreal didn't push the button themselves, other more radical groups may go down that route. Russia's support for Assad and Turkey's membership of NATO are a bit of a concern when viewed in combination.

India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers, engaged with a minor conflict with each other over their borders. Things appear to be settling down recently but if either side gets a war-hungry government then work on developing a peaceful resolution could be undone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India–Pakistan_border_skirmish...

I don't dispute that nuclear weapons could come into play again in the future, just that a truly global thermonuclear war is much less likely now than in the past. Sure North Korea might try to launch a nuclear missile or two (coincidentally they just threatened to do so today) and get wiped out in the process, and yeah, some terrorists would probably love to detonate a suitcase nuke somewhere, but that's not the same thing as a truly global event that threatens all of humanity as we know it.

During the Cold War there was a really good chance of that happening, and there were several instances where equipment malfunctioned (and showed impending missile launches when where there was none) and the only thing that stopped it was the right general making a smart call that it wasn't real, or several other close calls, from global destruction.

North Korea isn't likely to bring that about. The Middle East isn't too likely to bring that about. India and Pakistan aren't going to bring that in either.

Russia is still capable to do that, but I think they're not too serious about their desire to actually go into war and are more taking advantage of NATO's unwillingness to go into war to make a few small land grabs (that was a little scary, though).

The tension and complex web of polar opposite alliances across the whole world just isn't there like it was in WWI, WWII, and Cold War days. It could still develop in the next decade or two, sure, but I really don't think we're there right now.

For all the ills that Capitalism might have, I do think it's helped tie all the countries that participate in it to each other's fates, to a certain extent, and they don't want to see the other countries fail (or attack them directly) since it will now affect their own economy, probably for the worst.

Trump is a wild card, but I think assuming he won the nomination he'll calm down his rhetoric, since he needs to in order to win the moderate vote anyway. If he actually made it into office, then that's admittedly a wild card. I'd like to think that he didn't actually believe that shit he said and will be more concerned with internal politics than foreign, and/or will head the advice of people who have been there a lot longer. Hopefully.

The danger of thermonuclear war is just as real (yet remote) today as the danger (and remoteness) of a school shooting in the 80s. The only difference is the popular perception of that threat as fueled by the media.

I'm in Gen Y. My biggest fear is that an ecological disaster will kill half of the humans alive and society will regress to feudalism.

Which I would actually consider worse than a nuclear wasteland in some significant ways.

Some people might view your situation as very advantageous. No ties, no strings attached, nothing to hold you back. Your opportunity in life is a blank slate, in a good way.

Take every odd job that shows up, and amass some savings towards a long-term goal. Travel the US, or the world if you can manage.

Making friends is easy, keeping them can hard. Join some local clubs/organizations and put yourself out there.

Fear can be a motivator if you let it, use it to help you avoid the undesirable outcome.

Some of these sound like platitudes, but they do hold substance. It's easy to find yourself in a situation that seems hopeless. What you do from that place is important.