Baby boomers ruined America

[Anonymous]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/former-goldman-sachs-trader-pleads-guilty-to-fraud-private-employment-slips-in-march/2013/04/03/490d7400-9c96-11e2-9a79-eb5280c81c63_story.html
34-year-old Goldman Sachs trader pleaded guilty to wire fraud which caused his company to lose $118 million. That's okay, it was probably under the watch of a baby boomer, so the trader's generation is safe from being accused of ruining America. Goodness knows, the younger generation never did anything bad except when the baby boomers let them.

Sorry, folks, I know I'm laying the sarcasm on thick here and that there are some folks who are trying (but not always succeeding) to give nuanced arguments but I'm just so tired of being accused of ruining America when it's pretty obvious that there are people of all generations working on that.

Jeez, when I graduated from college into stagflation and an anemic job market in the 70s I did not turn around and blame my parents. When the recession hit the Rust Belt like a hammer in the early 80s, I managed to avoid pointing my finger at the World War II generation. Oh, I forgot, my generation never struggled and suffered and wanted for anything. Uh, what planet was that on again? Cuz that's not how it happened on this one.

[Anonymous]

Damn, lots of angry baby boomers. Might be time to retire and spend some time in anger management.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Damn, lots of angry baby boomers. Might be time to retire and spend some time in anger management.

Uh, most of us are Gen X'ers who are embarrassed by the things you are saying. It makes us look weak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Damn, lots of angry baby boomers. Might be time to retire and spend some time in anger management.

Ha ha! Nice try, troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Damn, lots of angry baby boomers. Might be time to retire and spend some time in anger management.

Aaaand you guessed wrong. We are your peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:11:38 poster here.

Let me clarify, I don't hate Boomers. My parents are Boomers, and they have had their share of hardship.

That said, my parents are the first to say that a lot has gone wrong on their generation's watch. For example, the whole McMansion thing was primarily *started* under the Boomers.

I would also say that many Boomers have suffered from the elimination of pensions, but it's also primarily Boomers who did the eliminating (i.e. Boomers started the move toward 401(k)s and eliminating defined-benefit pensions as well as breaking unions).

I know I'm not explaining this well, but my point is that resentment is directed at Boomers because a lot of these big changes happened under their watch. That's not to say that those changes didn't and don't also hurt Boomers.

And yes, even the housing bubble. Boomers were in the leadership positions and in charge of the big banks when all of this started in the early 2000s. That's not to solely responsible. My point was a lot happened under their watch. No GenXer or younger was in charge of a lending institution in 2003. No GenXer or younger was in a position of power to determine housing policy in 2003. But of course, as real estate agents, loan officers, et cetera, GenXers and younger were still involved. But they weren't at the top.

In fact, most GenXers and younger were buying when housing prices were already inflated. They weren't/aren't the ones who came out on top of that pyramid. That's my point.

Wow. You really need a good course in research methods. You argue that the variable that explains all these problems is the generation to which various people belonged?!!!?? That's like me saying that Gen Xers and Millenials are responsible for all the mass school shootings because it is younger men who have committed them.

Seriously, pp, I usually try to avoid harsh judgments of people who seem to be trying to sort things out but you really have a problem understanding the difference between causation and correlation. And as I mentioned earlier, while you're trying to pin the blame on a whole generation, the financial industry will go on trying to avoid regulation so they can rake in the profits during the next bubble and laugh all the way to the bank. And by that time your generation will be in charge! And you know who I'll blame? Greedy people in the financial industry because they will be the ones to blame. Maybe lots of them will happen to be from your generation but I am smart enough to know that that is not the thing that explains their behavior.

BTW, I never had a McMansion, never wanted one, and I know lots of boomers who feel the same way. But go on, just assign blame to a whole generation. You'll make the financial industry very happy.

You know, while you say I need a course in research methods, you need a course in reading comprehension. I NEVER said that the Boomers are to BLAME for it. I said it happened under their watch (while they were the ones in positions of power).

To follow your example, no Generation X and the Millenial generation is not to blame for mass shootings BUT it is primarily GenX and Millenials who make up the people committing them! The cause is more complex.

And my post, by the way, was trying to explain why people have the resentment toward Boomers (the appearance of it -- that these problems emerged when Boomers were at their peak).

But obviously, you didn't read my posts carefully or my point went over your head. You seem extremely reactive and over defensive.

My parents (Boomers) never had a McMansion either. But they'll admit that the McMansion fad began with their generation. It's not to say there aren't other factors that set the scene for that or that every Boomer is to blame and every Boomer had/wanted a McMansion. The 2-car family also emerged while the Boomers were at their peak. But there are tons of reasons why (more women working, et cetera). An unintended consequence was that what happened is as more families had dual incomes, the cost of housing and everything else rose to a level that now all of that seems to require dual incomes. It's not necessarily the Boomers' fault. But the change happened with the Boomer generation, and there are consequences for families today (i.e. with my mother's generation, for most -- not all -- middle class women, they had a choice to stay at home to raise their kids or work, but really, now, most middle class -- truly middle class, not DC middle class -- families *need* two incomes in order to afford a house.)

Again, none of this stuff is solely the fault of the Boomers. But a lot of these changes happened with the Boomers.

"Under their watch" means "while they were responsible". You did blame them. Either that or you do not understand the term.

I disagree. "under their watch" is not the same as "they were responsible" and it certainly does not suggest causation. No, "under their watch" means that they didn't stop it; not that they're responsible for it. 9/11 happened under Bush's watch. It doesn't mean that he's responsible for it or that he was the cause, but it does suggest that he shares some responsibility for not preventing it.

The Baby Boomers may not be solely responsible for the changes that happened, but I agree with the PP that they played a role in it.

And the PP never suggested that other generations don't have their issues either. The problem is that I hear Baby Boomers all the time claim that they single-handedly brought about civil rights and women's rights. And yes, they did a lot for those causes. But they can't take credit for those things but then claim that they played no role in some of the negative things that happened.

But with both the good and the bad, part of it is the momentum of history and forces/trends that were in play long before the results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:11:38 poster here.

Let me clarify, I don't hate Boomers. My parents are Boomers, and they have had their share of hardship.

That said, my parents are the first to say that a lot has gone wrong on their generation's watch. For example, the whole McMansion thing was primarily *started* under the Boomers.

I would also say that many Boomers have suffered from the elimination of pensions, but it's also primarily Boomers who did the eliminating (i.e. Boomers started the move toward 401(k)s and eliminating defined-benefit pensions as well as breaking unions).

I know I'm not explaining this well, but my point is that resentment is directed at Boomers because a lot of these big changes happened under their watch. That's not to say that those changes didn't and don't also hurt Boomers.

And yes, even the housing bubble. Boomers were in the leadership positions and in charge of the big banks when all of this started in the early 2000s. That's not to solely responsible. My point was a lot happened under their watch. No GenXer or younger was in charge of a lending institution in 2003. No GenXer or younger was in a position of power to determine housing policy in 2003. But of course, as real estate agents, loan officers, et cetera, GenXers and younger were still involved. But they weren't at the top.

In fact, most GenXers and younger were buying when housing prices were already inflated. They weren't/aren't the ones who came out on top of that pyramid. That's my point.

Wow. You really need a good course in research methods. You argue that the variable that explains all these problems is the generation to which various people belonged?!!!?? That's like me saying that Gen Xers and Millenials are responsible for all the mass school shootings because it is younger men who have committed them.

Seriously, pp, I usually try to avoid harsh judgments of people who seem to be trying to sort things out but you really have a problem understanding the difference between causation and correlation. And as I mentioned earlier, while you're trying to pin the blame on a whole generation, the financial industry will go on trying to avoid regulation so they can rake in the profits during the next bubble and laugh all the way to the bank. And by that time your generation will be in charge! And you know who I'll blame? Greedy people in the financial industry because they will be the ones to blame. Maybe lots of them will happen to be from your generation but I am smart enough to know that that is not the thing that explains their behavior.

BTW, I never had a McMansion, never wanted one, and I know lots of boomers who feel the same way. But go on, just assign blame to a whole generation. You'll make the financial industry very happy.

You know, while you say I need a course in research methods, you need a course in reading comprehension. I NEVER said that the Boomers are to BLAME for it. I said it happened under their watch (while they were the ones in positions of power).

To follow your example, no Generation X and the Millenial generation is not to blame for mass shootings BUT it is primarily GenX and Millenials who make up the people committing them! The cause is more complex.

And my post, by the way, was trying to explain why people have the resentment toward Boomers (the appearance of it -- that these problems emerged when Boomers were at their peak).

But obviously, you didn't read my posts carefully or my point went over your head. You seem extremely reactive and over defensive.

My parents (Boomers) never had a McMansion either. But they'll admit that the McMansion fad began with their generation. It's not to say there aren't other factors that set the scene for that or that every Boomer is to blame and every Boomer had/wanted a McMansion. The 2-car family also emerged while the Boomers were at their peak. But there are tons of reasons why (more women working, et cetera). An unintended consequence was that what happened is as more families had dual incomes, the cost of housing and everything else rose to a level that now all of that seems to require dual incomes. It's not necessarily the Boomers' fault. But the change happened with the Boomer generation, and there are consequences for families today (i.e. with my mother's generation, for most -- not all -- middle class women, they had a choice to stay at home to raise their kids or work, but really, now, most middle class -- truly middle class, not DC middle class -- families *need* two incomes in order to afford a house.)

Again, none of this stuff is solely the fault of the Boomers. But a lot of these changes happened with the Boomers.

"Under their watch" means "while they were responsible". You did blame them. Either that or you do not understand the term.

I disagree. "under their watch" is not the same as "they were responsible" and it certainly does not suggest causation. No, "under their watch" means that they didn't stop it; not that they're responsible for it. 9/11 happened under Bush's watch. It doesn't mean that he's responsible for it or that he was the cause, but it does suggest that he shares some responsibility for not preventing it.

The Baby Boomers may not be solely responsible for the changes that happened, but I agree with the PP that they played a role in it.

And the PP never suggested that other generations don't have their issues either. The problem is that I hear Baby Boomers all the time claim that they single-handedly brought about civil rights and women's rights. And yes, they did a lot for those causes. But they can't take credit for those things but then claim that they played no role in some of the negative things that happened.

But with both the good and the bad, part of it is the momentum of history and forces/trends that were in play long before the results.

You seem to be confused about the term. "Under their watch" is a reference to the military. While on watch, you are responsible for the fate of your fellow soldiers. In the civil war, if you fell asleep on watch you could be hanged, precisely because you are responsible.

If you were misusing it, fine. But the term involves taking total responsibility for the consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My father is 78 and semi-retired. Makes about $100/hour. GO DAD!

Baby Boomers are those born between 1946 and 1964. Your dad doesn't count. Mine either and he's still working full time at 73.

[Anonymous]

No. Rich people are ruining America and the world. They are gobbling up finite resources at breathtaking rate. Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. Rich people are ruining America and the world. They are gobbling up finite resources at breathtaking rate. Prove me wrong.

Damn Al Gore!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I disagree. "under their watch" is not the same as "they were responsible" and it certainly does not suggest causation. No, "under their watch" means that they didn't stop it; not that they're responsible for it. 9/11 happened under Bush's watch. It doesn't mean that he's responsible for it or that he was the cause, but it does suggest that he shares some responsibility for not preventing it.

The Baby Boomers may not be solely responsible for the changes that happened, but I agree with the PP that they played a role in it.

And the PP never suggested that other generations don't have their issues either. The problem is that I hear Baby Boomers all the time claim that they single-handedly brought about civil rights and women's rights. And yes, they did a lot for those causes. But they can't take credit for those things but then claim that they played no role in some of the negative things that happened.

But with both the good and the bad, part of it is the momentum of history and forces/trends that were in play long before the results.

But here's the problem I have with your thinking on this. You hear some (probably fatuous, self-centered) baby boomers take credit for civil rights and women's rights and you treat them as representatives of the whole generation. You should go back and argue with the people who made that claim rather than casting aspersions on a whole group of people who happened to be their age.

FTR, to act as if some generation deserves some special credit because they happen to come of age when a particular movement shifted into high gear is ridiculous and shows genuine ignorance of how social movements work so I have no respect for baby boomers who act as if they deserve a medal for accomplishments achieved by the civil rights and women's rights movement. (Not to mention that there were lots of baby boomers who were completely uninvolved in these movements.) And I watched far too many young people waste time wishing they had come of age in the 60s as if social change were impossible unless you were at the center of a mass movement. Activism takes many forms and there were lots of people who came before the mass movements of the 60s who laid the foundation for them, whose work was just as important those we remember from the modern civil rights movement.

I'm sorry you had to deal with those people who are ignorant about how social movements work and who apparently don't appreciate the work of those who went before them. But you need to not make the same mistake and assume they are speaking for the entire generation.

[Anonymous]

Gen Xer here. I don't hate the Boomers. But I do think that with the invariable cuts to come, they are going to need to share the pain. You can't just raise the retirement age, Medicare age, etc for younger generations. Boomers will need to suck it up with the rest of us.

Younger Boomers did lose a lot in the downturn, and I'm sure some of their retirements are delayed as a result. But the costs are higher for GenX and Y now than when the Boomers were younger - housing, college, gas, childcare, not to mention the coming costs for caring for elderly Boomer parents. The Boomers need to have some empathy for this - the average middle class X or Y-er can't save or build wealth the same way they did. We may never be able to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gen Xer here. I don't hate the Boomers. But I do think that with the invariable cuts to come, they are going to need to share the pain. You can't just raise the retirement age, Medicare age, etc for younger generations. Boomers will need to suck it up with the rest of us.

Younger Boomers did lose a lot in the downturn, and I'm sure some of their retirements are delayed as a result. But the costs are higher for GenX and Y now than when the Boomers were younger - housing, college, gas, childcare, not to mention the coming costs for caring for elderly Boomer parents. The Boomers need to have some empathy for this - the average middle class X or Y-er can't save or build wealth the same way they did. We may never be able to.

Speaking as another Gen X'er though, there is a key difference that you are missing:

Boomers are already past their prime work years. They have already planned around the retirement benefits that they were promised. The reason it's fairer for our group to have the limits raised is because we have time to change our behavior to meet our retirement goals. Also, we are going to live longer than them and so a raised age makes more sense for the younger cohort than the older one.

Lastly, we are so ready to talk about how "easy" the boomers had it. The reality is that they lived through the 70's, with double digit inflation, unemployment, and a stagnant economy at the same time. They lived through housing busts and the stock market crash of '87. It doesn't seem like as big a deal now because it's in the past. It was every bit as challenging as the last decade has been for us.

[Anonymous]

What are the generations? What comes after a boomer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gen Xer here. I don't hate the Boomers. But I do think that with the invariable cuts to come, they are going to need to share the pain. You can't just raise the retirement age, Medicare age, etc for younger generations. Boomers will need to suck it up with the rest of us.

Younger Boomers did lose a lot in the downturn, and I'm sure some of their retirements are delayed as a result. But the costs are higher for GenX and Y now than when the Boomers were younger - housing, college, gas, childcare, not to mention the coming costs for caring for elderly Boomer parents. The Boomers need to have some empathy for this - the average middle class X or Y-er can't save or build wealth the same way they did. We may never be able to.

I really think you do hate the boomers.

You are suggesting that a 70 year old woman/man who worked all their life, mind you without the additional benefit of IRAs and 457s, take a cut in their retirement benefits. These people put their money into a system with a promise of a certain payment upon retirement. They relied on that information and most planned accordingly. Now here you come along with all your youth and years of productivity in front of you suggesting that we should take from the elderly to make your life richer. Gag.