
? 20世紀六七十年代,集體生活在嬉皮士運動的浪潮中興起。如今,Z世代和千禧一代正愈發(fā)傾向于與朋友或家人共同購房——這一選擇并非受反主流文化的驅(qū)動,而是他們以務(wù)實態(tài)度應(yīng)對高房價、學(xué)生債務(wù)以及抵押貸款利率。
20世紀60年代和70年代是集體生活最豐富多彩、繁榮的時期之一。彼時,年輕一代——嬰兒潮一代——創(chuàng)立了公社,歡迎任何愿意摒棄主流文化、逃離城市化的人加入。
《紐約時報》1970年的一篇文章指出,集體生活也是一種低成本的生活選擇。公社——很大程度上受到嬉皮士運動(一場基于和平、愛、自由和個人主義的反主流文化運動)的影響——通過集中資源支付房租、食物和公用事業(yè)費用來降低生活成本。多人合租不僅降低了租金,也無需單獨購置電器、支付公用事業(yè)費用和其他生活費用。

五六十年前,集體生活曾風(fēng)靡一時。如今,我們正見證集體生活的復(fù)興,這種生活方式在Z世代群體中愈發(fā)常見——不過,背后的原因卻大不相同。
根據(jù)國家抵押貸款保險公司(National Mortgage Insurance Corporation)的最新報告,近三分之一的Z世代表示愿意與朋友或家人共同出資購房(即“合買”);18%的千禧一代也持有相同觀點。2024年OpenDoor的報告還指出,超過四分之三的首次購房者與父母、兄弟姐妹、朋友、伴侶甚至同事共同購房。
這絕非僅僅是潛在發(fā)展趨勢。房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀人和其他住房專家告訴《財富》雜志,他們已在各自的住房市場中看到這一趨勢的顯現(xiàn)。
TikTok和Instagram上也充斥著Z世代和千禧一代共同購房的視頻。
全美范圍內(nèi)的集體生活現(xiàn)象
康涅狄格州費爾菲爾德縣科威國際不動產(chǎn)(Coldwell Banker)房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀人帕蒂·庫珀(Patti Cooper)告訴《財富》雜志,自疫情以來房價一路飆升,在她所處的房地產(chǎn)市場中,合買趨勢正愈發(fā)盛行。根據(jù)美國房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀人協(xié)會(NAR)的數(shù)據(jù),抵押貸款利率仍接近7%,美國人需年收入達到六位數(shù)才能負擔(dān)得起中位數(shù)房價的住房,目前這一數(shù)字已超過42.2萬美元。
她表示,父母已出售自有住房,并與子女共同出資購置帶有獨立姻親公寓的獨棟住宅。雖然這種模式成效頗佳,但年輕一代仍希望擁有自己的空間。
“兄弟姐妹也因租金上漲而選擇合買住房,這樣更為劃算,”她補充道,“另一個原因是學(xué)生貸款債務(wù)使個人申請抵押貸款的難度增加?!?/p>
馬薩諸塞州Property Checker公司的首席房地產(chǎn)研究員兼分析師埃琳娜·諾瓦克(Elena Novak)也向《財富》雜志透露,過去兩年間,更多Z世代和千禧一代購房者選擇“聯(lián)合購置”房產(chǎn)。
“起初,是兩兄弟姐妹或關(guān)系親密的大學(xué)好友湊錢購買一套單人無力承擔(dān)的公寓,”諾瓦克說,“如今,我看到有同事三人組,甚至還有四人小團體在尋找房源。”
“相較于五年前,這種趨勢的增長態(tài)勢一目了然,”她繼續(xù)說道,“當時除已婚夫婦外,合買住房的情況基本不存在。”
根據(jù)Better Place Design and Build首席執(zhí)行官巴·扎克海姆(Bar Zakheim)的說法,Z世代的另一種常見合住選擇是在父母的房產(chǎn)上建造附屬住宅單元(ADUs)。
扎克海姆對《財富》雜志表示:“從經(jīng)濟層面考量,這根本難以實現(xiàn),尤其是在我們所在的圣地亞哥這樣住房成本位居全國前列的地區(qū)?!焙腺I或建造附屬住宅單元“讓他們能夠以遠低于直接購房的價格解決住房問題?!?/p>
專家表示,雖然我們可能不會再經(jīng)歷類似嬉皮士運動的浪潮,但Z世代和千禧一代的合買趨勢將會持續(xù)下去。
“與20世紀70年代的反主流文化集體生活實驗不同——這些實驗伴隨更廣泛的文化變革興起,后因經(jīng)濟好轉(zhuǎn)而消退——如今的合買住房現(xiàn)象源于嚴峻的經(jīng)濟現(xiàn)實?!敝Z瓦克表示。高房價和抵押貸款利率等跡象“都表明合買住房并非只是短暫嘗試,它極有可能成為一種永久的、常態(tài)化的購房途徑?!保ㄘ敻恢形木W(wǎng))
譯者:中慧言-王芳
? 20世紀六七十年代,集體生活在嬉皮士運動的浪潮中興起。如今,Z世代和千禧一代正愈發(fā)傾向于與朋友或家人共同購房——這一選擇并非受反主流文化的驅(qū)動,而是他們以務(wù)實態(tài)度應(yīng)對高房價、學(xué)生債務(wù)以及抵押貸款利率。
20世紀60年代和70年代是集體生活最豐富多彩、繁榮的時期之一。彼時,年輕一代——嬰兒潮一代——創(chuàng)立了公社,歡迎任何愿意摒棄主流文化、逃離城市化的人加入。
《紐約時報》1970年的一篇文章指出,集體生活也是一種低成本的生活選擇。公社——很大程度上受到嬉皮士運動(一場基于和平、愛、自由和個人主義的反主流文化運動)的影響——通過集中資源支付房租、食物和公用事業(yè)費用來降低生活成本。多人合租不僅降低了租金,也無需單獨購置電器、支付公用事業(yè)費用和其他生活費用。
五六十年前,集體生活曾風(fēng)靡一時。如今,我們正見證集體生活的復(fù)興,這種生活方式在Z世代群體中愈發(fā)常見——不過,背后的原因卻大不相同。
根據(jù)國家抵押貸款保險公司(National Mortgage Insurance Corporation)的最新報告,近三分之一的Z世代表示愿意與朋友或家人共同出資購房(即“合買”);18%的千禧一代也持有相同觀點。2024年OpenDoor的報告還指出,超過四分之三的首次購房者與父母、兄弟姐妹、朋友、伴侶甚至同事共同購房。
這絕非僅僅是潛在發(fā)展趨勢。房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀人和其他住房專家告訴《財富》雜志,他們已在各自的住房市場中看到這一趨勢的顯現(xiàn)。
TikTok和Instagram上也充斥著Z世代和千禧一代共同購房的視頻。
全美范圍內(nèi)的集體生活現(xiàn)象
康涅狄格州費爾菲爾德縣科威國際不動產(chǎn)(Coldwell Banker)房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀人帕蒂·庫珀(Patti Cooper)告訴《財富》雜志,自疫情以來房價一路飆升,在她所處的房地產(chǎn)市場中,合買趨勢正愈發(fā)盛行。根據(jù)美國房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀人協(xié)會(NAR)的數(shù)據(jù),抵押貸款利率仍接近7%,美國人需年收入達到六位數(shù)才能負擔(dān)得起中位數(shù)房價的住房,目前這一數(shù)字已超過42.2萬美元。
她表示,父母已出售自有住房,并與子女共同出資購置帶有獨立姻親公寓的獨棟住宅。雖然這種模式成效頗佳,但年輕一代仍希望擁有自己的空間。
“兄弟姐妹也因租金上漲而選擇合買住房,這樣更為劃算,”她補充道,“另一個原因是學(xué)生貸款債務(wù)使個人申請抵押貸款的難度增加?!?/p>
馬薩諸塞州Property Checker公司的首席房地產(chǎn)研究員兼分析師埃琳娜·諾瓦克(Elena Novak)也向《財富》雜志透露,過去兩年間,更多Z世代和千禧一代購房者選擇“聯(lián)合購置”房產(chǎn)。
“起初,是兩兄弟姐妹或關(guān)系親密的大學(xué)好友湊錢購買一套單人無力承擔(dān)的公寓,”諾瓦克說,“如今,我看到有同事三人組,甚至還有四人小團體在尋找房源?!?/p>
“相較于五年前,這種趨勢的增長態(tài)勢一目了然,”她繼續(xù)說道,“當時除已婚夫婦外,合買住房的情況基本不存在?!?/p>
根據(jù)Better Place Design and Build首席執(zhí)行官巴·扎克海姆(Bar Zakheim)的說法,Z世代的另一種常見合住選擇是在父母的房產(chǎn)上建造附屬住宅單元(ADUs)。
扎克海姆對《財富》雜志表示:“從經(jīng)濟層面考量,這根本難以實現(xiàn),尤其是在我們所在的圣地亞哥這樣住房成本位居全國前列的地區(qū)。”合買或建造附屬住宅單元“讓他們能夠以遠低于直接購房的價格解決住房問題。”
專家表示,雖然我們可能不會再經(jīng)歷類似嬉皮士運動的浪潮,但Z世代和千禧一代的合買趨勢將會持續(xù)下去。
“與20世紀70年代的反主流文化集體生活實驗不同——這些實驗伴隨更廣泛的文化變革興起,后因經(jīng)濟好轉(zhuǎn)而消退——如今的合買住房現(xiàn)象源于嚴峻的經(jīng)濟現(xiàn)實?!敝Z瓦克表示。高房價和抵押貸款利率等跡象“都表明合買住房并非只是短暫嘗試,它極有可能成為一種永久的、常態(tài)化的購房途徑?!保ㄘ敻恢形木W(wǎng))
譯者:中慧言-王芳
? Communal living surged in the 1960s and ‘70s as part of the hippie movement. Today, Gen Z and millennials are increasingly turning to co-buying homes with friends or family—not for countercultural reasons, but as a practical response to high housing prices, student debt, and mortgage rates.
The 1960s and ‘70s were one of the most colorful and plentiful examples of communal living. Younger generations—baby boomers, at the time—developed communes that were welcoming of anyone willing to reject mainstream culture and escape urbanism.
It was also a lower-cost living option. Communes—largely influenced by the hippie movement, a rejection of mainstream culture based on peace, love, freedom, and individualism—pooled resources for rent, food, and utilities, driving costs down, according to a 1970 article by The New York Times. Houses were shared among several people, pushing down rent costs and eliminating the need for separate appliances, utilities, and other living expenses.
Communal living was popular 50 to 60 years ago. Now, we’re witnessing a resurgence of communal living, which has become increasingly common among Gen Z—but for very different reasons.
According to a recent report by the National Mortgage Insurance Corporation, nearly one-third of Gen Zers said they’re open to pooling funds and purchasing a home with friends or family, a practice known as co-buying; 18% of millennials said the same. A 2024 OpenDoor report also said more than three in four first-time homebuyers purchased their house with parents, siblings, friends, romantic partners, and even colleagues.
This isn’t just a would-be trend. Realtors and other housing experts told Fortune they’re already seeing this movement show up in their own housing markets.
TikTok and Instagram are also filled with videos of Gen Z and millennials who have bought homes together.
Communal living across the U.S.
Patti Cooper, a Fairfield County, Conn.-based real-estate agent for Coldwell Banker, told Fortune the co-buying trend is becoming increasingly popular in her housing market since housing prices have skyrocketed since the pandemic. Mortgage rates are still nearly 7%, and Americans need to make six figures to afford a median-priced home, which is currently more than $422,000, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR).
Parents have sold their homes and combined their income with their children to buy single-family homes with separate in-law apartments, she said. While it can work out nicely, younger generations still want their own space.
“Siblings are also buying houses together because of the rising cost of rents. It’s more affordable,” she added. “The other reason is that student loan debt makes it harder to qualify for a mortgage by yourself.”
Elena Novak, a lead real-estate researcher and analyst at Property Checker based in Massachusetts, also told Fortune more Gen Z and millennial buyers have been “banding together” to buy homes in the past two years.
“At first, it was two siblings or close college friends pooling savings to snag a condo that neither could afford alone,” Novak said. “Now I’m seeing triads of coworkers or even small house shares of four people on the hunt.”
“The uptick is unmistakable compared to just five years ago,” she continued, “when co-buying was essentially nonexistent outside of married couples.”
Another common co-living option for Gen Zers, according to Bar Zakheim, CEO of Better Place Design and Build, is to build accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on their parents properties.
“The math just doesn’t add up, especially where we are in San Diego with some of the highest housing costs in the country,” Zakheim told Fortune. Co-buying or building an ADU “allows them to find a housing solution for themselves at a fraction of the cost of buying a home.”
And while we may not have something exactly like the hippie movement again, we can expect the trend of Gen Z and millennial co-buying to continue, experts say.
“Unlike the counterculture communal living experiments of the 1970s—which blossomed alongside a broader cultural shift and then faded as the economy strengthened—today’s co-buying is rooted in hard economics,” Novak said. Signs like high home prices and mortgage rates “points to co-buying being more than a fleeting experiment. It’s likely to become a permanent, normalized path to ownership.”