Living at home has a negative NPV

Well my suspicion has been validated by number of Jewish friends: Living at home has a negative NPV. Sorry FOBs, your Costco conquests are falling short: you got beat to the bunch in cheapness by a non-Asian race. This is a disgrace for all the cash mattresses and penny jars scattered around the Sunset neighborhoods. All the “free stuff” pick-ups from sidewalks and night raids of the city dump.

For every year of living at home with parents after the age of 21 you forgo five thousand dollars in annual future earnings. So for example if you live at home until you are 30 you have given up 9*5= $45,000 of potential annual salary. That means the moment you finally make that huge leap of faith to move out, likely when you were forced into marriage with a non-English speaker, you are facing life where your annual salary will never exceed 40-50k per year.

Now let’s do the math. Your primary argument is that you live at home so that you don’t have to pay rent but really the true reason is that you have been told you are a looser so many times by your parents that group harmony requires you to believe them and then the story is simple: how could a looser afford an apartment? But let’s get back to the green shall we? You figured $1,500 per month for 9 years is not a bad savings right? That’s a whole $18,000 per year isn’t it – more than 20 cheap flat screen Costco no-brand name flat screen TVs right? Well the problem is that in exchange of those TVs you are prohibited from making decent living until the rest of your days. Now what’s more important? You saving $18k per year for 9 years or forgoing $5k per year for the reset of your life?

The Jewish people know the answer: I will show you the finger today and make $120 per year for the next 40 years and you can take your group harmony you know where? Good work guys. I admire your IQ!