Reflecting on how it could work, financially ... say you have your young man. At 18 he gets a job, while still living at his parents' home. He can save the majority of his pay for his future expenses and/or education. His parents have also saved money for his college expenses.
Five or six years later, he's 23 or 24, meets nice girl, 20 years old, gets married. The girl has been living at home attending community college, has associate's degree in something practical :-). Now young man applies for college, knowing what he wants to study. Maybe he's got some CC transfer credits for the basics. His savings plus his parents' savings plus financial aid should be more than adequate to cover tuition, books, and a reasonable standard of living for himself, wife, and potential child. (Health insurance through the university? Health savings account? Not sure on that.)
He can be a full time student, just as many 18-23 year-olds are. Even more easily, because they've been earning interest on the savings longer. Wife can hold a job or be a student, as well, if she's not immediately having a child. If they do have children, maybe she can work from home - taxes, computer programming, sales, babysitting etc. - if they think it's worth the effort.
It seems to me that, among other benefits, the long-term financial outcome would be improved, because the couple would be motivated to be financially responsible from their earliest years of earning. Many young people spend the majority of their pay on things of no lasting value during their single years, and then start out their marriage with both debt and feckless habits.
Opinions?
There would be advantages to living at home. To be completely politically incorrect, I think this would have more value for women than men. Why? Ideally, a man should be the primary breadwinner in the household. A man needs to develop good work habits early. Living away from home would motivate a young man to increase his earning power, at least versus living at home. OTOH, living away from home can promote vice.
The priorities are different for women. A young woman should be planning on running a household as her primary duty. Living at home would serve two ends. It would help to preserve her virtue and reputation; and she would be able to pursue an education, save for a downpayment on a house, pursue a career, or any combination of the three.
I believe that the best thing for both young men and women is to begin working as early as possible. It's the best remedy for head-in-the-clouds disease.
"It seems to me that, among other benefits, the long-term financial outcome would be improved, because the couple would be motivated to be financially responsible from their earliest years of earning."
Sounds like a good plan. It assumes alot though, such as stable parents that will room and board the adult child, they have money available to save for college, and that the kid actually wants to go to college vs. work.
"Many young people spend the majority of their pay on things of no lasting value during their single years, and then start out their marriage with both debt and feckless habits."
So true. I watched a couple of friends go immediately into debt buying $3K+ engagement rings (this was '83). Didn't make sense to me. Of course, they thought I was crazy for blowing the money I saved in the Army on a cross-country motorcycle trip. But for me, the memories were worth every penny. Luckily, I had the parents who roomed and boarded the adult child. After I met my wife, we saved $10K living at home until we married after a two year courtship. And while I never went to college (she graduated before we met), we've had a stable financial foundation since day one. I like your plan. It would've worked for us had I gone to college instead of back to the Army.