NYT Opinion Piece: This Isn’t What Millennial Middle Age Was Supposed To Look Like

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless you're a white guy, life and economic prospects are better today than they've ever been.

Hahahahahahahaaaaa

You disagree? What era was any better for someone who wasn't a white guy?

Lol. Oh shit dude, you’re right! Black people and women are allowed to own property now. I guess everything’s just fine for everyone.

That's not an answer, and you're beating up on a straw man. You're Black, Latino, gay, a woman, trans-sexual, anything but a white man -- when is life *better* for you than it is today? Maybe a couple of years in the mid-late 90s?

Like 2 years ago?

Life was better for minorities under Trump? Wut?

2 years ago, babe.

Not following what you think was better about 2 years ago?

Let’s start with how you thought Trump was still president 2 years ago on this date, shall we?

“Like 2 years ago?”

Still waiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Execute and take the boomers money they stole from us

Trumper trying so hard to troll…and still failing. Classic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless you're a white guy, life and economic prospects are better today than they've ever been.

Hahahahahahahaaaaa

You disagree? What era was any better for someone who wasn't a white guy?

Lol. Oh shit dude, you’re right! Black people and women are allowed to own property now. I guess everything’s just fine for everyone.

That's not an answer, and you're beating up on a straw man. You're Black, Latino, gay, a woman, trans-sexual, anything but a white man -- when is life *better* for you than it is today? Maybe a couple of years in the mid-late 90s?

Like 2 years ago?

Life was better for minorities under Trump? Wut?

2 years ago, babe.

Not following what you think was better about 2 years ago?

Let’s start with how you thought Trump was still president 2 years ago on this date, shall we?

“Like 2 years ago?”

Still waiting.

…That’s the best you can come up with? “Like”?

[Anonymous]

Boomers didn’t divorce at the first sign of mundaneness.

[Anonymous]

I was born in 1984 and can’t relate to this at all. It doesn’t sound like my siblings or cousins either. We all have jobs, kids, mortgages, savings, etc. Are we unusually functional or is this The NY Times trying to make a trend out of what is actually a small subset of a generation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Behind paywall.

But if I can make an assumption based on the article title, it's someone complaining about life being unfair rather than acknowledging the mistakes of individual decisions.

I borrowed $19k for college.

I have paid back $24k.

I still owe almost $15k.

The only mistake I made was listening to every teacher over the years that drilled into my head that if you didn't go to college, you were a loser who would work at McDonalds for life. And of course, having the unfortunate timing of graduating college in 2008 when the whole god damn economy crashed.

Your comment is total out-of-touch Boomer energy. I wish a case of c.diff upon you.

I was actually feeling bad for you until your last line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was a good article.

I am an early millennial who is married, home, and one kid. It's not fully expected or achievable any more.

And, my parents had a comparable home in this area, but many MORE kids (3) and lower-paying jobs (GS-13 equivalent military and SAHM who later worked PT as teacher, versus us today as two GS-15 level).

Also, unless people understand student loans, they don't fully understand the ramifications.

People don't really get how student loans can impact their life even when it's explained to them, when younger people have asked me advice about career tracks, etc.

I have a graduate degree that is not the most prestigious but these many years out career counts much more. Going for highest "prestige" can mean more stress and negative impacts to present and future (savings for kid etc).

But not having student loans also has an impact. It’s hard to earn a living wage without some sort of post HS education. I do agree though that some people who borrow don’t understand the ramifications. And some people make terrible decisions about the things they decide to borrow for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a Gen Xer who graduated into the recession of the early 90s and then endured the financial crisis I find the millennial attitude/ignorance that they are apparently the first generation ever to face economic hardship laughable. This generation has been feeding at their boomer parents trough all their lives is on track to receive the largest intergenerational transfer of wealth in history.

No one is arguing that they are the first ones to face economic hardship. If you can't see how things in the mid-90s were different from things 10 and 20 years later, in terms of housing and college costs, I can't help you.

Also, the people complaining are not the ones with boomer parents about to transfer a bunch of wealth to them. It's the people whose boomer parents don't have wealth to pass on for whatever reason. The assumption that everyone is going to inherit a bunch of money from boomers is myopic. Some will and some won't. Wealth has become more concentrated so there are plenty of millennial who are not benefitting from what you think "everyone" is experiencing.

Stop being so myopic.

-- Fellow Gen Xer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an older millennial or younger Generation X depending on how you divide them and haven't read the article. Also, I took out student loans for law school and have paid them off.

But I do think people now entering middle age with student loans got kind of screwed and it's one of the reasons I support loan forgiveness coupled with totally overhauling how we pay for higher ed, even though it won't benefit me personally.

It just seems crazy that we as a society decided it was okay for 18 year olds to take out hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans with no underlying transferable asset (you can't sell someone your degree) and we think that's normal. I think my loans were different -- I took them out for a graduate degree with more value on the market, I was older when I took them out and I better understood what it would mean to repay them. But student loans for undergraduates, or for these schools with dicy cost-benefit promises (like community college or these for-profit colleges) just seems usurious to me.

I get why someone approaching 40 now who is still paying off those loans while also trying to buy a home and save for their own kids college would be really frustrated by that. People who let their kids take out loans like that without sitting them down and coming up with a plan for repayment first, were bad parents. It's just a really irresponsible thing to let a 17/18 yr old make that choice. It will haunt them for decades. And then schools and lenders profited off it -- the availability of student loans drove up the cost of higher education, and there are a bunch of very unethical businesses that have made a killing off servicing these loans and making it as hard as possible for people to pay them off or discharge them. It's really disturbing. I think people should be mad. They were taken advantage of.

That might explain the interest rate on these loans. They are an extremely risky proposition for banks since there are no assets.

On the other hand, they can't be discharged in bankruptcy and if they are federal they are guaranteed.

Banks are in a position to evaluate that risk and decide if it's worth it to lend. 17/18 year olds are not. It's a clearly imbalanced dynamic that benefits the bank and not the borrower. In most countries on earth, that type of lending would never be legal because it's so obviously designed to incite a young person to sign a contract that will keep them indebted for most of their adult life while enriching the bank, and only in the US do we look at that and think "this is fine!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was born in 1984 and can’t relate to this at all. It doesn’t sound like my siblings or cousins either. We all have jobs, kids, mortgages, savings, etc. Are we unusually functional or is this The NY Times trying to make a trend out of what is actually a small subset of a generation?

1984 makes you a very old Millennial. As someone pointed out upthread, life has been pretty different for people born prior to 1985 or so, versus people born around 1990.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an older millennial or younger Generation X depending on how you divide them and haven't read the article. Also, I took out student loans for law school and have paid them off.

But I do think people now entering middle age with student loans got kind of screwed and it's one of the reasons I support loan forgiveness coupled with totally overhauling how we pay for higher ed, even though it won't benefit me personally.

It just seems crazy that we as a society decided it was okay for 18 year olds to take out hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans with no underlying transferable asset (you can't sell someone your degree) and we think that's normal. I think my loans were different -- I took them out for a graduate degree with more value on the market, I was older when I took them out and I better understood what it would mean to repay them. But student loans for undergraduates, or for these schools with dicy cost-benefit promises (like community college or these for-profit colleges) just seems usurious to me.

I get why someone approaching 40 now who is still paying off those loans while also trying to buy a home and save for their own kids college would be really frustrated by that. People who let their kids take out loans like that without sitting them down and coming up with a plan for repayment first, were bad parents. It's just a really irresponsible thing to let a 17/18 yr old make that choice. It will haunt them for decades. And then schools and lenders profited off it -- the availability of student loans drove up the cost of higher education, and there are a bunch of very unethical businesses that have made a killing off servicing these loans and making it as hard as possible for people to pay them off or discharge them. It's really disturbing. I think people should be mad. They were taken advantage of.

That might explain the interest rate on these loans. They are an extremely risky proposition for banks since there are no assets.

On the other hand, they can't be discharged in bankruptcy and if they are federal they are guaranteed.

Banks are in a position to evaluate that risk and decide if it's worth it to lend. 17/18 year olds are not. It's a clearly imbalanced dynamic that benefits the bank and not the borrower. In most countries on earth, that type of lending would never be legal because it's so obviously designed to incite a young person to sign a contract that will keep them indebted for most of their adult life while enriching the bank, and only in the US do we look at that and think "this is fine!"

18-22 year olds cannot borrow anything from a bank without a co-signer, which is usually their parent. Parents take out Parent Plus loans entirely in the parent’s name.

Traditional college students can only borrow $27,000. Not per year, total.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was born in 1984 and can’t relate to this at all. It doesn’t sound like my siblings or cousins either. We all have jobs, kids, mortgages, savings, etc. Are we unusually functional or is this The NY Times trying to make a trend out of what is actually a small subset of a generation?

1984 makes you a very old Millennial. As someone pointed out upthread, life has been pretty different for people born prior to 1985 or so, versus people born around 1990.

Yes, it’s been dramatically better for those born later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an older millennial or younger Generation X depending on how you divide them and haven't read the article. Also, I took out student loans for law school and have paid them off.

But I do think people now entering middle age with student loans got kind of screwed and it's one of the reasons I support loan forgiveness coupled with totally overhauling how we pay for higher ed, even though it won't benefit me personally.

It just seems crazy that we as a society decided it was okay for 18 year olds to take out hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans with no underlying transferable asset (you can't sell someone your degree) and we think that's normal. I think my loans were different -- I took them out for a graduate degree with more value on the market, I was older when I took them out and I better understood what it would mean to repay them. But student loans for undergraduates, or for these schools with dicy cost-benefit promises (like community college or these for-profit colleges) just seems usurious to me.

I get why someone approaching 40 now who is still paying off those loans while also trying to buy a home and save for their own kids college would be really frustrated by that. People who let their kids take out loans like that without sitting them down and coming up with a plan for repayment first, were bad parents. It's just a really irresponsible thing to let a 17/18 yr old make that choice. It will haunt them for decades. And then schools and lenders profited off it -- the availability of student loans drove up the cost of higher education, and there are a bunch of very unethical businesses that have made a killing off servicing these loans and making it as hard as possible for people to pay them off or discharge them. It's really disturbing. I think people should be mad. They were taken advantage of.

That might explain the interest rate on these loans. They are an extremely risky proposition for banks since there are no assets.

On the other hand, they can't be discharged in bankruptcy and if they are federal they are guaranteed.

Banks are in a position to evaluate that risk and decide if it's worth it to lend. 17/18 year olds are not. It's a clearly imbalanced dynamic that benefits the bank and not the borrower. In most countries on earth, that type of lending would never be legal because it's so obviously designed to incite a young person to sign a contract that will keep them indebted for most of their adult life while enriching the bank, and only in the US do we look at that and think "this is fine!"

Literally nothing written above is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is something about millennials that went so wrong. Gen Z is better.

No Generation Z is not better, possibly worse. Trust me, I have experience with both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a Gen Xer who graduated into the recession of the early 90s and then endured the financial crisis I find the millennial attitude/ignorance that they are apparently the first generation ever to face economic hardship laughable. This generation has been feeding at their boomer parents trough all their lives is on track to receive the largest intergenerational transfer of wealth in history.

No one is arguing that they are the first ones to face economic hardship. If you can't see how things in the mid-90s were different from things 10 and 20 years later, in terms of housing and college costs, I can't help you.

Also, the people complaining are not the ones with boomer parents about to transfer a bunch of wealth to them. It's the people whose boomer parents don't have wealth to pass on for whatever reason. The assumption that everyone is going to inherit a bunch of money from boomers is myopic. Some will and some won't. Wealth has become more concentrated so there are plenty of millennial who are not benefitting from what you think "everyone" is experiencing.

Stop being so myopic.

-- Fellow Gen Xer

Another Gen Xer here as well. Agree. While a lot of the drama from Milennials that I see online is annoying, life is different than it was "in our day". The cost of living has gone up, the costs of college have gone up, etc. I graduated college in 1994 (born in 76) and remember paying right about $1/gallon for gas for instance. My parents purchased a house when I was in HS that doubled in value by the time they retired...great for them when they sold, awful for the next person who wants to buy it.