Boomers: The Evil Generation!

[Modder_Mode]

Try again. That was instruction for how to organize the society the believers formed. It was as close to "go ye forth and live communally" as anything any avowed socialist ever said. It had nothing to do with charity, voluntary or otherwise.

Well I feel that this needs to all go in the capitalism/socialism thread, but anyway here it goes.

If you read the verses prior to this, Paul states:

"For I testify that they gave as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability. Entirely on their own"
"I am not commanding you, but I want to test the sincerity of your love by comparing it with the earnestness of others." "I say this not as a command"

Here Paul makes it clear that this is not an instruction on how to live ones life, but it is seen as virtuous as a Christian to do voluntary charitable deeds to those in need.

In the verse you reference, he states:

"At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. The goal is equality"

What Paul is talking about specifically here is that at this time there was great persecution and famine for the early Christians, here Paul is making it clear that at the present time voluntary charitable giving is greatly needed, he's not advocating for some permanent economic and political system akin to socialism.

But if you are going to cite scripture and be totally wrong, expect to be challenged.

I don't mind being challenged at all, I encourage it, I wouldn't post on these forums if I didn't, I've been wrong on plenty of things that's how we can all learn new things and I have no problem admitting that.

There is plenty of room for interpretation in scripture

In that case, why are you asserting your interpretation?

 

[Patine]

Well I feel that this needs to all go in the capitalism/socialism thread, but anyway here it goes.

If you read the verses prior to this, Paul states:

"For I testify that they gave as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability. Entirely on their own"
"I am not commanding you, but I want to test the sincerity of your love by comparing it with the earnestness of others." "I say this not as a command"

These quotes, you just made, strike me as being FAR more likely speaking against a number of practices big churches have been doing for many centuries anyways - forced conversion, indoctrination of children before they are capable of understanding the religion they are supposed to be entering or giving true consent, or theocratic laws of secular nations to "force" people to salvation for fear of draconian punishment on the Earth. It doesn't strike as speaking on Early Church Christian Communalism.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

But did Jesus not say:

"Bring not my words into your discussions of generational woes. Quote not my guidance when arguing over socio-economic matters. Nor parade me as an oracle before those whom cherish me not."

 

[Modder_Mode]

These quotes, you just made, strike me as being FAR more likely speaking against a number of practices big churches have been doing for many centuries anyways - forced conversion, indoctrination of children before they are capable of understanding the religion they are supposed to be entering or giving true consent, or theocratic laws of secular nations to "force" people to salvation for fear of draconian punishment on the Earth. It doesn't strike as speaking on Early Church Christian Communalism.

You won't get any argument off me regarding this. It's mostly the unfortunate side effects of the Constantinian shift.
But we really are far off-topic. Raise your hands if you know you directed this thread off-topic. *hands in the air*

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Better our labour belongs to these (unfairly lumped and stereotyped, but for the sake of argument) Boomers than to monument-building "god-kings" of Antiquity.

why? I'd think it much more noble to work towards some monumental goal, no matter how stupid, than to work towards making the planet inhospitable for any lifeform that isn't cockroaches

and yes, generally speaking our material conditions are better, quite good actually. but ask the people who are actually working their ass off, like benghali factory workers, and I'm not so sure they wouldn't rather work for the pharaoh.

In Australia it's a lot worse than this. There is nowhere in the Greater Sydney Area where it is possible to buy a house on, say, a teacher or nurse salary, because the prices have doubled or tripled in 15 years (the closest a nurse can get is Cessnock, which is not in Sydney and is about 150km or about 2 hours from the nearest Sydney hospital). All the people who already had property (ie, older people who benefited from lucky conditions at the time and have seen their wealth skyrocket) are encouraged to further speculate by beneficial tax policies that let you deduct all losses on property from other taxable income like wages. That price boom has meant younger people are priced out virtually entirely, and is a nearly directly generational effect.

many students in major european cities (hamburg as an example) are literally homeless because all of the real estate is already bought up and prices are insane, even if you work a side job, even if you get money from the state, even if you get support from your parents, you still can't pay for a small apartment. they squat at their friends houses or just don't sleep. this is increasingly going to become the norm. even in my city, heck even in some of the shittier German cities it's next to impossible to find affordable housing unless you have "connections". couldn't find an English link since no one cares about this subject. unless you've got money out of the butt you're guaranteed to live in some kind of arranged living (Wohngemeinschaft, often three to six students sharing a flat) and even then you pay up to 500 or 600 euros for a room the size of a wardrobe.

https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.d...tsemester.1001.de.html?dram:article_id=429777

I myself was unable to find any proper apartment in the city where I study, so I searched for something in the outskirts of frankfurt (offenbach), which is kinda known for being full of brown people and crime ridden. it really isn't, but that reputation drives down the price massively.

as a trade-off I now get to spend 2 hours forth and 2 hours back commuting via train every day I go to university. it's not ideal, but it's all I could get.

Millenials can't cook? Men of every generation can't cook.

The opposite trend is the case. Millenials, especially men, are so into food that there's even been a phenomenon named after it: the gastrosexual man.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...astrosexual-men-cooking-bid-seduce-women.html

Milennials care more about food and cooking than any generation did before them. Artificial food restictions (vegetarianism, veganism, raw food, foodie-ism--) have partially replaced religion and religious beliefs towards food.

Especially the ethical concerns wrt food. It's not the grannies, nor the boomers going vegan, buying organic, supporting local businesses. it's Gen Xers and poor students.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The reigning ideology in the West since at least 1980 is that a classless society has already been achieved through the market; that disparities of wealth do not constitute a genuine class system because a meritocratic competitive system ensures both upwards and downwards social mobility; that socialism has become unnecessary, because it turns out you can have universal prosperity and private enterprise. Something about that vision clearly appeals to people, or our leaders wouldn't spend so much time insisting that they have fulfilled it.

People may be just relabeling things to sound differently, but income and wealth inequity certainly function like classes. Marxist terminology does come across as dated and tired. Income inequality is more easily understood by regular folks and more likely to provoke a desire for change. Either way we have an imbalance that needs to be addressed. Maybe I don't spend enough time on college campuses.

 

[Bamspeedy]

The opposite trend is the case. Millenials, especially men, are so into food that there's even been a phenomenon named after it: the gastrosexual man.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...astrosexual-men-cooking-bid-seduce-women.html

Sure, the number of men cooking in the kitchen is increasing, as women aren't stay at home moms anymore. I cook more meals than my wife does, but she's still the better cook. The article even states most women still say they are a better cook than their partners (the 'trend' is merely a 5% increase of men being the better cook....20-25%). It's unclear if the 'gastrosexual' is a significant group, just that it's growing in size.

Especially the ethical concerns wrt food. It's not the grannies, nor the boomers going vegan, buying organic, supporting local businesses. it's Gen Xers and poor students.

It's hard to wrap my head around 'Organic' (double, triple the price) food being bought up by 'poor' people, even if there is some truth to it.

 

[El_Machinae]

Do you have any savings if so why.

Yes, Lots. Why?
I have never used trickle down theory to convince people younger than me that their generation will benefit from my retirement

At no time did I complain about the savings disparity. The only savings disparity that I truly worried about is the one currently resulting in wealth shuttling upwards. That has very little to do with any individual Boomers saving account, it was the net effect of their voting.

 

[Arwon]

Sure, the number of men cooking in the kitchen is increasing, as women aren't stay at home moms anymore. I cook more meals than my wife does, but she's still the better cook. The article even states most women still say they are a better cook than their partners (the 'trend' is merely a 5% increase of men being the better cook....20-25%). It's unclear if the 'gastrosexual' is a significant group, just that it's growing in size.

Speaking for myself and the people I know, I can't think of a couple out of the dozen or so I'm reasonably close with, where the guy isn't into cooking and doesn't do plenty of it (I do 100% of the cooking for my wife and I, but we're definitely an outlier). Even the least cooking savvy (my sister's husband) likes to barbecue meat regularly (my nieces told me daddy cooks outside and mummy cooks inside). We may collectively be atypical, but then again we're mostly pretty ordinary white collar people in our 20s and 30s so who knows.

Food is great why wouldn't you wanna understand and do stuff with it as best you can.

 

[El_Machinae]

It doesn't. It's just the economic system that we live in, it exists in the way that it currently does because of a demographic shift. Because of the way our economy works, I think it is vital for people to collect savings.

You are extrapolating a micro benefit, and that's fine. The objection is calling it a macro benefit. An economy is benefited by people working, and anybody who comes up with the macro policy that suggests that people not working is a benefit will just be incorrect. We work to have leisure, but until any specific Leisure is paid for with sustainable automation, it is zero sum. In the real world, that work doesn't need to be 100% commodified in terms of dollars. So don't fall for that trap.

Dollar savings are not cans of beans. There are many times that it's okay to think of dollars as the equivalent of cans of beans. But sometimes it doesn't work.

Both supply-side stimulus and demand-side stimulus have their place in economic stimulus policies. But sometimes proponents of supply-side stimulus end up convincing people that trickle down economics is good. The way some people are phrasing the Boomer retirement, they are describing the benefits of using the same logic as trickle down economics.

 

[aelf]

Marxism is one way to look at the world. It's underpinnings of class struggle and the unsustainability of capitalism are appealing to many. It is an intellectual and philosophical approach most suitable for the classroom. What history has clearly demonstrated is that attempts to carry out a classless society at a meaningful scale haven't worked. Are there any success stories? I actually don't think that people want such a society. What they do want is to not feel left out, to have a chance for something better. The 80s moved capitalism into a mode of "we can be super rich" and and amass huge piles of excess capital that surpass anything we have ever seen. That has been unchecked and enhanced by the boom in technology. I think the solutions lie in taxing wealth, limiting the accumulation of excess wealth and constraining income or redirecting it to beneficial paths.

This just sounds like you're saying that any intellectual and philosophical approach is only for the classroom. Boomer logic, I guess - and I say that because it's a thing that old people of today seem to say a lot. I suppose the fact that they have done a lot of things makes doing those things seem more important to them than thinking.

When you say that something is an intellectual and philosophical approach and then immediately attempt to judge it by the results of carrying out a plan that someone derived from it, your logic is extremely flawed. How does Christianity fare if you judge it by the Crusades or the colonisation of the Americas? Not great. I guess Jesus' intellectual and philosophical approach is more suitable for Sunday school.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'm doing neither. I've written multiple times that there is no blame. I am just objecting to the phrasing that the coming spending wave is to my benefit. They will try to convince you that it is a gift on high, and that you should be grateful.

I don't mind that it's going to happen, I've said this many times.

When pressed, and if I'm only forced to completely oversimplify!, I think they failed on preventing a systemic wealth disparity and severely aggravating climate change difficulties. Complaining that they have savings strikes me as futile as complaining that someone needs to sleep.

 

[Birdjaguar]

This just sounds like you're saying that any intellectual and philosophical approach is only for the classroom. Boomer logic, I guess - and I say that because it's a thing that old people of today seem to say a lot. I suppose the fact that they have done a lot of things makes doing those things seem more important to them than thinking.

When you say that something is an intellectual and philosophical approach and then immediately attempt to judge it by the results of carrying out a plan that someone derived from it, your logic is extremely flawed. How does Christianity fare if you judge it by the Crusades or the colonisation of the Americas? Not great. I guess Jesus' intellectual and philosophical approach is more suitable for Sunday school.

for the most part philosophy and strictly intellectual approaches operate within a confined and controlled fence of prescribed rules. tht fine for those who are not very practical or interested in how the world actually works.

Boomer logic? WTH are you talking about? I just see little value to approaches that have little or no application. It has nothing to do with being a boomer. It could be that people with more life experience understand the value of figuring out how to apply ideas in the real word and actually doing things rather than just thinking about them then in the abstract. And yes if one is interested in actually making change, doing is much better than thinking.

I see little evidence of your deep thinkers actually presenting plans or carrying them out. Do you have some examples from this thread or other places? My opinion of Christianity is that it is like most religions in that it attempts to organize peoples thinking and actions in a way to make lives better. But, also like most religions, it is and has been corrupted by people. People do bad things in the name of religion as well as most systems we build to keep of societies orderly. Socialism, communism, capitalism, democracy, monarchy, whatever, all are corrupted by individuals who want money, power and control. Pick your poison.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Once people have kids their life changes and they spend the next 20+ years dealing with things other than what they were strident about before marriage+kids. Once the kids leave home and go out on their own, those parents do have an opportunity to get more political, but usually don't because work is demanding. Then, once they retire, they get to be more politically active again. That was what the tea party was all about. A lot of newly retired white folks who had been listening to Rush and watching Fox news for a decade got active.

 

[metalhead]

Three things I don't understand:

• Who actually handed us stuff?
• When did it happen?
• What exactly did we get?

I worked pretty hard for 40 years.

You got an entire system where you could exchange the simple willingness and ability to "work hard" for enough money to buy a house, go to college, provide for all your family's needs. Also known here in the U.S. as "The American Dream." This was given to you by the people who came before you, who made deliberate political choices that established that order for you.

Was it perfect? Far from it. But prosperity was nevertheless very broad-based. However, due to deliberate political choices made by your cohort, the same Dream was made unavailable to most people who have come after. The opportunity you had to trade your hard work for economic security has been destroyed, to the point it is completely inaccessible now to broad swathes of Americans.

 

[Hamid.H]

then, once the retire they get to be more politically active again. That was what the tea party was all about. A lot of newly retired white folks who had been listening to Rush and watching Fox news got active.

i donno, can the whole tea party movement really be attributed to that? i mean, i didnt realize that this forum is mostly old white liberal dudes until this thread and theres just as many of them, if not more, than there are republicans. i look at the democratic leadership and its all old white boomers. it sure explains a lot, especially why the democrats are so reluctant to change and embrace new ideas from the younger minority voices in the party like ilhan omar and aoc.

hh

 

[aelf]

for the most part philosophy and strictly intellectual approaches operate within a confined and controlled fence of prescribed rules. tht fine for those who are not very practical or interested in how the world actually works.

Boomer logic? WTH are you talking about? I just see little value to approaches that have little or no application. It has nothing to do with being a boomer. It could be that people with more life experience understand the value of figuring out how to apply ideas in the real word and actually doing things rather than just thinking about them then in the abstract. And yes if one is interested in actually making change, doing is much better than thinking.

I see little evidence of your deep thinkers actually presenting plans or carrying them out. Do you have some examples from this thread or other places? My opinion of Christianity is that it is like most religions in that it attempts to organize peoples thinking and actions in a way to make lives better. But, also like most religions, it is and has been corrupted by people. People do bad things in the name of religion as well as most systems we build to keep of societies orderly. Socialism, communism, capitalism, democracy, monarchy, whatever, all are corrupted by individuals who want money, power and control. Pick your poison.

Well, for one, thinkers are not as susceptible to the kind of incoherent thinking demonstrated here: On one hand, philosophy and strictly intellectual approaches are fundamentally unworkable in real life. On the other hand, also in real life, application of said approaches were flawed because they, like religion, were corrupted by individuals with ulterior motives. They're either practically unworkable or practically flawed due to human error - pick one.

There's definitely a lot of value in being able to think about and analyse things. If you thought about doing something, did it, and it turned out badly, does it follow that your subsequent actions should not be preceded by thinking at all? Could you then say that there's more value in performing actions that produce good results than in thinking about what to do? That's absurd. And, practically speaking, doing without enough thinking leads to a lot of blind actions, which perhaps explains why the young are inheriting the world as it is.

Actually, this is conversation already illustrates the issue at the heart of this thread: Younger generations think Boomers have a lot to answer for, upon reflecting on the condition of the world and the prevalent beliefs that made it this way; Boomers (or perhaps, as you suggest, it's simply old people) think their individual deeds speak for themselves and they have nothing to defend. One party is applying abstract analysis to derive a logical conclusion, the other is unwilling to speak of anything but (personal) experience.

 

[rah]

Was it perfect? Far from it. But prosperity was nevertheless very broad-based. However, due to deliberate political choices made by your cohort, the same Dream was made unavailable to most people. The opportunity you had to trade your hard work for economic security has been destroyed, to the point it is completely inaccessible now to broad swathes of Americans.

Total BS

When I graduated from school, I started for under 9 thousand a year and usually worked over 55 hours a week. I had to live with two friends an hour away from work to afford it. I couldn't afford to get married for almost 7 years after that and didn't buy (give the bank) a home for over a decade.

What was handed to us again? Your generation is expecting more for less effort. Yes, a generalization but that's all I keep hearing here.

 

[Hamid.H]

When I graduated from school, I started for under 9 thousand a year and usually worked over 55 hours a week.

and how much did the average home cost at that time?

hh

 

[rah]

Depended on how big and where. The eventual house I bought over a decade later was a modest one smaller than almost all of my peers, over an hour from the city. cost around 150k so it was a stretch at the time.