- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:35 pm to OweO
quote:
People eat out more than ever before. When I was a kid, it was rare for my parents to go "pick up something to eat".
I work with a few millennials that are good people but I definitely see some Waitr a few days per week and eat out most nights and then bitch about the price. Pack a sandwich dumbass.
Education and health care costs are legit complaints. Yay government intervention. Let's have some more please.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:40 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Why? GenX is a much smaller population segment. It would be like saying —given 100 people. 15 people own less of the nations wealth than 40 other people.
You took the bait.
You misread the study.
The study is comparing various generations, when the median age of said generation was 35. Gen X isn't half the size of the boomers, when both were at age 35, and the millennials sure as hell aren't 1/7th of the size that the boomers were, again, at age 35.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:41 pm to TheCaterpillar
quote:
Aren't Boomers a bigger generation that is living longer?
The study adjusts each group to age 35, so this doesn't matter.
quote:
Boomer parents died early and passed down their wealth sooner.
That's one of the points I made.
quote:
And there are more Boomers than any other generation.
More, yes. Not multiples more.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:43 pm to hubertcumberdale
A lot of issues with this chart:
Boomers were preceded by generations that lived through the depression and had a much lower % of college graduates. It was easier for them to grab a share of the wealth.
Aggregate wealth has increased since the boomers were 35. They had a bigger chunk of less money. This really needs to be average net wealth adjusted for inflation to be meaningful.
Boomers were preceded by generations that lived through the depression and had a much lower % of college graduates. It was easier for them to grab a share of the wealth.
Aggregate wealth has increased since the boomers were 35. They had a bigger chunk of less money. This really needs to be average net wealth adjusted for inflation to be meaningful.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:46 pm to hubertcumberdale
quote:
OK boomer — share the wealth.
This sums up the problem. Wealth is earned, not shared, at least unless you want it live off charity of others. So if you want wealth then you have to earn it. And you earn it by (say it with me) WORK.
W
O
R
K
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:49 pm to hubertcumberdale
Boomer parents died sooner?
That's the drawback of modern medicine. The x/millennial numbers will skyrocket in the next 20 years.
That's the drawback of modern medicine. The x/millennial numbers will skyrocket in the next 20 years.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:52 pm to hubertcumberdale
Stupid chart.
Boomers were and still are a huge proportion of the population. They far outnumbered their parents generation AND they were born into a period of relative middle class prosperity. The fertility rate has declined in the US since the 1940s and 1950s - and boomers are still too young to have died off in significant numbers.
A chart showing average wealth in today’s dollars by age would be more useful.
Boomers were and still are a huge proportion of the population. They far outnumbered their parents generation AND they were born into a period of relative middle class prosperity. The fertility rate has declined in the US since the 1940s and 1950s - and boomers are still too young to have died off in significant numbers.
A chart showing average wealth in today’s dollars by age would be more useful.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 5:52 pm to LSUFanHouston
Even if the absolute size of the boomer population is not multiples larger, that is only a part of the story. When boomer median age was 35, they were a much larger percentage of the population at that time than when gen x or millenials hit the same age, if for no other reason than boomers were still around. That alone suggests we should not expect gen x or millenials to achieve the same share of wealth as the boomer generation did at the same age.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:00 pm to DRMPHD
quote:
When boomer median age was 35, they were a much larger percentage of the population at that time than when gen x or millenials hit the same age, if for no other reason than boomers were still around. That alone suggests we should not expect gen x or millenials to achieve the same share of wealth as the boomer generation did at the same age.
Exactly right.
But if you listen to boomers, the millenials aren't as wealthy at age 35, as they were, because the millenials are lazy.
Also, I don't think you can attribute all of that difference simply to the size difference and boomers living longer. Some of that is due to hoarding.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:06 pm to hubertcumberdale
When you’ve worked for five decades already, you tend to have earned more, bought more, and have a greater total net worth.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:10 pm to Barbellthor
quote:
When you’ve worked for five decades already, you tend to have earned more, bought more, and have a greater total net worth
Learn to read boomer
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:11 pm to hubertcumberdale
Well, boomers work for a living, so there's that.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:15 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
But if you listen to boomers, the millenials aren't as wealthy at age 35, as they were, because the millenials are lazy.
Boomer strength is in numbers. Their weakness is egocentricity.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:16 pm to hubertcumberdale
A couple things about measuring ‘wealth’ this way.
There was much less aggregate wealth in the world when boomers were 35. Also, there were many more boomers than the comparative millennial generation. So owning 21% between a much larger group of people makes sense.
There was much less aggregate wealth in the world when boomers were 35. Also, there were many more boomers than the comparative millennial generation. So owning 21% between a much larger group of people makes sense.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:26 pm to Barbellthor
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/20/20 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:32 pm to hubertcumberdale
LEARN TO CODE YOU BASEMENT DWELLING frickS
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:33 pm to OweO
quote:
Its easier, but its more expensive than cooking.
People rarely consider the value of time spent cooking when comparing eating at home to eating out. This value and availability of this time varies quite a bit from person to person.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:38 pm to TexasTiger90
quote:
You know boomers were in vietnam.
quote:
and they fricking LOST
What an uneducated, stupid, worthless waste of carbon atoms.
Too bad your little punk arse was busy protesting for "all inclusiveness and diversity" rather than paying attention in History class.
Vietnam was the Greatest Generation's war. They started it. They made all the decisions.
The Boomers fought that war and never lost the battles. The Greatest Generation lost that war in a conference room.
Your sorry little punk arse wouldn't make a pimple on the arse of the men that actually fought that war.
The first war the Boomers were really in charge? The Gulf War. The brave men and women that fought that war waxed the arse of the fourth best equipped and trained army on the planet. They did it in a couple months.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 6:39 pm to hubertcumberdale
I'm "ok Boomer". I worked for mine (sometimes 2 jobs at once) and invested.
Come back and bitch when you do this ya bunch of whiney little Millturds.
MAGA & KAGA 
Come back and bitch when you do this ya bunch of whiney little Millturds.
Back to top


0








