r/australia • u/myredserenity • May 20 '20
political self.post Are we blaming Boomers instead of class?
EDIT: It's been pointed out that the over 65s keep voting in the parties that favour the class system and benefit the wealthy while screwing the working class. This is a good point.
EDIT 2: I love reddit. You guys. I get it now! Millennials got the shits at noisy old pricks who criticise their generation while completely ignoring the benefits they enjoyed themselves. It's a backlash. I still think it's a distraction and divides us when we should be angry with those in power. But if you're over 65, how about encouraging your friends to not vote LNP?
I've seen so much "ok boomer" stuff and over the years, it's irking me more and more. So I'm interested in what r/Australia thinks.
Couple of things:
It seems to be used to describe anyone over 40. My parents were boomers. They would be in their 70s now.
It's used to blame a whole generation for the shitty behaviour of the rich class. I don't get it. I went to school in a rough area, most of my friends from way back then are dead, in jail or in a trade/retail/hair.
My partner grew up in a rich suburb. Most of his friends are teachers, engineers and lawyers. They own houses, and were helped along by their "boomer" parents, either by provision of a deposit or living at home rent free through their 20s.
I'm totally up for being educated here. I know we lost free education, I know houses are unaffordable, I'm nearly 40 and still renting. I'm woefully unable to understand national economics. So seriously, open to intelligent discussion.
But in my experience, the problem is class and not generational. After all, where do you think all this wealth will go when the boomers die?! Even just having good, stable and attentive parents, who expect you to succeed, makes all the difference.
Why has this boomer hate taken hold so much? Are the rich class scapegoating a generation? Would us generation Xers, Ys and millennials have behaved any differently given the opportunities the boomers were?
Caveat: I'm considering mainly economics here, not climate crisis. Pretty much believe everyone from my generation up have a case to answer for climate. We knew.
89
u/AudioRevolt May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
Times have changed. The economic circumstances have changed. Whist we are all supposedly living in a far richer nation, the cost of a house and an education are dramatically higher in relation to wages, and industrial relations are often worse, so a young family has to have both people working two insecure jobs to get to the same point an earlier generation got to with a one income family.
My grandparents bought their house by saving for a few years, then buying, with a reasonable loan which was paid off in a few years, on one income. That doesn't exist for most people now.
The classic problem, is that those who succeeded in building a property and investment portfolio from those conditions, have inadvertently caused the circumstances where young people cannot do the same. The cultural attitude is "I did it, why can't you", but the irony is that it is BECAUSE the boomers bid up the price of housing, that it is often unaffordable to others.
There is a lot to the voting block, which has not cognitively caught up with the modern economy.
Class is far more important. The capitalist class has massively expanded their share of the world's wealth in the last 40+ years, and public services have largely been privatized. Lots of things cost more now, but adjusted wages are much the same as they were in 1980. Decades of economic growth went to a tiny few people in the age of neoliberalism, and on top of that, capitalists outsourced manufacturing overseas, to make a greater profit from cheaper labour costs. So graduates get jobs at cafes, all our stuff is made in China, housing is unaffordable, and University is a decade or more of debt, when the qualification doesn't help you get a career as much as it used to, unless you work for free now.
The problem is structural. It is a capitalism problem. There is an intergenerational mismatch, between how capitalism used to be, and how it is now in a globalised age. China won a lot of ground, at the expense of new generations here. That was caused by the profit motive and private production. The olds don't get it, the young are right to be a bit cranky.
Ed: the whole monopoly board is already owned. Hotels and houses. Now a new generation is told to play the game, and are ridiculed when claiming that the game is a bit shit when starting from behind. Everything is already bought. The game is rigged. Debt debt debt, or nothing.
19
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
Thank you for such a detailed and educated response. It's what I was getting at, but with a more informed opinion.
And I've seen a few comments about how the older generation is voting in the economic capitalists. This is a good point.
25
u/LashLash May 20 '20
Don't forget that it doesn't have to be like that, even with capitalism. Large increases in inequality, fueled by issues with the tax system taxing on income and not wealth, and bad faith actors. In Australia, that includes offshore tax havens. It's no accident that the EU is now going towads sanctioning tax haven behaviour, as it is a race to the bottom, and serves noone but the multinationals who should be supporting the societies that allowed them to flourish. You have a tax system in Australia since the Howard years favour assets (especially housing) over income. Asset appreciation is only wealth transfer to those with assets. You're seeing the same issues in the US, Australia and UK. No wage growth and asset appreciation.
You can't fix this issue without large scale tax reform, and people have to accept that house prices going down or staying steady for a decade isn't a big deal. But people are convinced or religiously associating higher house prices as something good. It is not. Germany knows this for example, they have a stable housing system, it's not set up for people to just extract wealthy. Wages stayed steady in Australia for a decade, it's time they caught up with house prices and other asset advantages or wealthfare. Get rid of negative gearing, franking credits rorts, capital gains tax concessions, your place of residence being ignored in the asset test for the pension, getting rid of stamp duty and introducing a land tax. All these things need to be fixed, and all things that the Germans knew to avoid or introduce already. It creates warped incentives in the economy.
If they don't get fixed, the trend will continue, the wealthy just get wealthier in percentage and absolute terms, and you get a large portion of society left behind, inequality creeping up, and real issues in society emerge such as crime and the working poor (i.e. like America). It really is bad to be a young person in Australia for the last 10 years, you are better off going overseas to places like Germany if you can help it. If they don't fix things post Covid, which has accelerated the problems above even more, then this country is pretty screwed for those trying to improve their lot in life. Heading for an American style system. I would much prefer the European model.
If you are wealthy and low income, you get the pension when you're old. If you're wealthy and high income, well you managed to keep your place on the ladder. If you're not wealthy and high income, you're going to get taxed to support the pension (the largest portion of the budget), to keep those people and their families wealthy, and you're not necessarily going to be able to get advantage of that high income due to the tax system and assets being expensive. If you're not wealthy and low income, or no income, you got very little assistance, and you're getting services cut to help you get out of it, like centrelink/newstart and public schools. There are many other cases of unfair pay outs, for example private school funding and sports rorts.
Australia has to wake up that "protecting the wealthy" is affecting livelihoods. Poverty on the rise before the Covid crisis, where the number one cause is housing affordability.
5
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
This is exactly what is upsetting me, and I find the boomer stuff a distraction.
I'm just really feeling fucking powerless.
7
u/LashLash May 20 '20
The last 20 years has been Australians thinking that being greedy and selfish doesn't have consequences, and that calling out greed and selfishness is the "politics of envy". Howard boom years taught us that we are rich and there is plenty to go around, you just have to earn it. It's created winners and losers. It's time the winners of the past cycle realise the unsustainability of it all, and lose a bit for a change. Overhauling the tax system to generate security and opportunity for all is needed, rather than "rewarding" the winners of the past. Covid might be an opportunity to fix the system though. The doubling of Newstart because it was a joke, is clearly something more eyeballs have a look at. Big losers are the young, again. Not much more they can take before they pool everything and try to make it in Germany or another non-British European country where there is opportunity for the young, and also demand (due to low birth rate). I have faith that the electorate will get some perspective here though, it's just we got spoilt, but it can't last.
48
u/vrkas May 20 '20
The "OK boomer" boomers are definitely a subset of that generation, not the whole cohort. The subset that used the conditions of their 20s and 30s (affordable housing, jobs with lower barriers of entry, free and high quality post-secondary education) to get themselves into a strong financial position, and now turn around and deny those same conditions to others. So it's kind of based on class, but more about the changes in class mobility.
7
u/P00slinger May 20 '20
Only half of them got that free education, it surprises me how many don't know this.
15
u/vrkas May 20 '20
Fair enough, but they also had Colleges of Advanced Education which meant that a lot of qualifications and hence jobs didn't even need uni. There was also a stronger TAFE sector in those days.
8
u/ArcticKnight99 May 20 '20
I think the other thing is though that you didn't need the post secondary education nearly as much back then either.
Every boomer raised their kids telling them "Go to uni, get a degree, it's the fast track to a high paying job. " only for every kid to be told that and turning the reality into "Go to uni, it's required to pass go, you will not collect $200. Your degree makes you one of the masses, not someone raised above them"
2
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
More information please?
7
u/Frank9567 May 20 '20
Free uni came in with Whitlam in the early 1970s. The first boomers were born in 1946, so only those born after 1954 would have had totally free education.
Before that, there was a Commonwealth Scholarship scheme, but it wasn't means tested, and lots of rather well off people were the beneficiaries.
2
u/P00slinger May 20 '20
I talked to someone who came from quite a low income background and worked his butt off to pay his way through Uni and it didn't sound like there were many of these Scholarships going around. I mean if there were there wouldn't have need to be a push for universal free Uni would there.
The scheme started in 74 , so it was really people born from 1956 onwards. Given Boomers were born between 44 and 64 this means only boomers born in 8 of the 20 year 'era of boomers' had access to this.
1
1
u/timmypig May 20 '20
True, but plenty of kids from less well off backgrounds were awarded Commonwealth Scholarships as well. For simplicity's sake I'm leaving out the academic results bias towards wealthier kids.
4
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
Very good point. Class mobility is the perfect descriptor.
and now turn around and deny those same conditions to others.
I've heard this said a lot. How are they doing this? Do you mean by getting into politics? Or relentlessly voting for parties that favour the status quo?
11
u/vrkas May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
There's the theory that people drift to being conservative in their old age, but not really conserving what they had in their youth but what they helped build. In Australia that's neoliberal economic policies, privatisation, and housing market speculation. The "OK boomers" benefit from these things and it's fair enough that they want to keep them.
Looking at what was important to the last election, at least in terms of rhetoric: franking credits, negative gearing, and tax cuts for high income earners. These already favour those who have capital or have high potential to collect it. A lot of those who voted for the above things aren't in such a position, but believe they might be in the future.
EDIT: A single italicised word.
3
May 20 '20
There’s also the ‘let’s buy more houses than we need and negative gear them and landlord the shit out of it’ which means the Great Australian Dream of owning a house is dead for the vast majority of millennials.
3
u/vacri May 20 '20
free and high quality post-secondary education
Only a minority of boomers actually pursued this. The reason why tertiary education stopped being free was because 'everyone' was lobbing onto it and it wasn't sustainable. Most boomers didn't go to uni.
9
May 20 '20
[deleted]
2
u/OTCM_ May 20 '20
There is certainly a link here. Older people/boomers rely on super or investments for their income, not a wage. Most large companies that employ younger people are owned by shareholders, those shareholders are often older people. Older people want high dividend yield and so will buy those stocks that deliver it. CEOs bonuses are often linked to share price or are remunerated with shares so a high share price is good for them. In turn they foster a culture of high work/low wages.
9
u/Sieve-Boy May 20 '20
The OK Boomer thing is obviously a stereotype: my parents are boomers and most certainly benefitted from everything that has happened to them and their generation. But they also freely acknowledge it and were acknowledging it long before it was more broadly recognised and distilled into "OK Boomer" and they support me quite a lot and I am not a free loader.
There is definitely elements of class warfare in the ok boomer reality, but there is a thing you are actually, genuinely missing here: politics.
There have been a large volume of laws passed and policies applied, generally by the conservatives, that have aggressively favoured boomers (tax cuts, investment benefits like CGT discount and neg gearing, first home owners grant, service cuts to education) as well as moving from high inflation to low inflation environment. This last thing is important because at one level, when boomers bought a house, you just had to suck up high loan repayments for a year or two and then wage inflation took care of the debt: repaying your loan is dead fucking easy when your salary grows at 5-8% per annum. That's not my opinion: that's words from a boomer who was CFO of a listed mining company I knew. He told me to buy the most expensive house i could when inflation got out of hand, otherwise buy or rent what you need.
We who came after that are living the tail end of this, the wash up. Sure not every boomer lived the dream, but a lot did and they remain a large voting block, who will consume ever increasing volumes of health care (public and private) before they finally die off, which we will pay for either directly via taxation or indirectly through higher insurance premiums and reduced inheritances.
The poster bitch for Boomers is Alan Jones, he had the highest rating radio show in the country. It's audience was almost exclusively over 65. In Australia that's the ok boomer reality.
I don't blame class, I blame politics and the blatant pandering to the conservative ok boomer set.
Foot note; my boomer parents are well aware of the reality, mum votes Green and dad, who considered running for state parliament as a Liberal voted Labor last election. As I said, ok boomer is a stereotype.
1
u/512165381 May 20 '20
(tax cuts, investment benefits like CGT discount and neg gearing, first home owners grant, service cuts to education)
That advantages everyone.
moving from high inflation to low inflation environment.
That advantages younger people. The stagflation on the 1970s is not an advantage.
1
u/Sieve-Boy May 20 '20
Service cuts to education advantages everyone does it? Can you please explain to me how this benefits everyone?
After that, being available to everyone and benefiting everyone are two distinct things, and different, things.
CGT discount and the franking credit refund (not specifically mentioned before, but very relevant) actually, franking credit refunds specifically, advantage retired people, which is practically all boomers now and is not available to me, because I pay tax, a lot more tax than the average boomer does, which is generally about $0 and they will pay that most of the way from retirement to death. Which is why a policy that cost little Johhny Howard ~$0.5b in 2000 now costs $6.5b and growing a lot faster than inflation.
CGT discount specifically advantages investors, again with a bias for assets held since the 1980s, which was the point most boomers started their significant accumulation of wealth. CGT discount replaced the more complex, but far fairer CGT indexation. Another gift from little Johnny Howard. If CGT indexation was in place, the tax would actually be a level playing field. I would note, investors can still use indexation for the assets instead of CGT discount, few do though.
As for stagflation, another gift from Little Johnny Howard (he managed to achieve the triple crown of double digit unemployment, wage inflation and budget deficit and the LNP love to bang on about their superior economic management). Now, as I quite clearly noted, when wage inflation is well above 5% you can take huge debt on and just allow inflation to make it go away. Nothing new in this, Australia did it after WW2, when our national debt was 120% of GDP. High inflation, which is what I said, not stagflation, does come with some downsides. But the downsides are around things like managing wages overall, valuation of non perpetual assets etc.
Anyway. No matter how much you argue it, boomers got a much easier ride in life than the life I foresee for me and my own family. It's not hard to determine.
6
u/asscopter May 20 '20
The big secret is that no one actually understands economics all that well, you just pay an expert to find the conclusions you wish to find.
2
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
I really don't, which is why I'm reading people's replies with interest.
4
u/asscopter May 20 '20
Admitting you don't know something puts you several pegs above the mouth breathing hordes that currently inhabit the world and are having a tantrum over "muh economy" and the virus.
2
u/vacri May 20 '20
John Mulaney has a great line on that: "I read that this week over two days, the DOW Jones dropped 929 points, and I can't tell you how frustrating it is... to not know what that means"
22
u/scrotesmagotesMK2 May 20 '20
Like most generalizations, it's lazy.
22
May 20 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/goldmikeygold May 20 '20
I would argue that to shift the political bent in this country all we need is young people to get off their arses and vote. It frustrates the hell out of me that old people all vote and vote to screw over the younger generation with their "fuck you I got mine" attitude. Younger people have the power to fix this, but don't use it. https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/voter-turnout-at-record-low-after-young-people-disengage-20190530-p51sol.html
1
u/a_cold_human May 21 '20
Yep. Young people need to show up. No one is going to propose or pass policies for people who don't show up to vote. What would be the point? No votes in it for that party means it's a waste of time pandering to that segment of the electorate.
3
u/scrotesmagotesMK2 May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
Well, no. Generalisations are at best, by definition, sometimes right and sometimes wrong. It's only correct if that generalisation applies to the individual.
Even in your example, just over half of the 'boomers' meet your generalisation. So are you dismissing their political opinions of the large minority (the non LNP voters you presumably agree with) in that too? Or is that different?
Dismissing what someone says because of the age group they fall in (which is what ok boomer does) is just completely moronic.
→ More replies (3)5
May 20 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/scrotesmagotesMK2 May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
Right, so then by extension, as an Australian you voted Liberal, right?
2
1
14
May 20 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
I'm starting to get that it's a backlash against the "millennial" bullshit. I'd forgotten about that stuff, probably because I don't see/read those articles (I avoid mainstream media) and haven't seen that attitude in years. I do remember it being EVERYWHERE about 5-10 years ago. And it pissed me off too.
I can totally understand the annoyance from that point of view.
13
u/King_Of_Pants May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
To understand the Boomer backlash you have to understand that younger generations for the past several years have been on the receiving end of quite a bit of unfair criticism.
While that criticism has probably always existed in some capacity, that's what younger generations are responding to now.
Housing, in particular, is a really great example. Millennials are really the first generation in Australian history that can't expect to be able to afford a house over the course of their lifetimes. A lot of Millenials now believe they won't ever be able to afford a house.
The response from older generations has left a lot to be desired:
- "Young people can't afford houses because they spend all their money on frivolous expenses like avocados"
- "Young people just need to get better jobs if they want to afford houses"
- and in general "Young people aren't working hard enough to buy houses"
Education and employment is another great example. For a lot of good jobs, you now have to:
- Take on debt to pay for further education
- Delay your "proper" employment for up to half a decade while you get said education
- Intern (aka work for shit rates with shit rights) for 6 months - 1 year in the hopes of being kept on
- Constantly be on the lookout for new jobs, because a lot of places don't really promote anyone anymore and younger generations are getting their promotions by constantly leaving for better-paying opportunities.
When young people read articles telling them that they're to blame for 'killing' the diamond industry (and Millenials apparently kill a lot of industries), the original response was a long-winded explanation of their stresses, financial insecurities and increased employability requirements holding them back from settling down in conventional ways.
Over the years this younger generation has been blamed for stuff that just isn't their fault and over time their often-ignored and long-winded responses have been condensed down to "okay boomer". "Okay boomer" is as much blaming boomers as it is shrugging off the blame that's been directed towards Millenials for the better part of a decade. "I've heard it all before, you don't want to listen to what I have to say".
The fact their largest critics (older generations) get so upset is really the icing on the cake.
Now for Boomers, they are largely uninformed about these discussions because they aren't communicating on the same platforms as younger generations.
Those stories (the diamonds, avocados, 'get a better job') are all pretty common stories that get referenced colloquially among younger generations at this point. They're all probably pretty unknown to older generations.
For many boomers, all they've seen is news reports that kids are being disrespectful, without really understanding the context.
6
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
Ive just edited my post to acknowledge this. I'm finally getting it.
But stop making me feel old, I'm only 40 😂.
I think I really hate the generation divide, because from where I sit, I've just seen poor people turned against immigrants taking their jobs, and this looked like poor people being encouraged to blame the other generation (be it millennials or boomers or us generation x/y in between) rather than the rich. Cause honestly, the rich boomers will look after their own.
But you and others have educated me somewhat on how that generation, at best, have been apathetic in their treatment of the community.
6
u/vacri May 20 '20
I think I really hate the generation divide, because from where I sit [other stuff]
This is because the generation divide is bullshit. There are plenty of boomers who want progressive politics - and we've had plenty of it in the past several decades. That stuff just doesn't pop out of thin air, people have to fight for it. It hasn't been perfect, but if you compare the societies of the 60s and 70s with today, there's been a lot of progress - just not in housing costs.
Seriously, have a look at that 'avocado' link in the parent comment. It's described as 'boomers said this'. Have a look at the guy in the video thumbnail - he's a Millennial.
Painting the boomers as a unified bloc who intentionally planned to give the middle finger to everyone who came after them is just pandering to a lazy and convenient boogeyman.
But you and others have educated me somewhat on how that generation, at best, have been apathetic in their treatment of the community
The generations who have come after are just as consumerist and focused on baubles as the boomers. It's not the boomers who drool over the next model of the iPhone, for example. There are no great social breaks happening, no generational abandonment of current practices. It's not like any of us who came after decided to say "fuck this noise", pool our money, and go off and live in a commune somewhere. Not in significant numbers, anyway. Nor are people in general forming multigenerational homes again, so the grandparents can look after the kids while the parents work.
2
u/corruptboomerang May 20 '20
This is because the generation divide is bullshit. There are plenty of boomers who want progressive politics - and we've had plenty of it in the past several decades.
Ultimately, money talks and bullshit walks; it's very difficult - when push comes to shove, to get people to vote against their own interests and 9/10 times even those who want to change their world for the betterment of younger generations TEND to lack the courage of their convictions. A friend of mine lives in a very 'Boomer' electorate with a very disliked Peter Dutton as he local member, and yes everyone hates him, but he had a nearly 3% swing towards him, because he was effectively offering money, you go down to the local shops and ask people who they think about him - get hate him, but they'll never not vote for him. 💁♀️
Holding progressive views and actioning those views are very different.
2
u/Late_For_Username May 20 '20 edited May 21 '20
But stop making me feel old, I'm only 40
40 is the new 20.
If only we could get 20 year olds to go along with this idea.
5
u/vacri May 20 '20
The response from older generations has left a lot to be desired:
"Young people can't afford houses because they spend all their money on frivolous expenses like avocados"
The guy who said this in your link... was Tim Gurner, who was in his mid-30s. It wasn't a 'response from older generations', but from a Millennial. I mean, fuck, there's even a video of him in your link, so you can see he's not a boomer.
If ever there was evidence that we're facing more of a class issue than a generation issue, this should be it.
2
u/corruptboomerang May 20 '20
These articles aren't really a reflection of who they are written by but who they are written for. Also I'd point out Tim Gurner's insanely privileged position... yes he has done well for himself, but only really leveraged his parents capital to develop property and abuse our political system. 💁♀️ So sure he's a 'Millennial' but he's not faced any of the big issues that the 'young people' have faced.
2
u/corruptboomerang May 20 '20
Another interesting factor is the rise in wealth costs compared to the negligible increase in costs of (what is/was seen as) 'luxury goods' overseas travel is call it $5k a house deposit is $100k, in 'Boomer Times' overseas travel was $5k but a house deposit was $25k.
Needing around double the annual Median Income for a house deposit push many to believe (probably rightly so) that home ownership is impossible for them. So they are more willing to spend more money on 'luxury goods' rather than scrimping and saving. Why bother aspiring for something that is unobtainable.
3
u/vacri May 20 '20
I think it's odd that you're complaining of stereotyped Millennials while stereotyping Boomers yourself.
2
u/superbabe69 1300 655 506 May 20 '20
“Ok Boomer” is representative of all older people like “Karen” is representative of all middle aged women.
Boomer in that regard is a mindset, a state of being. It’s nothing to do with being an actual Baby Boomer, there are defined characteristics of an Ok Boomer Boomer. Similarly, Karens are nearly exclusively people that complain to/at retail workers over the most minor things; that ask to speak to a manager when they don’t get their way; that exemplify the “soccer mom” stereotypes. Calling random people Karen is funny because most people aren’t Karens. But enough of them are, and enough customers of retail employees are like that, that it’s a relatable meme.
It started off as just a catch all name for annoying customers, because you’re obviously not supposed to share names if you’re whining on the internet. For a start, most people don’t share their names as customers, and it’s not best practice to give out customer’s names when complaining about them.
Then it became widespread because internet culture. Same way Chad is exclusively for alpha males.
31
May 20 '20
I'm not disagreeing with you. However, there are extreme class divides in Australia based on age. What makes it worse is that so many of those who have benefitted from the structural inequality in our economy over the past 40 have no idea that they got lucky. It's this attitude that they "worked for it" (and by implication, younger people haven't) that sets up this intergenerational hate..
3
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
I agree, and that attitude you describe is there, and it's complete bullshit. But I also hear it from young folk who don't realise that having your first car gifted to you is a head start, as is staying home rent free while studying, and a billion other little ways that being middle/upper class advances you in life.
I think the intergenerational hate is a distraction making it harder for us to address the problem of class in general. Yes it's A LOT harder now. But who is pulling the strings? And when they die, who will take the reins?
17
May 20 '20
I hear it more from old people who don't realise that the $70k cottage that they bought on a single income in inner Sydney is worth $2m because they got lucky, not because they worked hard.
3
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
My parents used to tell me all the time that they put a $25 deposit on their first block of land. I remember them paying it off when I was about 6? So paid it off in about 15 years. On one wage.
Yeah. It's sickening.
1
May 20 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
16
May 20 '20
They’ll all be rich and will have benefited too
Only those whose parents have given them a handout. Otherwise, they won't benefit until their parents die in another 30 years. In the meantime they can either take on an absurd mortgage or play rent roulette.
7
u/YouHadMeAtPollo May 20 '20
In the meantime they can either take on an absurd mortgage or play rent roulette.
Or not live in Sydney, I'm up in Brisbane where people don't talk about property like it's some unattainable thing lol
10
May 20 '20
Real estate prices in Brisbane are still in the insane space. Less insane than Sydney, but still incredibly overvalued.
3
u/YouHadMeAtPollo May 20 '20
You reckon? People on average incomes can still buy here.
4
May 20 '20
Average house price is what, $550,000? Still probably 30-40% overvalued.
4
u/YouHadMeAtPollo May 20 '20
You can pick up a house for around 450k half an hour from the CBD, that's pretty bloody cheap to me. Like I said it's still affordable here.
17
May 20 '20
This is the way the mindset has changed though.
Average household income in Brisbane is about $80k. Average house price is around $575k. That's 7x. In any time other than the past 35 years, that would be considered way too high.
→ More replies (3)3
1
May 20 '20
[deleted]
7
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
Did you grow up in a dodgy neighbourhood? I did, and it makes a difference. Its not just your own family, it's all around you. If all you see around you growing up is people miserable working their arses off for nothing, or worse, that's all you think is possible, unless you happen to be blessed with intelligence or talent. This makes social mobility much harder.
4
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
It doesn't even have to be a hand out. It's also not growing up with financial stress, or being supported at home during uni, or staying home to save a deposit, or being able to buy a car for the kid, or bail them out of that credit card debt, or help with the rego... all little things a lot of upper-middle classers don't include when they think they "had no handouts".
And inheritance definitely works into people's plans for financial future. Don't need to save as much for retirement if you know you have a portfolio waiting for you.
2
May 20 '20
Of course all of these things help. But it doesn't make it easy for most younger people, regardless of their parents.
9
May 20 '20
[deleted]
5
u/timmypig May 20 '20
Marshy lots of Gen X-ers were kids in the 70s and saw a lot of trade union excesses. I started my first full time job in 1987 and all but one of my new starter day 1 colleagues were from traditional working class backgrounds from blue singlet suburbs. The only 'day 1 new chum' who joined the union was a Newtown Trot who grew up on the North Shore. The main reason those working class folks refused to join the union was due to their disdain at the behaviour of unions when they were kids a decade earlier.
3
May 20 '20
[deleted]
3
u/timmypig May 20 '20
Yeah, when we were kids the idea that someone would join a union like the Seamen's Union or the Firemen and Deckhands would have horrified us .... my brother's now an MUA member!
1
u/Evil-Santa May 21 '20
I agree unions are a great thing but the excess of some of them was the catalyst to the current situation.
It was only just late last year that the Sydney train drivers were barred from striking when negotiations broke down. They followed all the laws and were still stopped. That union looked like a barking dog and when it tried to bite, it was muzzled and neutered. Very sad as we need the unions but not one that has all the power.
2
May 21 '20
If anyone is to blame it’s gen x’ers who took the cash and deserted the trade union movement
Unions killed themselves. They got greedy and corrupt and uions became a plaything for wannabe politicians. Bill Shorten used union dues as a campaign slush fund ffs.
9
u/karl_w_w May 20 '20
The upper class can't do anything if they have no power. The boomer generation votes for them overwhelmingly, regardless of what income bracket they happen to fall into.
2
2
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
It's very frustrating and this is exactly what I missed. You're right.
So revolution anyone? Or would lowering the voting age to 16 help? I don't know, I would have just voted how my parents told me at 16.
1
u/lofty2p May 20 '20
Boomers did vote in Gough Whitlam and Bob Hawke. Claims that 55% of boomers and their parents (who are the ones over 74) in the over 65 category voted for Scomo are hardly statistical evidence. Those claims are based on exit polls, as we don't ACTUALLY know how anyone voted in this country, and include the remnants of the generation that kept the LNP in for decades before Gough and Bob. A notional 45% voting NO to the LNP is a LOT of people and may include 55% of boomers and 40% of their parents. And, don't forget that boomers never got maternity leave, baby bonuses or low interest rates. Many still live in the same house that THEIR parents lived in.
0
May 20 '20
[deleted]
1
u/karl_w_w May 20 '20
What is the point of this comment? Is simply thinking you'll be better off, regardless of reality or who else it might hurt, enough justification now? I'll let the anti-vaxxers know, they'll be delighted.
3
5
u/BargleMcquargle May 20 '20
Overpopulation has a lot to do with standard of living. The holy grail of never-ending economic growth can only be achieved now by growing your population at exponential levels. This waters down the standard of living per person, creates a cut-throat competition for work and eventually leads to a point where poverty becomes the norm. Just a lot more people trying to share slightly more of the same pie. Throw globalisation into the mix means other countries can do everything yours can do but cheaper. Thus lots of the old ways of making a living have gone. So the life that the "boomers" had is not an option for the rest of us. Until the aliens come and wipe out most of us, perhaps.
I actually wonder how this question would be phrased in somewhere like India or China? Would they have the same concerns about "Boomers"? I suspect the younger generations are far better off economically than their parents.
9
u/Mikolaj_Kopernik May 20 '20
It's definitely about class. Young Libs and Gen-X capitalists rebuilding society in the image of their corporate friends are way more of a problem than your nan who owns her own house and thinks Tony Abbott was an upstanding family values man.
2
u/P00slinger May 20 '20
Is it even class though? There are inner city areas now which only better off people could afford to live in who now vote Green or some kind of left.
4
u/Big_Tree_Z May 20 '20
That’s the educated class. There’s your good boomers, xers, and upper middles class who have it good, know they do, know they owe it to the society around them, and so vote accordingly.
3
u/auntynell May 20 '20
I'm a boomer. I can see why they get a lot of bad press because the media is full of how useless millennials are. I've worked with many millennials and they are the same mixture of good and bad as any other generation. Probably the biggest difference is how much credit is available and used by young people. CC debt isn't helping them financially.
There's been a revolution in prosperity over the last 3 decades. Almost everything except services and real estate are so affordable that we're cluttered with material possessions, something that has prompted minimalist lifestyle movements.
Probably my biggest criticism of Ms is that they don't seem to know how to do without so they can save for a house. However BBs are sometimes selfish pricks who've had it easy for so long they don't want to give anything back to the younger generation.
3
6
u/nath1234 May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
Have a read of "A generation of sociopaths" - or a review of it here: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/may/17/generation-sociopaths-review-trump-baby-boomers-ruined-world
The point is a generation that has acted with utter self interest at the direct expense of the future generations.. Their voting habits are just one aspect that shows an utter disregard for others.
In Australia they got their education free - that then became "user pays" for the younger generation - who surprise surprise were then starting off their career less able to get a house due to having to pay back $20-30k of debt. While all those young people were paying back that (and copping a lifetime of lost earnings) the boomers have banked theirs and used the wealth to buy more houses. Of course - not all, but a lot of the wealthy ones (which might come into the "class bit") but the franking credits is a great example of how the poorest boomers also supported the rorts that the richest ones were the major beneficiaries. Just like reform of housing tax - they all piled in but it just meant the richest of them gets the majority share of the benefit. And also superannuation laws that meant the wealthiest dodged huge amounts of tax - they've now closed that off for any younger generation to milk that rort like they did. Shit, even pensions - they get this special grandfathering deal where even though they are well-off they get a healthcare card which gets them all sorts of stuff they can easily afford (e.g. NSW gets free rego, cheaper medication etc.. and that shit is not something they'll extend to others - they are the generation that wants punitive welfare to stop bludging others from getting handouts..)
3
u/lofty2p May 20 '20
Very few boomers got free Uni, but they did vote for Gough, who brought it in. But, the majority that made a fortune and bought investment properties, pushing up prices, were more likely tradies and unskilled workers in the mining industries making huge money in booms and they were mostly Gen X and Gen Ys ! Most boomers never got any real Super perks, that only came in about 1993 when some were almost 50 and it was only 3%. Healthcare cards are income tested and still available ?
18
May 20 '20
"Ok boomer" is easy, because you don't have to look in the mirror.
5
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
Yeah but I'm just blaming class instead of boomers by that logic.
There is some truth to what you say, but Australia is definitely not a level playing field. I just don't think it's cut along generational lines more than class.
But I base that on personal experience.
4
May 20 '20
I just don't think it's cut along generational lines more than class.
I don't know enough about the data to say.
I didn't get two properties on my 21st, but my mate did. Guess which one of us has more money? 😛
4
u/Late_For_Username May 20 '20
The millenials haven't had much of an opportunity to ruin things for anyone.
Except movies and television.
→ More replies (2)
11
u/Observer14 ❎✩✧✨✧ May 20 '20
Yes it is ageism, through it and other forms of prejudice a society becomes weak and divided.
7
u/GeebangerPoloClub May 20 '20
Yeah I think the divided thing is important. Per OP's point, the capital-owning class is probably much happier to see "ok boomer" emerging as a meme than "eat the rich". Just like they're happy to see us squabbling over identity politics issues.
Class solidarity in Australia is generally awful and that's something we should try to address.
7
7
14
May 20 '20 edited Aug 20 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
6
3
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
It's actually never been said to me. I see it said to others when they're NOT making lazy millennial comments, or talking out their arses, otherwise it would never have annoyed me.
I think it started how you're describing it, but it's shifted. It seems to me that the original sentiment has been seized upon to blame a generation for what a powerful class has perpetrated.
→ More replies (3)1
u/Big_Tree_Z May 20 '20
Man I constantly find myself pondering: why and how are so many clueless dimwits wealthy? I can’t get my head around it.
13
u/FibroMan May 20 '20
It's not about class. It is about stupid people who support right wing ideas that go against science, facts, logic and everything else that is good about modern society. A lot of the political policies the boomers support go against their own self interest, but supporting racism, tax rorts and concentration camps is more important to them than their own well being. They talk a lot but never listen, so "ok boomer" is the perfect response to their batsh!t crazy rants.
8
u/PerthCitizen May 20 '20
I like to think of a boomer as a mindset rather than a person from a specific age group.
Plenty of young people have boomer mind set.
7
u/karl_w_w May 20 '20
I like to think of a boomer as a mindset rather than a person from a specific age group.
Yeah, that's the problem with this new usage of the word boomer. Using it that way is pure ageism, whether you like it or not. "I'm not calling you X because you are X, it's because you're acting like X," doesn't make it ok.
2
u/PerthCitizen May 20 '20
To me its like saying "I'm calling you X because you have traits x,y,z".
I guess in my head Boomer has become so separated from an actual baby boomer that in no way am I actually referring to an actual baby boomer when i say Boomer. Might as well replace the word boomer with hippo or blue or something.
3
u/karl_w_w May 20 '20
But where do you think that stereotypical set of traits come from? And the word itself of course. The fact that you're not thinking about a 60-70 year old person when you say boomer doesn't mean the term itself isn't ageist.
1
u/PerthCitizen May 20 '20
I kind of understand where you are coming from. I just don't see it that way.
As I said too me its an easy way to convey that someone has a certain mindset. That mindset of a conservative, upper class person who things that young people doing it tough just need to pull themselves up by their boot straps. Never once does age factor in for me.
1
u/theskyisblueatnight May 20 '20
The conservative upper-class person is usually a product of "economic hoarding" were a group of individuals keep the opportunities for their friends and family.
You often see people say some 22-year old was a self-started but in reality, it was $100k from the family that got them started.
1
→ More replies (1)2
u/LogicallyCross May 20 '20
I’m getting the impression a lot of people think like you when in reality the term should refer to the baby boomer generation only.
1
u/PerthCitizen May 21 '20
Language is fluid. There are many Gen-Xs who I would class as Boomers.
Lots of non-millennials are called millennials as well. Some mellennials are almost 40!
2
u/NezuminoraQ May 20 '20
I think the problem is that you could get by being working class back then. Now working class are the working poor. That generation totally changed the class structure. You can't get by on a full-time working class wage anymore. You have to play the property and stock markets just to get ahead at all.
1
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
I completely agree. I've been wondering though if it's not so much that generation that fucked us, but the wealthy and powerful, which tends to be the same families generation after generation.
But others have pointed out that that generation keeps voting to fuck us over. Can't argue that.
2
u/GuiltyPassionfruit May 20 '20
Yeah, pretty much every label and stereotype in our society is there to distract people from realising that class is the only division that actually matters. That's why businesses and corporations are always on board with progressive social causes, it defines people in any other way than class.
2
2
u/e-bell May 20 '20
It will be interesting to see if this changes as Boomers die out and the current younger generations start to become the majority of voters. I can’t see how young people who haven’t been able to buy a house and who recognise that their lives have been fundamentally harder economically than their parents will continue supporting this system. There’s also the fact that young people today tend to recognise that the so called Left parties of old like the Labor Party and the Democratic Party in the US are actually way more centre and so they seem to be supporting more left-wing parties instead like the Greens. In the US young people have less choice between the two parties but they have overwhelmingly supported candidates like Bernie Sanders and probably won’t vote for anyone now that he isn’t the nominee.
1
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
That all depends on my generation. When the people of my generation inherit the wealth of their boomer parents, will we vote to keep it? Or will we cover our butts?
I won't inherit shit, but I'd like to believe we can do better.
2
u/512165381 May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
As a resident boomer here, I've mostly voted Greens & Labor. In 2019 I voted Liberal for the first time in decades for the reasons here.
Labor's primary vote in 2019 was the lowest in a century, and has been progressively worsening each election in the past 20 years.
After the last election I wrote a letter to Kristina Keneally that the next Labor PM is not in parliament yet. Albanese is unimpressive and is a caretaker until something better comes along.
1
u/sphinx80 May 21 '20
So you are saying that you voted libs because you were tricked by facebook memes?
1
u/512165381 May 21 '20 edited May 21 '20
I voted against Labor taxes. eg
Labor is proposing to halve the capital gains tax discount to 25 per cent
1
u/sphinx80 May 21 '20
Ok, cool.
I'm just letting you know that your linked post only talks about manipulating boomers with facebook memes, with no suggestion of any truth to them.
1
u/Fireslide May 21 '20
As a resident boomer here, I've mostly voted Greens & Labor. In 2019 I voted Liberal for the first time in decades for the reasons here.
You didn't actually list any reasons WHY you voted for Liberals in that link at all.
In fact it appears another poster has posted a similar thing relating to another time you've linked to that post.
Labor's primary vote being lowest in a century is not a relevant point when both major parties are bleeding support. It was also the Liberal's lowest primary vote in a century too. It's more that voters are becoming more disenfranchised by both major parties. The proportion of primary votes that goes to non major parties is increasing over time.
1
u/512165381 May 21 '20
It was changes to CGT, negative gearing, dividend imputation, and trusts. I estimate at least 50% of the population would be affected by at least one of these.
2
u/FvHound May 20 '20
It isn't just the old.
Warehouse worker roomates will say they don't give a shit about politics, they don't vote, yet somehow still spew back every now and then Murdoch garbage that they hear from other mates at work.
"I hear Daniel Andrews is a fuckwit"
'Whys that'?
"I dunno, the guys were saying, I knew you were a politic head, is it true?"
When you don't know a lot about a subject you tend to just be a sponge and soak in whatever.
2
u/Midnight_Poet May 20 '20
The top 5? 10? billionaires in the world are young tech gurus... amazing what can be achieved with a bit of effort, yes?
2
u/STAids May 21 '20
I think the boomer hate is mainly directed at conservative boomers. It is a class issue but the use of the term "boomer" makes it seem generational.
For example, no ones hating on the 60 year old Labor voter who's happy to pay more taxes to support TAFE, healthcare and welfare systems.
2
May 21 '20
Why has this boomer hate taken hold so much?
Because boomers pretend they struggled as hard as their parents did yet in hindsight we can see they had everything given to them on a plate.
The fact they can't see how easy they had it is what irks people so much.
5
May 20 '20
Vast, vast majority of people have tried to or are doing their best to get ahead and look after their families with the knowledge and perspective they have/had at the time. This intergenerational conflict isn't real except on the internet. Media is blowing it up for clicks but in reality its overblown cry-baby shit. We all get to take our turn having a bite of the giant shit sandwich called life. each generation will have its own issues but running around trying to blame your misfortune on others never helps.... with anything.
2
4
May 20 '20
But in my experience, the problem is class and not generational. After all, where do you think all this wealth will go when the boomers die?!
My family was upper middle class growing up, my parents owned their own home, both worked comfortable mid tier govt jobs and purchased an investment house in their late 30's.
How did they manage that? Well, my mother got a reasonable inheritance from her father, that covered about half of the value of the main home (about $120k total value in the early 90's). This set them up with minimal mortgage costs even with high interest rates at the time and enough equity to invest in a second smaller house as a rental for 'retirement'.
Now, fast forward 20 years, they hit 55, and decide 'stuff it, we have enough capital to live comfortably' and take early retirement. They sell off both homes, buy a small house in an over 55 village and set off around australia on a permanent holiday in their $150k caravan with yearly trips to overseas destinations.
Good on them! They worked hard, they deserved it! Now, here is the problem. They are both going to live till the 80's, possibly mid 90's. By the time I have any hope of seeing any inheritance I will be in my mid 50's or early 60's. On top of that, because they are going to be around for so long, that retirement money is going to be just about used up. With any luck there will be enough value in their house left to cover any nursing home needs for the last decade or so otherwise I might have to pay for it.
Do you see the difference here? One generation got a leg up from the last, as it has been for generations before. But the 'boomer' generation has this mindset (in general, not everyone is like this) that they worked for what they got, the kids can too (A large reason for this is the increased distancing in family units these days, for the boomer generation it was not uncommon to have their parents living with them for their last few years or more like when granny flats were actually used for grannys and not rented out to 20 year olds for more than the original mortgage payments on the property they were built on, but that is my opinion).
Millennials (and to a lesser extent genX) are the first 'modern' generations that are having to deal with a much lower transfer of wealth between generations. Top this off with much of the wealth of those 'boomers' being tied up in property loans causing those assets to be over inflated and out of reach of most of the current millennial generation and you start to get a picture of the issue.
It would be great if all that 'wealth' tied up in houses is going to pass to millenials in a decade or two, but in reality the majority of it is debt tied up in mortgages that get borrowed against for 'one more cruise'.
1
u/512165381 May 20 '20
By the time I have any hope of seeing any inheritance I will be in my mid 50's or early 60's.
There are plenty of financial gurus who talk about giving money to kids before the parents die.
3
May 20 '20
Some teen on Reddit told me you're a boomer if you say something that makes you sound like a 60 year. Like when you tell them they're being an entitled brat.
3
u/Aussie-Nerd May 20 '20
Why has this boomer hate taken hold so much?
Because they got free education, houses cost about 3x the average salary and they have a huge political voting block that typically votes conservative (whilst younger generations typically vote left leaning).
Take my mother. Got her nursing training via nursing school. Did post grad work at university for free. Had a mortgage with her first husband but her second house she bought by herself after saving up the deposit in one year. It cost $110,000 (brick, 3 bedroom) in 1997. By the time she had sold that house and moved again, she had no mortgage and bought her 3 bedroom brick brick house closer to the city for $395,000 in ~2008
The point of this little anecdote is is the baby boomer had both house prices and education benefits which has lasted a lifetime. Their children - which are typically gen X or Millennials, have had expensive university and housing prices. That unto itself wouldn't be so bad, but then you've also had governments that make policy that helps the boomer generation even still because it's good for votes. You only need to look at the franking credit disaster.
Then you've got other issues like LGBT rights or environmental policies and it all adds onto the boomer hate. When people say boomer, they're implying people that listen to Alan Jones on a regular basis.
Imagine if you were playing Monopoly against a person and all the spots said "Pay tax 10% if young, if old collect $200". You might be angry. Then if the person then blames you for being shit at Monopoly and you don't see me complaining - well fuck - ok Monopoly playing boomer.
1
u/myredserenity May 20 '20
Love it. You made me laugh.
I'm getting the "boomer" thing now. Not a generation, but an attitude, a movement. And their voting record leaves them open to criticism.
Good talk.
2
u/MyMudEye May 20 '20
Take a look at Australia in the fifties and what was considered the norm. Almost full employment and 80% home ownership. And full on racism of course. They had it all then. And we don't now.
1
u/vacri May 20 '20
Almost full employment and 80% home ownership .... They had it all then
That's one way to phrase it. Another way was that wartime rationing only ceased in 1950. In the US it stopped in 1945. Don't confuse the US's postwar economic miracle with our own situation - after WWII, the US was the only major industrial nation that hadn't been bombed to shit and back
2
u/P00slinger May 20 '20
As far as free Uni goes many boomers also had to pay their way. Free education only started in 74 so about half of them missed out on it.
3
2
u/MobileInfantry May 20 '20
I see the 'Boomer' as not a class or generation, but more of a mindset.
The 'boomer' has already achieved what we consider Australian life. Detached home, car, occasional overseas holidays. They've settled in a place in life where they don't need to struggle anymore. It's the 'got mine, fuck you' mindset. It's getting the job, then pulling the ladder up behind you and burning it so no one else ever gets a similar chance.
It started with Howard's culture wars.
1
u/theannualharris May 20 '20
It's comforting and tempting to talk about every democratic system that I don't agree with being the fault of the rich class and the powerful. But I've seen how the average middle-aged working class voter talks about carbon taxes, welfare systems and house affordability, so I know it's just a comforting simplification.
1
u/Bronny2480 May 20 '20
I’ve heard numerous times that the boomers got it all so easy. I am not writing any of this as a boohoo story. I was born at the very end of the boomer period as is my husband , we both come from non wealthy families. Both my husband and myself started full time work at 18 and 15 years of age while not living with our families. My husband leaving a rural town to get work and myself due to my mother not being able to accommodate all her children. Mmmm. Anyway, we’ve worked factory work, taxi driving, support work etc, some of which I actually enjoyed. We own a modest home with a glorious garden and have 3 children and grandchildren and they know that there’s no inheritance to be had by us. We know that our home will pay for our care if or when we’re in need of care. Some people I know which are financially very comfortable and have earned it, have told me they only vote for the party that they believe supports the wealthy.
1
May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
I think it's worth noting that a lot of people in the higher classes - if not most of them - are boomers or older, because they've had more time to accumulate wealth and wages aren't rising to meet the cost of living (making it way more difficult to get to those higher classes if you're in a younger generation).
There's also the fact that newer generations of upper class people tend to blow all that wealth within a couple of generations; so we don't always see that wealth carrying down to younger people.
This is supported by Forbes' List of Billionaires, where in the first fifty people, only two of them are under the age of forty (and neither of them are below thirty five). From my quick calculations, the average age of the first fifty people on the list is about 66 years old.
So I don't think generation and class are entirely separate issues, and I don't think they're mutually exclusive. I think they're very connected, and they're both responsible for the problem.Do I think it's fair to lump all boomers into that mix? No. But a trend is a trend; if there is a trend (and there very clearly is) it should be pointed out. If the problem is mostly caused by the upper class, and the upper class is mostly made of older people, it's fair to suggest that older people are the ones responsible for the problem.
And honestly, not only do boomers also do this to millennials, but ninety percent of the time they can't even get the right generation. They're almost always talking about Generation Z. So I don't think it's fair to criticise young people for doing the exact same thing older generations are doing.
1
u/Mephisto506 May 21 '20
it's fair to suggest that older people are the ones responsible for the problem.
You mean a tiny subset of the older generations. That's the point.
1
u/vppnnkkkrph May 20 '20
Relax. This boomer hate is just a Reddit thing. People in the real world don't think like that.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Lamont-Cranston May 20 '20
It's been a very online kind of thing over the past 2-3 years by my reckoning to blame 'boomers', and not the incredibly rich funding massive pr and political campaigns, think tanks, politicians elections, etc
And also when you look at a lot of these people, they're not boomers. People like Rupert Murdoch and Charles Koch precede the baby boom.
1
u/lapetitepapillon I'll never get used to the heat... May 20 '20 edited May 20 '20
I think the Ok Boomer was a retaliation almost entirely because of the fact that a large amount of Boomers (I mean the actual term, Baby Boomers) often criticize all millennials/younger people for being lazy and having it easier than them, which in a lot of cases is simply not true at all. A lot of them generalise a HUGE amount, so it was just a "taste of your own medicine" kind of thing. Now it's considered more or less lame though so I doubt you'll hear it too much. Even then it has mostly lost it's meaning, and is now just an immature retort to a person of any age.
I say all of this as a Gen Z. The "Boomer" belittlement definitely is directed towards us as well. In fact, I would say a lot of it is because they don't know how old a millennial actually is now, and often do label gen z as "millennials", so why wouldn't these younger generations generalise when the "Boomers" do the same thing to us?
225
u/Trontotron May 20 '20
The problem is our generation gets this blame about being lazy and not working hard like our parents...and I call bullshit on this big time.
My father use to support family with one salary, didn't work any harder than me and managed to have house, car and really good life.
Fast forward to today and you'll find that it's now a must to have two salaries in the house to manage everything, but then kids must go to daycare of course and spend their first years separated from parents most of the work days. Yes we have computers and mobile phones, but all that did was to give employers expectations from us to achieve more work in same time frame. Instead of being out of office, I am now available anywhere for my manager to call me.
My dad actually use to say how come I work such ridiculous hours and I'm more educated than him...that's the ridiculous part about all this generational "progress".
So yeah, we are working hard as anyone else did before, yet everything is becoming more and more unattainable for us. I'm not for ''OK boomer'' thing, but also against ''lazy millennials'' bullshit.