DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
Wasn't sure where to put this, but we need a thread for the wing nuts. Lauren Boebert.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Direct link to this infomercial
Well, she's a professional RWNJ, so she's got that going for her.She has a professional reputation?
She has a brain?Perhaps she can get someone to fix her brain.
I'm not sure that's accurate. Obviously inheritance existed, but there was quite a lot less to inherit. Members of that generation were in the optimum position to benefit from lower cost housing and the economy booming over the second half of the 20th century. Not so much the case for the generations after them, which is also reflected in things like pensions.This is how boomers got their wealth, largely, yet we still see them being touted as “wealthy” when they got their money the exact same way. Not seeing the misleading bit here.
Yes we can and we can do it without these unjustified and unnecessary ad hominem judgements and implied insults...We can agree to disagree...
There is some serious thin skin on this board regarding this topic.
If you can't handle a conversations about demographics without getting all up in your feelings.
This should not be triggering.
My point was that the so labeled "Baby Boomers" aren't taking their wealth with them and every generation has wealth hoarders. Each generation has bigger wealth hoarders than the previous generation, even in adjusted dollars.This seems to be a bit of a tangent to this thread, but I think this particular stat is a bit misleading in this context, given that a key reason that the millennials are poised to become the richest generation over the next 20 years is that they - well, some of them - are going to inherit it from the boomers and silent generation.
Does sharing the wealth - patchily - between generations really count when it's happening because they can't take it with them?
Please let the Secret Service have a word with this nut.
My point was that the so labeled "Baby Boomers" aren't taking their wealth with them and every generation has wealth hoarders. Each generation has bigger wealth hoarders than the previous generation, even in adjusted dollars.
The problem is not any one generation. The problem is that in each generation a greater percentage of wealth gets concentrated into the hands of an ever decreasing percentage of the population. Fixating on blaming the "boomers" is part of the problem, not the solution.
I looked for it, I vividly remember reading that the wealth transfer from our parents was the greatest one the US had ever seen (at the time). It was largely based on the value of housing, IIRC. which in many areas exploded in value just before our parent’s generation passed away. I couldn’t find the articles. Google has gone to crap, it seems. Even though I specified wealth transfer TO boomers, all I got were all the recent articles about wealth transfer FROM boomers.I'm not sure that's accurate. Obviously inheritance existed, but there was quite a lot less to inherit. Members of that generation were in the optimum position to benefit from lower cost housing and the economy booming over the second half of the 20th century. Not so much the case for the generations after them, which is also reflected in things like pensions.
That naturally doesn't apply to every individual member of the generation, plenty of whom got left out from not being in a position to take advantage of those things.
I think you can blame the people who voted for those politicians and policies without making it seem like it was everyone in an entire generation that was responsible. Because it wasn’t everyone who happened to be born in certain years who did that.I'm not about to let Boomers escape responsibility for putting politicians into office and support policies that basically pulled the ladder up after them.
That generation went along with Reagan's "Spend and borrow" philosophy until it became embedded into both parties.
I think you can blame the people who voted for those politicians and policies without making it seem like it was everyone in an entire generation that was responsible. Because it wasn’t everyone who happened to be born in certain years who did that.
Amusing, but generally correct. No one can control the year they happen to be born and the year they are born doesn’t dictate their personality traits any more than their Zodiac sign. I will die on this hill, so to speak,People don't change, we are just products of our experiences.
That is where the generation differences come from.
People in GenZ are the same as the people who fought WWII. If George Patton had been born in 2010 he'd be doing tictok dances.
Same applies to geography. Being born in one place does not make a person inferior or superior. It can and does impact people via the conditions there, the legal system and political economy. Thus the phrase “I’m a ‘Murican” is meaningless beyond stating that is where you live.Amusing, but generally correct. No one can control the year they happen to be born and the year they are born doesn’t dictate their personality traits any more than their Zodiac sign. I will die on this hill, so to speak,
Same applies to geography. Being born in one place does not make a person inferior or superior. It can and does impact people via the conditions there, the legal system and political economy. Thus the phrase “I’m a ‘Murican” is meaningless beyond stating that is where you live.
the flu pandemic was 1918, over 30 years before the Second World War. Anyone who was becoming a parent after WW2 (which are the baby boomer parents) didn’t really experience the flu pandemic of 1918 as anything but infants, did they?Their parents were the Greatest Generation and defeated the great evil and withstood the Great Depression and Spanish Flu.