- 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
re: Do young people have it harder today? Did Boomers ruin everything?
Posted on 12/5/25 at 8:45 am to Penrod
Posted on 12/5/25 at 8:45 am to Penrod
quote:
Do young people have it harder today?
In some ways yes and other ways no, you could ask that question in any year in human history and probably answer it the same way.
0
Posted on 12/5/25 at 8:47 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Interesting. Certainly that is a pervasive narrative in these threads
Is it interesting? Perception is reality.
quote:
Even more interesting in that about 40% of boomers have millennial children. That should serve as a solid hint regarding "empathy".
My parents are boomers who both exceedingly lack empathy. Pretty much all discrimination is rooted in a lack of empathy. I know both my parents are racist and classist AF, and they have been divorced and living in separate time zones for virtually my entire life, so it's not a (geographical) cultural thing.
quote:
My biggest critique of the millennial generation is your stereotypic and glaring lack of accurate perception. If time machines were a real thing, and millennials could substitute their current experience to the actual experience of "boomer life" growing up, they'd be fit to be tied in that lifestyle. It is what it is.
Fair critique. Likewise, if you entered a time machine and had to grow up during the Industrial Revolution, you'd throw a fit to be tied to that lifestyle. Standards of living change and improve (or they have consistently improved up until very recently). It is what it is.
quote:
But in these threads, statements such as "No generation has had it as hard as millennials" are not really empathy engendering assertions
I totally agree with this. Personally, I haven't analyzed every generation to try to play the victim Olympics. I'm just extremely grateful that we bought a house when we did. I would happily forfeit equity for more of my peers and younger cohorts to be able to afford to purchase homes.
But I acknowledge that there is a large number of frustrated millennials and Gen Z-ers who only feel empowered to lash out at Boomers. That's really just another testament to the dwindling opportunities available to them, though.
This post was edited on 12/5/25 at 8:48 am
Posted on 12/5/25 at 8:51 am to Flats
quote:
You don't WANT government action taken to solve it.
Government action is what created much of it.
quote:
You just want to virtue signal that you feel worse about it than others.
I wouldn't say that. Feelings are irrelevant. I just happen to be studying it so it's on my mind a lot. Other people "study" Xitter and post random tweets for dissection.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 8:56 am to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:Such things are a matter of choice, aren't they?
I'm assuming your husband didn't end up in a university that required a one to two hundred thousand dollar debt to get out.
E.g., given the example that you were responding to, the community college prelude would nearly cut that debt in half. Alternatives such as ROTC scholarships, shirking Greek life, and campus social experiences, would further impact said debt.
That is not to discount the overpriced current cost of college education. But it is to say that if an entire generation opted out of the first two years of university experience, supply-demand would kick in, and the cost of tuition would not be what it is.
Again, we're talking in stereotypes. There are piles of anecdotes antithetical to that stereotype. For example, a graduating valedictorian who made the choice not to attend Harvard, but rather to attend UNC, because of costs. Ultimately, that decision probably did not impact her career in medicine one iota. It certainly reduced the debt she experienced in that path though. It's a decision which was common in previous generations, not so much now.
Living at home, while attending community college for two years, or choosing to attend a state school rather than an exclusive private university, simply entails an austerity in which many/most young Americans choose not to engage.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 8:59 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Government action is what created much of it.
So? You specifically backed away from any sort of government action in the other topic when talking about old people who can't afford rent when property values rise. You called it an injustice but then said multiple times that doesn't mean you want the government to take action.
He just shrugs his shoulders (according to you), you call it an injustice then shrug your shoulders. What's the difference?
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:11 am to 4cubbies
quote:Negative.
Perception is reality.
While it may seem to reflect "reality," individual perception may or may not relate to actual reality. It's an equation of "your truth" versus the truth.
quote:Case in point. You extrapolate your anecdotal experience to that of an entire population.
My parents are boomers who both exceedingly lack empathy.
quote:Indeed.
Likewise, if you entered a time machine and had to grow up during the Industrial Revolution, you'd throw a fit to be tied to that lifestyle.
The difference is I'd not assert otherwise.
quote:and by your description, you don't fit the stereotypes of your generational cohort.
I'm just extremely grateful that we bought a house when we did.
quote:No. It's testament to projection and blame transference which is fairly unique to GenY
who only feel empowered to lash out at Boomers. That's really just another testament to the dwindling opportunities available to them, though.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:13 am to Flats
quote:
So? You specifically backed away from any sort of government action in the other topic when talking about old people who can't afford rent when property values rise. You called it an injustice but then said multiple times that doesn't mean you want the government to take action.
Life is not always fair. Acknowledging that we have structures that create and sustain unfair outcomes is not the same thing as demanding government intervention. Some harms are built into the way our systems operate. Naming them is not a policy proposal.
For there to be winners, there will be losers. When landlords gain, their tenants often lose. I pointed that out in the other thread because you seemed hesitant to admit that it is not fair for an elderly person on a fixed income to be priced out of housing in the wealthiest country the planet has ever known. You do not have to support a revolution, or even mild government action, to say that this outcome is not fair.
quote:
He just shrugs his shoulders (according to you), you call it an injustice then shrug your shoulders. What's the difference?
There is a difference between recognizing an injustice and pretending it is not one. He refuses to name it. I named it.
Describing a structural problem accurately is the first step in any honest conversation about justice, even when we disagree about solutions. If we ever hope to "solve" injustice, we first have to admit injustices exist.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:15 am to Penrod
My kids are in their mid 30s. They are doing alright. But they better buck up and work their tails off to progress their careers to the point of making real money. I hope they have the right attitude to get there.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:18 am to 4cubbies
quote:
I pointed that out in the other thread because you seemed hesitant to admit that it is not fair for an elderly person on a fixed income to be priced out of housing in the wealthiest country the planet has ever known.
There's nothing to admit. Calling it "unfair" doesn't mean anything and calling it an "injustice" is inaccurate. Nothing is fair so I don't know why you'd even point that out.
quote:
There is a difference between recognizing an injustice and pretending it is not one. He refuses to name it. I named it.
But not everybody considers it an injustice. You named it inaccurately then claimed that people who disagree with your description aren't acknowledging the issue at all. I can (and have) agree that it's unfortunate and still not consider it an injustice.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:22 am to Penrod
quote:
Durable goods like furniture, cars, and appliances have all become better and more affordable since the mid-1960s
Bullfrickingshit. They’ve become more expensive and lower quality. Appliances and furniture use to last decades because companies use to take pride in making high quality goods in the US. Now they are racing to the bottom to make the cheapest disposable shite in China. Cars are going that way too.
Don’t even get me started on how generically shitty everything that is built these days looks. Every damn shopping center, neighborhood, vehicle, restaurant, and even gas station is the same cut and paste lazy bullshite.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:26 am to Penrod
Got a feeling if you sent some 21 year old back in time to 1970 they would lose their shite without all the comforts they enjoy today.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:38 am to PeleofAnalytics
quote:
Got a feeling if you sent some 21 year old back in time to 1970 they would lose their shite without all the comforts they enjoy today
Yes, that’s how it’s supposed to be in a society that makes progress. No different than somebody from the 70s losing their minds being sent back to the 20s.
What sucks for the 21 year old is that they are the first generation in American history that is projected to enjoy a lower quality of life than their parents. It’s never happened before and the older generation DGAF
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:38 am to TheePalmetto
quote:
Durable goods like furniture, cars, and appliances have all become better and more affordable since the mid-1960s
Bullfrickingshit. They’ve become more expensive and lower quality. Appliances and furniture use to last decades
See, that is just reflective of an alternate reality, the equivalent of Peter Pan or Alice in Wonderland down the rabbit hole.
E.g., cars in the 1970s we're generally drivable for half the time as present day cars. Refrigerators, stoves, ovens, etc. were nowhere near the quality we see today. Likewise, there was a comparative parcity of consumer choice.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:43 am to MC5601
quote:
Got a feeling if you sent some 21 year old back in time to 1970 they would lose their shite without all the comforts they enjoy today
---
Yes, that’s how it’s supposed to be in a society that makes progress.
quote:Do you not see the irony of those two statements juxtaposed?
What sucks for the 21 year old is that they are the first generation in American history that is projected to enjoy a lower quality of life than their parents.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:49 am to Flats
You are treating “unfair,” “unfortunate,” and “unjust” as if they all mean the same thing or mean nothing at all. They don’t.
When I called it an injustice, I was describing a structural outcome that predictably harms a vulnerable group through no fault of their own. You may not like that word, but disagreeing with the label is not the same as showing the label is wrong.
Saying “nothing is fair” is not an argument. It avoids the question.
If you think pricing elderly people out of their homes is only “unfortunate” rather than unjust, explain the principle that makes that distinction. Otherwise you end up with a position where nothing can ever count as unjust, which makes an honest conversation impossible.
When I called it an injustice, I was describing a structural outcome that predictably harms a vulnerable group through no fault of their own. You may not like that word, but disagreeing with the label is not the same as showing the label is wrong.
Saying “nothing is fair” is not an argument. It avoids the question.
If you think pricing elderly people out of their homes is only “unfortunate” rather than unjust, explain the principle that makes that distinction. Otherwise you end up with a position where nothing can ever count as unjust, which makes an honest conversation impossible.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:57 am to MC5601
quote:
Yes, that’s how it’s supposed to be in a society that makes progress. No different than somebody from the 70s losing their minds being sent back to the 20s.
What sucks for the 21 year old is that they are the first generation in American history that is projected to enjoy a lower quality of life than their parents. It’s never happened before and the older generation DGAF
So you are agreeing that they would lose their shite going from 2025 to 1970 while losing all the comforts they have now but then saying their "quality of life" is worse or going to be worse? How exactly does that work because you are saying their quality of life is worse but would be in the fetal position if they were transported back 55 years when you say QOL was better? Of course some aspects of their lives are worse but maybe explain how the QOL now is worse but 21 year olds would likely refuse to go back to 1970 when you claim the QOL was just better.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:58 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Do you not see the irony of those two statements juxtaposed?
A 21 year old going back to the 70s freaking out about not having computers and an iPhone? Major technological advancements have been made but the American dream of home ownership and having money for a family is dying
We’re talking about purchasing power and the ability to build a life and have a family. Having iPhone and a laptop does not make one “comfortable”
This post was edited on 12/5/25 at 10:00 am
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:03 am to 4cubbies
quote:It appears his point is that outcome and structural outcome are different issues.
a structural outcome
quote:It is reflective of life. It isn't fair that I lacked ability to play football at LSU. I would have given my I-teeth for that opportunity. On the other hand, someone like Arik Gilbert who pisses such an opportunity away, and instead ends up in jail, is not a victim of structural outcome.
Saying “nothing is fair” is not an argument.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:07 am to NC_Tigah
Yeah keep being a “create shareholder value” corporate cuck
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:16 am to MC5601
quote:Capitalistic economics should take care of that. Housing will not continue to rise. Rates may decline. Affordability will return. The FAR bigger current issue for GenZ is employment.
the American dream of home ownership and having money for a family is dying
Page 8 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News