I also posted in that OOT thread (about roommates? I forget) a while back but I'm more or less on fryke's side. The key is having a good roommate as having a bad roommate really sucks (this is important!). But if you have a good roommate, IMO it's better than living alone. In my case, I'm 25, live in the SF Bay Area, don't quite make 100k, and live with a close college buddy who has a similar job to me.

We both pretty much plan to have roommates until we're ready to move in with a girl. Benefits of living together: general hanging out, cooking/eating meals together, meeting new people, just going out more often because the roommate invites you, and having those awesome late-night conversations that just don't happen when you live apart. And if either one of us just wants some alone times, that's cool too.

We also share a lot of expenses (groceries, cable, internet, alcohol, entertainment, furniture) and that further increases the amount of money I have to put towards other things. Girls haven't been a problem - we've liked each others girlfriends, and it's really not a big deal to let the other have privacy when necessary.

While I don't live a balling life, it's pretty damn nice. Our apartment is pretty sweet (2 story with 2 master bedrooms), I don't worry about money at all, go out to bars as often as I want (1-2x/week), eat out for probably 75% of my lunch/dinners, drive a nice new car, have a small student loan payment, and still save ~1/3 of my takehome towards retirement, a house, and general savings and a lot of that is due to the fact that I'm not paying $2k+/mo just to live on my own.

So yeah, maybe roommates aren't for everyone, but I love having one and even if I made way more money I'd still have one. That might change when I'm 30 but hopefully by then I'll be settling down with a girl.

I'm over 25 and had a roommate move into my small condo (according to you small) for an insignificant amount of rent ($250). He lives on the couch. I hate living alone. You seem to only see the downside of a roommate. What about having someone to chill with, or always have someone to pick up mail when you're on a business trip vacation, or hey can you get me milk while you're shopping.

And in regards to people talking about what's considered normal, I say **** em. Do what works for you.

Yeah I agree with fryke here. Probably an age thing, as I'm 21, but I can't imagine living without flatmates. it obviously depends on who you live with, and it has its disadvantages, but even if we forget the saving money part of it, I'd much rather live with other people than by myself.

I think ideally, if you're OK with roomates, you want a large house/apartment with one or many flatmates, so you can have your own "area" but still be able to socialise with them when you want to.

It's interesting that the people advocating having roommates are under 30. I think that makes a significant difference in perception of the situation.

When I was in my 20s getting married was such a ridiculous concept that I would laugh in a person's face if they even breached the subject. I got married last year at 35 and am pretty happy about it.

I'm also a liberal Democrat, and have been for quite a long time. As I get older, conservative values actually creep into my line of thinking more so than I'd ever thought. Things change over time.

I say technically it is a lack of maturity thing more than strictly age although the two are obviously correlated.

I would think roommates are more acceptable if you live in a major city. Think the show Friends.

Sorry, are we talking about someone who is married or has kids? If so lol at roommates, I didnt mean to suggest that. I thought we were talking about a hypothetical single male in a metropolitan area, in which case I stand by my suggestion.

I also assumed we are talking single male 25+ (maybe 28+) living in a city with a population >1M.

i lived with room mates for undergrad and on my own for a couple of years after graduating.
i prefer living with room mates.

the kind of women who need privacy are the types who would have their own place anyways.

congratulations. you're one step closer to apathy.

I'll also chime in in favor of roommates. Some people just like having people to hang out with a lot without going to bars all of the time.

This seems reasonable overall.

The biggest argument is expense I'd say - the 1-bedroom is easily the worst deal in the rental market. The incremental benefit of more space at better rates in a shared 2-bedroom rental could easily offset the downside of having a roommate (if you preferred to live alone). And if you want a roommate for social reasons like Duke, win-win.

Reading thru the thread the issue about whether or not 100k a year can afford you some baller life style is completely subjective. I love in the mid west and 250k can buy you a ****ing mansion in many cities.

My step dad retired to a ranch in the black hills of south dakota which is like 4k sq ft with 40 acres and a massive shop and he paid 250k for it.

Welcome to the real world:



When you look at the graphic above, keep in mind that this is median household combined income, not individual income.

While that is an option we are talking specifically about people living in cities with a population of at least a million. We are intentionally avoiding the very subjective argument over what is a preferable lifestyle since that is purely subjective. I'm fairly sure that if I wanted to move to Winnipeg or even rural Ontario that $100k would seem like a lot more money because housing costs would be substantially reduced. The question is can I live in a major city and live well on $100k and the answer is clearly no unless you have a pretty low standard of what is consider living well.

Yeah but not even every city of > 1 million is created equal and 100k in New York is less than 100k in Los Angeles which is less than 100k in Chicago. It also really depends on whether or not you are including suburbs etc... I mean if you are saying can you afford to live "well" in some downtown Chicago apartment on the Magnificient Mile eating at Gibson's every week on 100k a year the answer is hell no.

It depends on how you define "live well" and where you are willing to live. I mean you are pretty hellbent on moving the bar to some stratospheric height where the obvious answer is no. I would argue that in most cities of > 1 million you can live very comfortably and retire with little to no worries while taking a solid vacation every year.

That is a realistic expectation and acceptable bench mark imo.