Some parents love their kids. Why wouldn't they welcome them back?
because a huge part of good parenting is producing children capable and willing to make it on their own.
You should disclose your own living and working situation since your generalizations and insulting rhetoric are making others feel obligated to defend themselves and their choices to you.
He's already mentioned that he works for the family insurance business (which he personally never had to build into a success), so he didn't have to struggle to find a well-paying job with security like so many others do.
What he failed to mention is that he never needed to move back into his parent's home because of that job and because his in-laws built a brand new house for him. It takes a very special brand of cognitive dissonance to judge others negatively for moving back in with their parents when you moved into a home built for you by one side of the family while the other provided you guaranteed job security. But that seems to be the norm for some people of your political persuasion (more on that later).
You're judging people negatively regardless of the circumstances (Are they paying their own way? Are they helping their parents? Are they paying off college debts? Are they unable to find a job or lost one? Do they have kids of their own to take care of, and thus have to trade a little bit of lost pride moving back home to provide for them?), absent of considerations of other cultural norms (multiple generations living together is considered standard around much of the world, used to be here, and is becoming so again) and forgetful of the fact that children --especially now with the baby boomers rapidly aging-- will take care of their poor and infirm parents in ever growing numbers, because that's what families who love each other do.
I also feel that it's important to mention that you have cheered politicians (Alan Keyes) who kicked their own children out of their home for being gay, and have insinuated that you would do the same, so there's a general lack of empathy playing a role here as well and not just a desire to teach children a lesson in independence.
Now, back to the politicians whose hypocrisy and attitude you seem to emulate and admire.
One of the overriding narratives of the RNC (and the DNC too, but without the judgment of those who were poor) was that we all had to struggle in our lives, but that Republicans never accept that as their lot in life. We were regaled with stories of Mitt and Anne Romney's saw-horse and door desk and ironing board dining room table and how they were eeking out an existence without jobs while going to school. Except, oh yeah, they were living off Mitt's stock options, and his father was an auto executive and famous politician. Because every college student has stock options, right? Romney was an ardent supporter of the Vietnam War while he didn't have to serve since he was on a mission for his church (of which his father was a top member). Romney grew up in this house, but he wants to tell people that being poor is just a state of mind.
Paul Ryan wants us to know that he worked at McDonald's in high school and that he never considered it a dead end job. Well, why would he when he had a stake in his family's major 100-year old construction business? While overcoming the loss of a father at 16 is certainly difficult and worthy of sympathy, it's strange when there is little sympathy for others surviving on government benefits when he paid for college using social security survivor's benefits. Paul Ryan had already held political office (on the school board) while in high school. He interned for one Senator and worked on the political campaign of a Representative (John Boehner) while in college. He served several others afterward, went back to work at his family's corporation, and was elected to the House at 28. This guy was a child of privilege groomed for political office from his teens and he's praising himself for not considering McDonald's a dead end job? Here's his childhood home, by the way.
People who are the children of privilege in wealth and opportunities should be the least judgmental of others for their status in life, not the most, yet somehow we've wound up with things being ass backwards here with a bunch of Ayn Rand worshipers who are somehow unable to grasp the difference between the situation they grew up in and the situation which most other Americans and people around the world did. No one is envious or looks down on you for wealth and privilege; no one wants to take it away from you. Hell, the Democrats are mostly filled with people from similar upbringings, but at least they recognize that they should try to extend those opportunities to others wherever possible instead of just hoarding everything for themselves.
Now, I'm not saying your situation is comparable to Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan obviously. While your privilege is a more modest one, it's still quite a bit more than what the average American has. Most people don't get guaranteed job security in the family business or have a home built for them. All I ask is that you take the blinders off and recognize that you shouldn't be judging people for not having the same opportunities which fell into your lap through a combination of luck and the hard work of others. That doesn't mean you don't work hard yourself, by the way, but the gist of your argument seems to be that children who move back into their parents homes for whatever reason aren't working hard or pulling their own weight or have failed in some way, and that's not a fair or accurate assessment in most cases.
