Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/millennials-vs-boomers-charts-e6f1971b


I know it’s non stop Boomers and Millenials but many GenX were ruined by the dot.com and housing busts and had the lost decade up to the GFC. Careers haven’t advanced because boomers WILL NOT LEAVE.

Let's back the truck up for a bit.

Boomers WILL NOT LEAVE because they can't! Life is damn expensive and they got caught in the squeeze same as narcissistic you. Do you think their old asses want to continue working? Don't be dense.

Blame population growth for creating conditions leading to higher cost of everything since everyone is chasing the same goods and services including housing, transportation, food, etc. And my population growth comment is my delicate way of saying unchecked immigration.

Anonymous wrote:NIH is full of boomers who refuse to retire. You would be surprised by the number of octogenarians still working full time there. This leaves fewer opportunities for the next generations.

Yes!! And they have been ineffective for decades now. So many great people have been forced out behind them because there was nowhere to go.

Anonymous wrote:At my work, it’s GenX who are completely uninterested in taking over for boomers. When the boomers finally retired, we couldn’t even get GenX to apply for those jobs. So millennials stepped up en masse. They all just want to coast into retirement.

I think it was a moment in time. In our 30s, the early 2000s, Gen Xers wanted to take over and be heard. We were finally mature enough, better at tech, etc. But the Boomers, our bosses, then in their 50s still ruled the roost. It was just As It Always Had Been.

Then Millennials come in and are handed entire departments in their 30s, and are bosses of older people. And of course Gen x is like "whatever"- we tried. But I'm sure it stings a little.

Anonymous wrote:Gen X’er who was able to buy a condo in my mid-20s with 3% down, take the equity from that to buy a house in Arlington, then take the equity from that to lock into my forever home at 2.65%. 25 years at my company and consistently maxed my 401k contributions.

I don’t think any of these steps is possible for the generations behind us.

One more - I also paid off my law school debt in 10 years because it was ‘only’ $110k (no help from parents). $100k gets you 1 year in undergrad now.

No, I was not big law.

Gen X’er who was able to buy a condo in my mid-20s with 3% down, take the equity from that to buy a house in Arlington, then take the equity from that to lock into my forever home at 2.65%. 25 years at my company and consistently maxed my 401k contributions.

I don’t think any of these steps is possible for the generations behind us.

Anonymous wrote:Instead of pitting different generations against each other, you should realize that each generation is at the mercy of historical booms and busts, OP. It's not the fault of anyone in particular. I object to your narrow-minded characterization.

I am late gen X, born in 1980.

You are more of a millennial.

-1971 baby

The author Douglas Copeland was born in 1962. Census defines generation as every 10 years until the iPhone introduction (now 5 years)

I am extremely concerned the millennials will go for GEN X taxable 401K (this is where demographics and democracy collide).

I see a very dysfunctional relationship between boomer parents and their millennial children: but they share a common trait that compounds: liberal mindset when they’re spending other people’s money. Arch conservative with their own.

NIH is full of boomers who refuse to retire. You would be surprised by the number of octogenarians still working full time there. This leaves fewer opportunities for the next generations.

Anonymous wrote:the 2000-2010 period was a great time to invest. Bear markets are your friend.

Many of us were paying off student loans then. Money for investing wasn’t something we had.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/millennials-vs-boomers-charts-e6f1971b


I know it’s non stop Boomers and Millenials but many GenX were ruined by the dot.com and housing busts and had the lost decade up to the GFC. Careers haven’t advanced because boomers WILL NOT LEAVE.

Boomers are mostly retired and GenX is getting close to retirement age. Plus there’s a 20 year gap between the oldest boomer and youngest boomer. You can be a boomer who has a child who is also a boomer. It’s ridiculous to lump people together like that.

The oldest millennials seem to be doing well generally. Not all of course.

Stop reading those articles. Run a Google search for GenX financial strain and find like-minded readers. Or better yet, get offline.

Who cares what one opinion article spotlights. The algorithm spotlights different trends for entirely capitalistic reasons. Your life isn’t going to get any better by venting about the articles served to you.

Anonymous wrote:Nobody takes you seriously if you start criticizing groups based on when they were born. Don't be stupid and hateful.

Where did I criticize the groups, I was criticizing the US media for ignoring GenX.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/millennials-vs-boomers-charts-e6f1971b


I know it’s non stop Boomers and Millenials but many GenX were ruined by the dot.com and housing busts and had the lost decade up to the GFC. Careers haven’t advanced because boomers WILL NOT LEAVE.

They DO NOT HAVE TO. Goodness, such entitlement. And I'm an X'r.

Sure? But US media is obsessed with the hard life of Millenials, and discounts GenX.

https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/careers/gen-x-business-leadership-executives-d74ca6ad

The Economist gets it, as they usually do: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/05/08/why-gen-x-is-the-real-loser-generation

Anonymous wrote:the 2000-2010 period was a great time to invest. Bear markets are your friend.

You don't understand the concept of lost decades, the whole point is that investing over that period is essentially the same as starting investing in 2010. So all the stocks that GenX bought dropped.

The "lost decade" (2000–2009) refers to a period where the S&P 500 delivered negative or near-zero total returns. A $100,000 investment in the S&P 500 on Jan 1, 2000, would have resulted in a loss, with the index averaging a −0.95% annualized return.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/millennials-vs-boomers-charts-e6f1971b


I know it’s non stop Boomers and Millenials but many GenX were ruined by the dot.com and housing busts and had the lost decade up to the GFC. Careers haven’t advanced because boomers WILL NOT LEAVE.

They DO NOT HAVE TO. Goodness, such entitlement. And I'm an X'r.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s Gfc?

Global Financial Crisis?

Great Recession 2009-2010?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_financial_crisis_in_September_2008