That is mainly because "these days" 18 year olds are no longer empowered to make any relevant decisions. You propose to keep treating them like children for seven more years. The day they become 25 you'll say "My gosh, they're 25 now but they're STILL like children!".
It is my opinion that this huge collective distrust towards youth is one of the biggest hidden problems of today's society. If it was up to me, kids would get a basic income from the age of 14.
I think it's mainly because these days, it's much harder for an 18 year old to make an indipendent living than it was back in the day. Today, most people don't even begin their careers until after college, which is usually around 23 at the earliest. When my Dad was growing up, it was not unusual for 16 year olds to begin working full time to support themselves. By 25, most people were already well on their way to marriage. This is not the case today. Today, people who are 18 are usually still dependent on their parents.
It's not the children's fault, either. It's just a fact of the times. More schooling is required than before, and continuous schooling shelters people from having to make many real world decisions. It's easy to live a "don't care" lifestyle during college, only to be hit with reality hard once you graduate. I've personally experienced this.
There is a major difference in meltalities of someone who's been in school their entire life and someone who's been in the "real world" for a few years.
I'm not sure of your age, nor am I suggesting that it would have any negative impact on your perception here, but we seem to have different perceptions of the youth of today. I am 25 years old and I can only speak on my experiences.
And my experience shows that there's not much of a difference in maturity between an 18 year old senior in High School and a 22 year old Junior in college.
However, there's a huge difference between a 22 year old Junior in college and a 24 year old who's been working for a year.
In the end all society's have a baby-elder process with many stages. We let 15 year old's risk their and others lives driving multi thousand pound vehicles at 70+MPH. We keep prescription medication behind many additional hoops even for well educated 60 year old's.
IMO, the real difference is how much education people need. A 15 year old can dig a ditch just fine, but cancer research takes quite a bit more. In the end society simply values 15 year old's time less.
That's quite the accomplishment, and is by far not the norm. I am 25 and have only been financially independent since 23, and even I am the anomaly amongst my peers.
I don't see what's wrong with my stereotype in this case. Most people under 25 are not financially independent, and it's mainly due to the society we live in, not the children themselves.
When my Dad was growing up, people had full time jobs at 16 years old and were married with kids by 25, where as today, the average person doesn't even graduate college before 23.
Stop calling us "children." It's offense and rude. How very convenient that the cutoff of adulthood is your own age—if you're going to insult vast numbers of functional adults, at least insult yourself in the process. Silly child.
First of all, you are in fact wrong. The majority of young adults do in fact live independently. [0]
Second of all, if you think that adulthood isn't reached until 25, why would you be advocating for reinforcing this supposed infantilization?
[How very convenient that the cutoff of adulthood is your own age]
I chose the number 25 because it is usually a few years after most people have graduated college and have entered the work force. The number 25 is used in many places as a "special" age. Insurance companies, rental car companies, hotel bookings, etc...
[you're going to insult vast numbers of functional adults, at least insult yourself in the process. Silly child.]
I don't know about your peers, but from my graduating class of ~1000, I would guess there were less than 100 who were completely independent by 23.
[First of all, you are in fact wrong. The majority of young adults do in fact live independently.]
I'd like to lend my support to "old enough to realize that the real world sucks".
By that measure, I reached adulthood two weeks short of my 25th birthday. That, of course, was when I was laid off for the first time, just after signing a year-long lease on a new apartment.
That's probably just coincidence, though. I'm sure that many people realized the real world sucks earlier than I did.
Most people don't get college degrees, so that's a poor jumping off point to begin with. Near 68% of Americans do not have a bachelors degree. Many who do enroll simply drop out long before graduating.
I see plenty wrong with the stereotype. I've been on my own since 17, too. I'm 28 now. In that time I've worked at nearly every job you can imagine, with no parents to beg money from or go back home to live with. I know what grinding poverty feels like, and how it's all the worse when you actually have a full time job. Doesn't mean I wasn't financially independent. There's lots of us in the same boat.
I eventually ground out night classes while working and job-hopped my way into industrial automation and a halfway comfortable life, so I understand the appeal of passing judgement from a high and mighty place - but don't. It's a particularly pernicious intellectual weakness.
I'm not trying to condescend people who aren't financially independent. Maybe the use of the word "children" wasn't the best, because I can see how it gives off that vibe. I am just pointing out what I have observed.
Most people at the age of 23 are not in a position to support themselves yet, which is kind of off-topic w.r.t my original point anyway.
The fact that there are people like you who were able to work hard and make good things happen at a young age doesn't nullify the fact that the average 23 year old is still dependent on their parents.
But what I was really getting at is that there is a certain level of judgement/wisdom that is obtained by working hard and living on your own/supporting yourself.
This can be learned at any age (as pointed out by my comment about my Dad working at the age of 16). However, many people today are not exposed to these types of desicions until after they get done school, which is usually at the age of 23.
Some people are forced into an adult mindset earlier than others. I've known 14 and 16 year olds that could be trusted with more responsibility than most 30 year olds. I've also met 60 year olds with a child's mindset. Clearly, age doesn't cause maturity, but it's certainly correlated with it.
An outlier can't be treated like the center of a distribution. Your own experiences don't mean that most 18 year olds aren't still children. It's not like the government is going to start maturity-testing people to decide when to start dispensing a basic income. They're more likely to test a "representative population" and set the age to the point where 2/3 test as "adult", or use one of the traditional age-cutoffs like 18, 21, or 25.
Probably one of the biggest mistakes is not learning more skills and different skills. In this era of online learning, there is really no excuse for not spending a couple hours bere and there to learn something new or different.
I think we should actually lower the drinking age. It's currently 21 here. In fact, being 18 really gains you nothing here other than the ability to join the military and get into trouble with the law.
My main point is that a few years should go by after a child enters into the adult world before they have access to a fund left for them.
There's usually a short "reckless" period immediately after graduating high school and college. However, this usually calms down after the initial shock of having sudden freedom wears off.
I have two friends who inhereted $20,000+ sums of money from relatives when they were in their late teens, and both of them pissed it away in under a year. Looking back, both of them seem to regret it.
> I have two friends who inhereted $20,000+ sums of money from relatives when they were in their late teens, and both of them pissed it away in under a year. Looking back, both of them seem to regret it.
Would they have learned that lesson without making that mistake? Are you even sure they really wouldn't do the same again?
To quote Time, "About 70 percent of people who suddenly receive a windfall of cash will lose it within a few years, according to the National Endowment for Financial Education."
Just to make the anecdotes match the statistics, I inherented roughly 30k. It remained in my education fund until I finished undergrad. At 22, I opened an investment account. It's been paying dividends for the better part of a decade now.
[Would they have learned that lesson without making that mistake? Are you even sure they really wouldn't do the same again?]
It's hard to say. However, I think one really learns the value of money after having been in the work force for a while. I think that experience may have had a positive impact on their decision making had this happened later on in their life.
[To quote Time, "About 70 percent of people who suddenly receive a windfall of cash will lose it within a few years, according to the National Endowment for Financial Education."]
I believe it. But I also believe that the likelyhood of making good financial choices increases with some time spent in the work force. In this case, they had been living a nice lifestyle under their parents when they received the money.
[Just to make the anecdotes match the statistics, I inherented roughly 30k. It remained in my education fund until I finished undergrad. At 22, I opened an investment account. It's been invested in the TSX60 for the past 6 years now.]
You are also on hackernews, a website which consists of generally well-educated people. I'm not trying to sound snotty here, but there's a good chance that you have better judgement than most people.
> I think one really learns the value of money after having been in the work force for a while.
Perhaps you should consider using that as your criteria rather than discriminating based on age. I'd still disagree, but that policy would deprive fewer people than your current proposal.
Let me know when you have this thing in place: I will start a "Spring Break Holiday Park" somewhere in the south where beer is $20 and a Rum&Coke goes for $40. Only people from 25 are allowed in.
Mildly related, but for a while I've felt we should change the age of majority / self responsibility to age 25. It would improve a lot of things about society...
Personally I think the opposite is true to some degree. Age does not guarantee that you are a rational and well informed citizen. I've also read numerous articles about how young people are more tolerant (gay marriage is a good example), moving back into dense urban areas (causing less sprawl and a renewed interest in better public transport and urban planning), and willing to at least admit that major challenges like anthropogenic climate change are real. Society can learn from people of all ages, but often the enthusiasm and free time of youth is what is needed to drive real societal change.
I'm not sure what that has to do with age of responsibility? The statistical facts are there to show that people under the age of 25 have generally impaired judgement compared with those over. (Among other things that's why you can't rent cars until 25.)
An 18 year old these days is still a child. Give them a couple years into the drinking age to get their bad decisions out of the way.