The idea of owning something for yourself seems to be falling out of favor these days, and some people worry that it might never make a comeback. Let’s look at the concept of the war on ownership and how younger generations are being affected by it.
Renting works, but not long term
In the long term, renting is not a sustainable solution for younger generations. The cost of living is only rising, and younger generations are already struggling to make ends meet. On top of that, skyrocketing housing markets and subscription business models make it even harder for young people to own anything. The war on ownership is failing younger generations, and something needs to change soon.
Housing should be affordable for everyone and less focused on those who can afford luxury homes. Housing should include storage space, laundry rooms, and dishwashers to facilitate apartment living. A huge difference between renting and owning a place is what you can do with it. You can modify your home however you want, but the landlord has a say if you rent or lease.
Even if the landlord isn’t consulted, which could result in penalties, changes could still be deducted from an initial security deposit. With Real Estate companies buying properties in bulk, housing prices rise while available housing disappears. Since Real Estate corporations develop most new housing projects, it makes sense to seek profit by only renting them out.
Median rents across the US are over $2000 a month. That could be a mortgage payment in some states. However, most younger people don’t have the credit history, or savings, to qualify for a mortgage. So younger people are stuck paying rent or living with their parents. Dropping $2000 a month into a property that will never be yours doesn’t really give you the sense that your future is financially stable.
Lack of ownership means fewer families
Then there’s the issue of building a family. 2021 saw the lowest birth rate in US history, and it’s understandable. Let’s forget that global overpopulation seems to be an issue younger generations will have to deal with; with most millennials and Gen Z-ers unable to afford their own homes, starting a family doesn’t make financial sense.
On top of that, most young millennials and Gen Z-ers who rent can afford it because they have roommates. Starting a family is enough of a challenge without your friend Steve sharing the space; that situation is unfair to everyone involved. Similarly, it’s hard to build your own family with either your parents or in-laws weighing in.
The subscription model
For a long time, the subscription model seemed like a way to keep things affordable. But now, it’s becoming clear that this model is snowballing and preventing younger generations from owning anything. The high cost of living and widening wage gap makes it hard to afford things without inflation.
And skyrocketing housing markets and subscription business models might keep ownership out of younger people’s reach. It’s a problem because ownership is key to building wealth and security. And it’s not just streaming services offering subscriptions these days.
Take Adobe, for example. From Photoshop to Premiere, Illustrator, or Audition, Adobe’s creative suite has been a long-time staple for creatives. You could purchase Adobe’s creative suite for a one-time payment in the early days. It wasn’t cheap, but you owned it once you paid for it and got your license key. Now Adobe offers a range of subscription services that let you select which creative suite software you want.
Most single-app subscriptions (i.e., Photoshop or Premiere) cost around $20 per month. That adds up to $240 a year. That seems like a solid deal considering individual software licenses used to run about $1000 each. At that rate, it would take five years of subscription payments before paying more than you would have under the license key model. The full Adobe Creative Suite costs around $55 a month, or $660 annually. Its equivalent, the Master Collection license, used to cost $2600.
In this case, you’d have to pay a full subscription for four years before you pay more in subscriptions than a license would have cost. On top of that, your Adobe subscription will update the software for free as new versions are released. Under the license model, the owners’ upgrade to a more recent version offered a discounted price.
Subscriptions lead the war on ownership
There are two blatant big ones and an underlying third with the subscription model. First, most Adobe users will probably pay more over time with subscriptions. Four or five years may sound like a lot of time, but it’s not. Most people using Adobe’s suite need it for work, whether it’s their main job or a side-hustle. If you’re going to be using something for your career, four or five years is nothing.
Second, the subscription model removes the notion of saving up to buy something. Instead of a one-off payment, however large it may be, subscriptions are constantly eating away at our bank accounts. There are even subscriptions that help you track your subscriptions, so you down go overboard. Eventually, you’ll have to pick and choose which services you keep paying for because you don’t own any of them.
The underlying issue is that constantly updating software means your hardware might fall behind. If you have an older computer, the software will eventually stop being compatible. You can usually ask either your computer’s maker or the software company itself for a compatible version. Under the subscription model, you’ll still have to pay full price to keep an outdated software version.
Outside of the Adobe example, subscriptions are a key instigator of the war on ownership. Since you’re always paying for a product and never own it, it’s like we’re renting everything. Younger people are facing a future where our incomes are immediately swallowed by recurrent subscriptions. Even finished products are using the model. BMW recently received backlash after their heated seat feature was offered as a subscription.
