Boomers: The Evil Generation!

[Valka D'Ur]

that's very respectable!

I call it "ethical voting" - where the voter makes an effort to get informed and then votes for whoever/whichever party will positively affect the most marginalized people without kicking them in the face some other way. That's why I didn't vote for the party that raised disability benefits in this province in 2012... they kicked us in other ways.

It's also why I'm voting for the incumbent party that is kinda clueless about the disabled people who kept telling them over the years that it's long past time for another raise, so they grudgingly boosted it by 25% of the previous one (claiming it was unaffordable at the same time they were preparing to toss some $700 million at the Calgary Winter Olympic Games of 2026). I think it must have suddenly occurred to the incumbent premier that disabled people also vote. The reason I'm voting for them is because they're the only non-right-wing party with a chance and the UCP is just the provincial wing of the federal Reformacons.

I've been raising disabled voters' rights with any politicians or their agents who call or canvass me.

I was just poking fun about how this is the future of the English language, not endorsing it

Pretty sad future. There are actually people who don't know how to read cursive now.

glad you asked. I use a positive minimum of plastic. no plastic bags, barely ever buy food that comes in containers or packaging. usually that means it's more expensive so a pretty much all of my money is used up paying rent, paying for my degree and paying for food. I don't use any products with micrplastic in them (I check, though I am sure it cannot be avoided realistically).

however, even with my current lifestyle I'm still damaging the environment. many things we utterly rely on involve plastic, involve shipping items overseas, involve ressource extraction which is incredibly destructive.

I know where your argument was going, and it's useless. it's not a good argument to make. unless you literally live innawoods without plumbing and electricity and don't ever buy anything (even local produce might, for example, be grown from shipped seeds) you're contributing to the downfall of the planet. so the first reality check is, obviously, that it's realistically impossible to not damage the environment, you pretty much do so by merely existing. so the next logical conclusion is just to

1) do your best in order to not make things even worse
2) live sustainable as far as your own ressources allow it
3) spread the good word and fight the good fight

that's all an individual can do, and that's already a lot. nitpicking other people's lifestyles isn't contributing to that in any way

I was just asking, because in my experience people who complain because I'm not living up to their standards tend to be people who don't live up to the standards they expect of me. In short, don't expect me to be perfect if you're not perfect.

Sadly, I can't be as responsible as I'd like, since we don't have a blue box program here. There's a dumpster for garbage and one for paper. There's nothing for cans or plastic.

I want my blood pressure taken, but I cannot.

Psst! There are machines in most pharmacies these days where you can do it yourself for free.

 

[El_Machinae]

I know there's a lot of money to be made. But I ask you to re-read my previous inputs. You don't even need to reply, since it will be something that has to niggle over time. You're making an essential error.

As a worker, my future is not better because Boomers have lots of money. At least not at the aggregate. The fact that Boomers have a claim on my labor doesn't mean that my labor wouldn't be able to exist without it. I benefit from the road that already exists. I don't benefit because someone with money is in between me and the medical technician. The technician could have been working for me, and me for the technician.

Post World War II, the soldiers came home and there was spending that allowed them to work for each other. This created a virtuous feedback cycle. They didn't need to serve a wealthy upper-class in order to greatly benefit their economy. The governments of the day just figured out how to put them to work rebuilding Society

Suppose the government just took $1000000 from every baby boomer with over 10 million dollars. And then, hired me to work on climate change. I would be just as employed as if that baby boomer was hiring me to be his golf cart caddy. But I would be creating something that benefited the future, instead of just transferred my labor to benefit the present.

The Boomers created wealth. But the fact that they have dollars, paper wealth, doesn't benefit me. Again, it's not that I particularly mind. It's just that I don't accept that it's framed as being beneficial to me. Their roads do. The internet does. Reruns of Gilligan's Island does. But the actual paper dollars don't.

 

[rah]

You may have the money to be confident that you will be well taken care of, but do you have a trustworthy guide for that money?

Yep, I think so. You can't always be sure until it happens, but I figure the probability is pretty high.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yep, I think so. You can't always be sure until it happens, but I figure the probability is pretty high.

Good on you and I hope you are right. A lot of people seem to think that money is the key. The reality is that the guide is the key. With the right guidance it doesn't really take all that much money, but with bad guidance no amount of money can keep you from being stacked somewhere like cord wood and left to die...or more accurately, stacked like cord wood and forced to live in misery.

 

[Patine]

I know there's a lot of money to be made. But I ask you to re-read my previous inputs. You don't even need to reply, since it will be something that has to niggle over time. You're making an essential error.

As a worker, my future is not better because Boomers have lots of money. At least not at the aggregate. The fact that Boomers have a claim on my labor doesn't mean that my labor wouldn't be able to exist without it. I benefit from the road that already exists. I don't benefit because someone with money is in between me and the medical technician. The technician could have been working for me, and me for the technician.

Post World War II, the soldiers came home and there was spending that allowed them to work for each other. This created a virtuous feedback cycle. They didn't need to serve a wealthy upper-class in order to greatly benefit their economy. The governments of the day just figured out how to put them to work rebuilding Society

Suppose the government just took $1000000 from every baby boomer with over 10 million dollars. And then, hired me to work on climate change. I would be just as employed as if that baby boomer was hiring me to be his golf cart caddy. But I would be creating something that benefited the future, instead of just transferred my labor to benefit the present.

The Boomers created wealth. But the fact that they have dollars, paper wealth, doesn't benefit me. Again, it's not that I particularly mind. It's just that I don't accept that it's framed as being beneficial to me. Their roads do. The internet does. Reruns of Gilligan's Island does. But the actual paper dollars don't.

Let's face it, everyone. Better our labour belongs to these (unfairly lumped and stereotyped, but for the sake of argument) Boomers than to old Feudal landlords, Colonial slaveholders, 19th Century factory industrialists, or monument-building "god-kings" of Antiquity. Consider THAT, and then say NOTHING has improved, and it's only gotten worse over time.

 

[RobAnybody]

Boomer hate is really dumb. I personally suspect that it's driven by bitter Gen Xers, especially younger ones who are better at the internet and are good at disguising themselves as millennials.

Nah. We don't care. That's kind of what defines us.

 

[El_Machinae]

So, again. I'm not blaming or complaining. I'm just saying don't tell me that it's to my benefit.

The Alzheimer's thing is an interesting case study. Boomers knew Alzheimer's would happen. And so, they individually endeavor to place a claim on my labor to take care of them when they're old.

Before I was born, they could have put more effort into creating a viable intervention for Alzheimer's. And so, instead of forcing me to take care of them, the problem would not have existed.

There are an incredible number of cases like this, where good spending will prevent future cost. And that is literally the same as Building Wealth. It would have been something good that we inherited instead of an obligation

 

[rah]

There has been considerable effort put into learning about Alzheimer's. There has been some progress. There's a lot of money in it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So, again. I'm not blaming or complaining. I'm just saying don't tell me that it's to my benefit.

The Alzheimer's thing is an interesting case study. Boomers knew Alzheimer's would happen. And so, they individually endeavor to place a claim on my labor to take care of them when they're old.

Before I was born, they could have put more effort into creating a viable intervention for Alzheimer's. And so, instead of forcing me to take care of them, the problem would not have existed.

There are an incredible number of cases like this, where good spending will prevent future cost. And that is literally the same as Building Wealth. It would have been something good that we inherited instead of an obligation

Only you consider it an obligation. I'm more in the 'stack them like cord wood and leave them to die' camp.

 

[metalhead]

It's actually been fun the last 10 or more pages watching the eternal 'the younger generation whine about the older one' to place the blame of their failures.
We complained about our parents, they complained about theirs, etc. It's and endless cycle. At least our generation got over it and had success.

Your generation didn't "have success," you had it handed to you on a silver platter and then did everything you could to deny it to the next ones through support for politicians like Reagan, who I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you voted for. Support for policies at the state and federal level to make sure that all the advantages you had would not be available to generations following yours.

That you find this hilarious is typical. Your generation could have ensured success for future ones, but you went entirely the other direction.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Your generation didn't "have success," you had it handed to you on a silver platter and then did everything you could to deny it to the next ones through support for politicians like Reagan, who I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you voted for. Support for policies at the state and federal level to make sure that all the advantages you had would not be available to generations following yours.

That you find this hilarious is typical. Your generation could have ensured success for future ones, but you went entirely the other direction.

Why don't you go ahead and blame Nixon on the boomers while you are at it?

 

[Birdjaguar]

I know there's a lot of money to be made. But I ask you to re-read my previous inputs. You don't even need to reply, since it will be something that has to niggle over time. You're making an essential error.

As a worker, my future is not better because Boomers have lots of money. At least not at the aggregate. The fact that Boomers have a claim on my labor doesn't mean that my labor wouldn't be able to exist without it. I benefit from the road that already exists. I don't benefit because someone with money is in between me and the medical technician. The technician could have been working for me, and me for the technician.

Post World War II, the soldiers came home and there was spending that allowed them to work for each other. This created a virtuous feedback cycle. They didn't need to serve a wealthy upper-class in order to greatly benefit their economy. The governments of the day just figured out how to put them to work rebuilding Society

Suppose the government just took $1000000 from every baby boomer with over 10 million dollars. And then, hired me to work on climate change. I would be just as employed as if that baby boomer was hiring me to be his golf cart caddy. But I would be creating something that benefited the future, instead of just transferred my labor to benefit the present.

The Boomers created wealth. But the fact that they have dollars, paper wealth, doesn't benefit me. Again, it's not that I particularly mind. It's just that I don't accept that it's framed as being beneficial to me. Their roads do. The internet does. Reruns of Gilligan's Island does. But the actual paper dollars don't.

We really talk in different languages. Yours is often confusing to me. I think I do get what you are saying, but certainly cannot respond in the same jargon.
To begin, most boomers are not wealthy; I think they have sufficient income now, but income isn't wealth. Their value is the demand they will create and the price collapse when they dump all their useless stuff on the market. Housing prices are also likely to fall as too many go on the market.

And yes the benefits are not going directly to you in most cases. But if they improve the roads in your neighborhood to accommodate the new hospital, well then maybe.

 

[El_Machinae]

Like I said, it has to niggle. In my very first comment, I expected there to be sufficient economic growth so that I could see a increase in the quality of my life.

And there will definitely be positive feedback benefits from this spending.

Just remember, it's the real wealth transfer that will be of benefit. The paper wealth transfer isn't, except maybe by accident. The paper wealth is just a claim on my labor. The fact that there's a lot of it doesn't mean that I will be able to labor more or that the output of my labor will benefit me.

Only you consider it an obligation. I'm more in the 'stack them like cord wood and leave them to die' camp.

No, it's an obligation. They have a claim on my labour. Obviously, this is not a desirable outcome for me. It's why I ask for help. But still, it showcases the difference.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

Most boomers suck.* There was even a good Twitter thread explaining exactly why, but I would have to dig deep to find it.

*Except Mike Gravel. #GravelGang

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No, it's an obligation. They have a claim on my labour. Obviously, this is not a desirable outcome for me. It's why I ask for help. But still, it showcases the difference.

Their claim on your labor can be reduced to the minimal effort of stacking, or you can bow to a "moral obligation" to cure what ails them. But that's your choice, not a claim to the full extent of the labor you are expending.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yes, I guess I could kill baby boomers in order to prevent them from being able to spend on their retirement. But, yeah, I don't really consider that option.

Or I could vote down their wealth, which is hard when they out vote me

A viable intervention for Alzheimer's helps me. It's not out of altruism that I think that we need it. If I'm being forced to work for old people I would much rather be a caddy than a daytime attendant

 

[Birdjaguar]

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.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yes, I guess I could kill baby boomers in order to prevent them from being able to spend on their retirement. But, yeah, I don't really consider that option.

Or I could vote down their wealth, which is hard when they out vote me

A viable intervention for Alzheimer's helps me. It's not out of altruism that I think that we need it. If I'm being forced to work for old people I would much rather be a caddy than a daytime attendant

So their health care needs and ability to pay for them are in fact driving research that ultimately benefits you. Imagine that.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

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.

The assumption is that somehow we are going to make them provide for us to the same extent that we provided for our parents' generation, despite the numbers proving that even if we had the power to make them willing they genuinely cannot do it. Boomers, through sheer numbers, could support my parents mind shattering income in their old age...but the smaller subsequent generation cannot do that for us, period.

It's surprising how difficult this reality is to get across despite how simple it is. I was one of three children. I have three kids. Being one of three kids was pretty ordinary when I was a kid, and it was pretty ordinary when my kids were kids. The difference being that among my contemporaries being one of three kids was the low end of normal. A lot of my friends had three or four brothers and sisters. Nobody really blinked until the kids were in double digits. The only "only child" that I knew was viewed as an outright oddity. When my kids were kids three was still normal enough, but it did get some fisheyes. I had the excuse that twins rushed me right past the two that boomers had pretty widely decided was all we could allow ourselves.

 

[El_Machinae]

Tim, do you understand how saved dollars are a claim on my labor? Is my phrasing just bad? I only introduced the idea after I was being told that Boomers spending would benefit me.

So their health care needs and ability to pay for them are in fact driving research that ultimately benefits you. Imagine that.

Yes, but we are paying a much higher cost than we need to.

Do you think our quality of life would be higher if we had never invented the polio vaccine? This is the logic that you're using, just inverted.

Without the vaccine, we would be arguing about whether jobs making iron lungs was better or if we would just be better off stacking them up like cordwood. We would be arguing about whether only the children of rich parents should be able to have iron lungs, or if the boost in employment from universal iron lung coverage would pay for itself. Those conversations would be dumb, because creating a viable intervention was the superior option.

Boomers intentionally underinvested against the threat that was going to affect a decade of their life. But, some of them consoled themselves by placing a claim on future labor.

I don't blame them. I'm just saying that don't treat it like it's a favor to me