Skip to main content

I think there are way too few conversations going on between us Baby Boomers and our kids' generation about our commonalities and areas of divergence and friction.  Given that, when our young adult son Eric posted a link on Facebook the other day with the following intro...

Everyone should read (and share) this. Everyone.
Followed by posting a provocative quote from the linked piece...
"From every corner of the institutional spectrum, the whole of American society has been rearranged so that the limits of vision coincide exactly with the death of the Boomers."
I took notice!

Eric, now 26, has emerged from his youth into adulthood as a thoughtful person not prone to hyperbole, and someone I (biased perhaps) would consider a thoughtful spokesperson for his circle of young adult peers and his “Millennial” generation.

Eric's must read is a piece in the April 2012 edition of Esquire magazine, “The War Against Youth”, by 36-year-old Canadian Stephen Marche, who writes a monthly column for the magazine, "A Thousand Words about Our Culture".  

FYI... Per a short Wikipedia article on Marche, he was a finalist for the 2011 American Society of Magazine Editors award for columns and commentary.  Also noted in that article, is that during a Canadian election campaign in October 2010, the Toronto Globe and Mail published online a commentary by Marche where he “effusively taunted a candidate for mayor of Toronto for the man's obesity”.  Assuming both these citations are true, Marche perhaps combines an incisive social criticism with a penchant for anger and at times hurtful words.  But given Eric's nod, I don't necessarily want to judge the message by the messenger.

Marche's Thesis

The provocative opening rhetorical salvo of Marche's piece encapsulates his angry shot across us Baby Boomers' bow...

The recession didn't gut the prospects of American young people. The Baby Boomers took care of that.
Setting a context for the past three decades in which members of Eric's “Millennial” generation were born and now entering adulthood, March elaborates...
Twenty-five years ago young Americans had a chance. In 1984, American breadwinners who were sixty-five and over made ten times as much as those under thirty-five. The year Obama took office, older Americans made almost forty-seven times as much as the younger generation... This bleeding up of the national wealth is no accounting glitch, no anomalous negative bounce from the recent unemployment and mortgage crises, but rather the predictable outcome of thirty years of economic and social policy that has been rigged to serve the comfort and largesse of the old at the expense of the young.
Marche's summation of that trend calls out an ugly bifurcation between the older and the younger among us...
If you follow the money rather than the blather, it's clear that the American system is a bipartisan fusion of economic models broken down along generational lines: unaffordable Greek-style socialism for the old, virulently purified capitalism for the young. Both political parties have agreed to this arrangement: The Boomers and older will be taken care of. Everybody younger will be on their own.

And as a result...

The situation is obviously unsustainable: At the exact moment when the United States and all other Western countries are trying to deal with aging populations, they are failing to capture the energy and potential of the people who will have to work to support those aging populations. We have arrived at a moment, just before the 2012 election, in which the hedges, the corner-cuts, the isolated decisions about young people from a host of institutions have accrued to the point of a continuous catastrophe. The question rises from the wreckage: How long can you eat the young?
Given that that last question perhaps harkens back to his rhetorical excess of taunting a candidate for his obesity, if you read the arguments in his piece he has a point.

Marche says Baby Boomers are to blame, not by intent, but more by selfish naiveté and inaction, as in that activist wisdom from the 1960s that goes something like, “If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem”.  

Marche's Case

Marche calls out the scope of the areas where our young people are facing this disenfranchisement...

Government, academia, the professions, corporations, unions, and both political parties — all continue to mine the vulnerability of youth in service of the needs of their aging power base.
I think there is merit to this argument, because I have certainly had at least anecdotal experience to this effect.  What follows is my attempt to lay out the key points of his  argument that older Americans are disenfranchising the young.

Taking Away Youth Voting Rights

According to Marche, the recent trend particularly in red states to create stricter ID requirements for voting has impacted the number of young people able to vote in elections.  Many young people are being prevented from  voting since they do not have current photo IDs, including being away at college on election day where they don't have an ID with a local address.

I tend to agree.  Most people attend college in their first adult years when they are likely to be developing their political consciousness (with any coursework in social studies presumably contributing to that development).  Further, habits (including voting and political activism beyond just voting) developed in those first adult years are likely to carry forward into their years beyond.  Development of those good habits of democratic citizenry are stymied rather than encouraged.

Exploiting College Graduates

Marche points to statistics that while the cost of a college education has greatly increased since 1980, the quality of that education has deteriorated.  And increasingly, those college graduates are having to take unpaid internships rather than getting paying jobs out of school.  Unpaid or minimal-pay internships are becoming the “new normal”, giving even major corporations the opportunity to exploit young workers desperate for even a path towards the possibility of scarce jobs that actually pay real salary...

The practice of not paying young people for their labor has become so ingrained in the everyday practice of American business that we've forgotten how bizarre and recent the development is. In the early 1980s, 3 percent of college grads had had an internship. By 2006, 84 percent had done at least one. Multiple internships are common. According to a survey by the National Association of Colleges and Employers, more than 75 percent of employers prefer students who have interned or had a similar working experience.
Of course they do!  You get to try someone out on the cheap!  If they don't work out, not much ventured.  If they are competent at their work you get their labor for a period of time at little or no cost.  One of our son Eric's close friends with a business degree did an internship at a company for at least half a year before he was actually paid.

Graduate Degrees

Marche points out that for increasingly more professional jobs these days, graduate degrees are required, degrees that have generally become hugely expensive to obtain, saddling graduates with major debt for years, hopefully repayable by getting high paying jobs.  I know someone who put himself and his family in considerable additional debt to get his MBA, hoping to leverage that degree to get a high-paying job to pay off his previous debt.  Instead he spent the next 18 months not able to find any job at all!  I also hear about other young adults in our extended family with graduate degrees doing unpaid internships.  This includes people that do several years of graduate work to get degrees as social workers or therapists and then must do hundreds or even several thousand hours of traineeships and/or internships which are mostly unpaid before they have the opportunity to get their professional credentials and put out their shingle.

By the time you jump through all those hoops, there may be a glut of people with comparable credentials, so its a crap-shoot at best, often in the best circumstance saddling decades of debt...

Naturally, a glut of lawyers decreases their value. So kids pay more for a worse education that leads to lesser prospects in order for the schools to prosper temporarily. Even for doctors and lawyers, an accrual of property or any rise in net worth happens much later in life than it did twenty years ago. The standard debt-repayment plan for physicians is ten years, but twenty-five is a commonly accepted option. For the new professional class today, life begins at forty. That's not just an expression.
Unionized Blue-Collar Jobs

Marche calls out the disparities in manufacturing jobs between recently hired versus long-time workers even in many union shops...

Manufacturing jobs, having been exported to the Third World, are now returning to America at Third World rates. Newer workers at unions across the country earn ten to fifteen dollars an hour less than established workers, and the unspoken but widely reported understanding with the AFL-CIO is that the wage of these workers will not increase. In other words, Boomer workers make almost double what their young counterparts do, and will continue to do so regardless of how long a young worker stays in the same job.
I'm no expert onf this, but this seems to be the brave new world of unionized trades and professions.  Two-tier union contracts that maybe “grandfather” some benefits to existing workers but change the playing field for newer hires.

Troubling Implications

Marche notes that this exploitation of young people is a global phenomenon with its connections to recent unrest in the “Arab Spring” as well as the U.S. “Occupy” movement, plus protests and riots in various countries in Europe...

The UK has 21.8 percent youth unemployment, France 22.8 percent, Hungary 26.1 percent, Italy 28.2 percent, Spain 47.8 percent. Around the world, young people are beginning to be defined by their unemployment: the mileuristas of Spain, "those who earn less than a thousand euros"; the NEETs of England, "not in employment, education, or training"; the hittistes of Tunisia, "those who lean against the wall." Revolutions or unmanageable riots have inevitably followed the rise of masses of bored, underemployed young people.
Many of us progressives are heartened by the “Arab Spring” and “Occupy” movement, naïve perhaps that the economic privilege being challenged (particularly by the latter) may soon extend to those of us like myself with good jobs squarely in the middle class. Could a large swath of young adults in my own kids' generation never have the opportunity to join me in that middle class?  Will those young adults quietly accept that fate?  I wouldn't, and I'm pretty uncomfortable feeling like I'm on the wrong (privileged) end of this divide!

As a Boomer and a person who is determined to be aware of my impact on the world and be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, I take no solace when Marche writes...

Boomers did not set out to screw over their kids. The wind just seemed to blow them that way.
Grimacing, I read the rest of the paragraph...
But no matter what their motivations, a painful truth grows truer with every passing year: Through its refusal to act, the generation in power is willing to do what other generations before them would not — sell their children's birthright for a mess of their own pottage.
Though it might be tempting to dismiss Marche's argument due to his angry and at times unfocused rhetoric, I think he has touched a very key sore spot in the rules of engagement between my generation and my kids'.

I think those of you reading this who are Baby Boomers yourself need to read Marche's piece, and even if he has not presented it in the most thoughtful manner, consider it through the lens of say Stephan Stills, one of the great bards of 1960s folk-rock who wrote the lyric in his 1967 song “For What It's Worth”...

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind
I think it's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Forgiving me the naval warfare metaphor, but a shot across your bow, perhaps not so expertly fired, is still a shot across your bow.
EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  wrong target.. Not boomers, it's rich old wingers (14+ / 0-)

    that's too broad a brush, in my opinion.

    •  You could be right, but... (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nzanne, wu ming, Christy1947, varro, Shahryar

      I feel sensitive to the critique that we Boomers have way more privilege than our kids.

      I don't think we should get so sanguine to think this is just an issue of the rich among us vs the rest of us.  In the economic pecking order that still exists, us successful middle-class boomers with good jobs are down the food chain from the 1%, but up that chain from our Millennial kids!

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 01:25:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  but if you get a raise then you make more than... (5+ / 0-)

        you did before...when you were a little younger. If you get a job you have more income than you did...when you were a little younger. If you save and have more money in the bank then you have more...then when you were younger.

        It seems perfectly logical that, if having stuff is your intention, you'll have more as you age.

        As for the lack of jobs and all, that's not because of boomers, it's because greedy people have decided to make it better for themselves and if it affects others badly, oh well.

        I could say 35 year olds are aggressive whiners, using Marche as an example but that would be foolish. Why blame 35 year olds, as a group, for what one person, or several, or many, do?

        •  Good points, particularly on Marche. Just think... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mogolori, Shahryar, shaharazade

          there is a discussion here to be had.  My son Eric is a thoughtful 26 year old.  When he calls out a "must read" I want to take not and not just judge the messenger but try to divine the kernel of the message.

          Anecdotally, I see too many of my fellow boomers with perhaps selfishly expensive habits and stuff and not enough effort to save for retirement that push us to hang on to our good jobs longer than we otherwise would, thus not making them available to folks in our kids' generation.

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:08:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  As a Xer (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            greengemini, shaharazade

            I watched my parents play keep up with the Jones for years. Now with my dad in his 60's and my mom coming up on 60 they can't retire. They had a few thousand with AIG but not more than 5K, and that went bye-bye in 08. So my dad will work til he drops. He instructs pilots at a ground school. It wasn't by choice. They are waiting for my 95 year old grandmother to pass so they can take over her condo and have their inheritance.

            For today August 9 I found a signature. I am a badger in heart today. Fight on Wisconsin.

            by the mom in the middle on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 06:56:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sounds like a typical story!... (0+ / 0-)

              And one more job that will continue to be held by a Boomer.

              I'm not saying we Boomers are selfish, its just many of us perhaps naively got caught up in the "shop til you drop" (your keeping up with the Jonses) consumerist materialism that has powered the American economy  since World War II.  That path is having its consequences now that there is much doubt of endless expansion going forward.

              Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

              by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:37:37 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Im not much better (0+ / 0-)

                The difference is I can't save because of financial issues not keeping up with the Jones. Unemployment killed us. So in the end I will not be any better than my parents. Well except no inheritance.

                For today August 9 I found a signature. I am a badger in heart today. Fight on Wisconsin.

                by the mom in the middle on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 03:26:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I was blessed to be able to survive unemployment.. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  the mom in the middle

                  3 months here, 7 months there, but during that longest period (surviving on some severance pay & unemployment) it gave me the opportunity to really focus on trying to write and overcoming a lifetime obstacle and finally enjoying the writing process.  So today I spend every day I can carve out pounding on the keys of my little netbook computer.

                  Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                  by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 03:36:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  The difference being that the wealth gap (8+ / 0-)

          between the young and old has increased, meaning that it isn't just a function of the normal fact of younger people earning less.  I don't think there's anything wrong with older people having more, they had more time to get it, it's when the gap widens that the problem sets in.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:24:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  that economic ladder doesn't really obtain (6+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mr Robert, Mogolori, AoT, Shahryar, meg, marina

          for many, many people younger than boomers. we don;t get the same predictable increase in wealth and salary as earlier generations get, we're actively falling behind relative to a lot of our expenses.

          it's not the stuff so much as the security, of knowing that if you keep working hard, things will turn out OK. the huge wealth disparity between older and younger generations reflects, in many ways, the breaking of an earlier system of social contract, and people get pretty bitter once they realize that it's not going to get better with age and seniority.

          some things happen at the macro level. marche might be an aggressive whiner, but there are real generational grievances behind what he's saying, and they won't go away by dismissing them as whines. if anything, they will make generations of people susceptible to right wing trojan horse arguments, and that's not good for any of us.

          •  yes but the problem isn't generational (6+ / 0-)

            they, the corporations, the monied interests, have really @$##%ed it up for everyone. Some of them are older, some aren't. It's whoever is greedy.

            By allowing manufacturing in the US to dwindle, by sending those jobs overseas where they can get stuff made my people willing to work for 22 cents an hour, the capitalists have shown they don't care about the citizens of the United States over anyone else. If there's a crisis here it's not really a concern of theirs.

            Meanwhile the politicians work for them, passing laws that make it easier for decent jobs to be lost.

            The "crime" of the Boomers seems to be there are a lot of us, we grew up when the dream was still half-way believable, and those who control economies let it crumble behind us.

            Actually that's a pretty good analogy. We, the Boomers, are the last ones to cross the bridge safely as it falls apart. But it makes no sense to blame us because we got across, instead of blaming the people who blew up the bridge.

            I'm as horrified as you that the system does not work. To tell you the truth I have minimal confidence that I won't end up in the streets. Social Security isn't enough to live on. I might have to work until I'm 75, then sell the house and hope that keeps me going. And even then, if the economy goes in the tank worse, what value would the house have?

            •  the thing is, you're not being blamed (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Shahryar, shaharazade, AoT

              that's the defensiveness we've got to get past before we can have the conversation we need to have to deal with this stuff. boomers need to understand that they have advantages and wealth and power, in a relative sense (ie. "got across the bridge"), that younger generations simply were not allowed to have, and as such, boomers need to recognize where that anguish and bitter upset is coming from.

              once we get to that place, where boomers understand that we don't have the same deal as they got, and can't bootstrap ourselves up to that point in this system, then we can start to work out what alternate future we might want to build together, that gets both boomers and younger generations a shot at a decent, secure way of life that's actually attainable no matter what decade you were born in. we want to have that discussion, and we want to build that world, because as far as we're concerned, this one really sucks for us.

              but we can't move forward on that when boomers won't acknowledge that they have privileges as a category, just as racism and sexism can't be dealt with until whites and men acknowledge that they too have group privileges as a category. to speak of that privilege does not mean that there isn't a ton of disparity within either of those groups, nor does it mean that members of those groups aren't screwed by the powers that be. it's a relative not an absolute thing.

              we're not blaming boomers that the bridge got blown up, so much as trying to get them to recognize that the rest of us are down here in the chasm, and would really like boomers to focus on working with us to build a new bridge, rather than just moving away from the chasm and saving themselves.

              because rest assured, the people who blew up the bridge will eventually throw you in the chasm, if you don't help the rest of us get back out and give you strength in numbers against those bastards.

              •  which is why OWS is so important (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                shaharazade

                of course it's obvious that those who have will do what they can to get more, regardless of what it does to anybody in their way, including boomers. That's a given.

                I don't understand why you don't see that boomers DO want to change things. At least, the boomers who cared about changing things when we/they were younger care about fixing it. I'm sure the nasty people of my age group, who were nasty as kids, don't care.

                Seeing this as a "boomers" thing is simply a mistake. It's compounded by your not seeing that people your age are split just the same, into those who want to make the world a better place and those who are out for themselves.

              •  wu ming... sounds like the heart of a diary! (0+ / 0-)

                that you should write unless you have already done so!

                I'm always encouraging my son and daughter to write, particularly about this topic, but they are busily engulfed in other important stuff right now.

                Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:41:12 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  If the Boomer Dem Politicians weren't (6+ / 0-)

      ready to sacrifice my social security for some crap "Grand Bargain" that gets them nothing then I might believe you.  The point being that the problem is not that all of the boomers, or even most of them, are conspiring against people my age and younger, it's that too many of them don't understand what the issues that affect us really are.

      From what I can tell this is one of the reason younger folks support gay marriage, because there are so many other problems to deal with that we just don't see the fucking point in arguing about that one, even those who are not exactly pro-gay.

      The elephant in the room here is of course climate change. Not even mentioned in the article, it's going to be the biggest challenge of our life times and not a single party has put forward a reasonable plan to stop it, much less mitigate it.  Sure, they say it's important, and I know you thin it's important, but it gets lost in the noisy fight over budgets and health care.  The fact that Obama went after Healthcare before significant climate change legislature is what killed a lot of the hope young people had.

      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

      by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:21:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So when Obama had those 60 Senate votes.... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skohayes, AoT

        you would have had him put those chips on say carbon "cap & trade" rather than health care reform?  

        I keep thinking real universal health care which is not so easily lost due to job loss or illness would liberate all of us to be able to take a much wider range of work opportunities not always worrying about losing health care coverage.  But then if you are a healthy young adult, that may not be such a concern.

        Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

        by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:32:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Definitely *not* cap and trade (0+ / 0-)

          And I can't rightly blame Obama for the fact that there are no decent proposals from the Dems that actually deal with climate change, and part of that has to be because they won't really have to deal with it.  That was more my point.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:38:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  When it comes to "sausage making" of democracy... (0+ / 0-)

            sometimes you just have to start with something flawed that you have a majority consensus on, like our private sector focused health care reform or "cap & trade" to at least get society in some sort of game that then can be transformed later.

            Democracy is the art of the possible.  In a more totalitarian state the possibilities are endless but the likelihood is not good.

            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

            by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:45:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Cap and Trade isn't just flawed (0+ / 0-)

              Instituting any program that gives the appearance of trying to fix the climate change problem while not actually doing anything significant is the worst thing we could do.  Then we'll be stuck with cap and trade for the next ten or twenty years because politicians will be waiting for it to work.

              Let's just say that if we restrict ourselves to what is politically possible then we are headed down a bad, bad path.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:48:25 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  well, that and the fact that the health insurance (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, Shahryar, Brooke In Seattle

        bill had a giant gaping hole for people between 26 (who also had parents with good health insurance to keep themselves on) and 65. unsurprisingly, those people are the least impressed with it.

        had it been open to all ages, the support would have been higher IMO.

        •  And the mandate (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wu ming, Shahryar, meg

          Which is a lot less onerous than I originally thought, but it's really easy to misinterpret.   So it makes "reform" look like us getting screwed.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:40:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I understand your logic... (0+ / 0-)

            If it were a single-payer approach then the funding would be coming from taxpayers, so young people, who tend to make less money and pay less taxes would be saddling a smaller proportional share perhaps.

            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

            by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:46:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Tangentially on gay marriage, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT

        the economic sense of it in my mind is partially responsible for the relative speed of its acceptance.  We were a nation of comfortable one-wage earners -- as we more or less were 30 years ago -- pairing off would likely be less incentivized.

        Just surmising here... that's a research dissertation I'd read.

        "And now we know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." -- FDR

        by Mogolori on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:47:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'd add that it has been a dream for older gay (0+ / 0-)

          activists, and more specifically has been the big thing for the rich, white gay activists.  I fully expect rich gays to abandon the Dems once they have their economic security and can use the GOP to attack on economic issues.  Not all of them, but in general.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:55:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Economic privilege looms large here... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            And that privilege goes beyond "rich people" to the middle class even  I have to acknowledge that as a middle class family where I have a good steady job I am economically privileged.  I would hope other Boomers in my situation are willing to acknowledge that.

            And even Boomers struggling to find jobs have some economic privilege in that the Boomer political majority and their Boomer peers are more focused on their struggle, since we identify as peers, and are more likely to be helped by entitlements etc.  If you are young and have never been able to get a "real job" where you can get unemployment when you are laid off, then extending unemployment does not benefit you.

            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

            by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:52:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Obama is not (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shahryar, teloPariah

        a boomer pol. He is the next generation of wealth creating  free market 'screw or get screwed' sellouts. Sorry to say pols are pols. Very rarely does any generation generate a decent one. It does not matter what generation they are. The torch was passed from Daddy Bush to Clinton, his other honorary boomer son, then to his bad seed psycho preppie boomer son George 11 and then to Obama, the next torch bearer for the oligarchical ruling class.

        This generational finger pointing is ridiculous it's another variation of cooked up culture wars. Internecine fighting does nothing but pit people against each other while the real culprits with power and arrogance ranging in age from the old reconstituted  zombie Simpson to Rand Paul or younger. Obama killed hope for many generations including many non yuppie bloomers.

        Each generation has it's share of people who could care less about anything but getting a head in business and say without compunction screw you I got mine, it's what America is about. At least the last Democratric boomer, free market greed head, president felt our pain. This lot just gets all self righteous and tells us all to get a job in robotics or be an entrepreneur, or sacrifice your kids for the race to the top for profit. Then fines us when we can't afford the extortionists vig and calls it a glass half full.                

    •  Or, as the "through the looking glass" world we (0+ / 0-)

      live in today demonstrates, you're flat wrong and it is your refusal to acknowledge reality that allows to illusion to continue.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

      by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:53:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This negative portrait of boomers (6+ / 0-)

      especially the "avant garde" 60's boomers has been used for years now, but it's especially anxiety provoking now that those of us in that group are entering the age when many are going to most need the social programs that have existed for decades and are now the most threatened.  Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are all in real trouble - politically, not necessarily fiscally. And it's all too easy to pit young against old and vice-versa. The Koch Brothers, Pete Petersen and his ilk, pretty much all Republicans and certainly some Democrats are ready and eager to "profitize" those social programs, along with education, the corrections system, and the entire commons.

      The same divide and conquer strategy was used against the unions, pretty much starting with the Reagan administration. As the power of unions diminished, so did the rights of all working people to improve their working conditions, get fair wages, etc.

      I think that under Reagan the Fica tax was raised specifically so that a higher amount of money would be going into Social Security as boomers began to retire. Somehow that never seems to be mentioned in these broad brush generalizations.

      Be leery of solutions that target the elderly, the poor, the disenfranchised (that's a whole other topic.) We need to fight for rights for all. And we have to be as aware of the problems of younger people as we are of our own.  Re-electing Obama, taking back the House and getting a larger majority in the Senate may be the only way we can prevent the destruction of the social network. And, yes, we will have to keep a lot of feet to the fire if we can succeed in November.

    •  HALF of SENIORS WILL LIVE BELOW POVERTY LINE (7+ / 0-)

      Her article is a boomer bashing lie.

      Just saw the charts today: nearly half of all seniors in the U.S. are facing life below the poverty line, and 60% of senior women.

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...

      Boomer bashing gives the 1% cover to slash Social Security and Medicare, as lousy a safety net as they are already.

      The war is against the 99% of us.

      firedoglake has a better title for her piece:
      Esquire Magazine: Writer wanted to help convert class war into generational war. No skills required; pays top dollar.
      http://my.firedoglake.com/...

      •  And yet as a generation the boomers have (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wu ming

        far more money than does my generation.  Ignoring the fact that my generation will be far, far more affected by these attacks on SS plays right into the hands of the people trying to divide and conquer.  Right now we've got boomer politicians bartering away my SS so that boomers won't have to take as much of a hit.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:15:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Politics is generally a compromise... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, northerntier

          between various vested interests, which usually does not include young people.  Its just that up until the last few decades, we all thought things would continue to get better for the next generation.  Now that's in doubt and that whole paradigm is at risk.

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:47:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I was recently having a conversation about (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Greyhound

            the myth, generally very strongly believed in liberal circles, that things tend to get better.  I think it's a very dangerous myth and can lead to passivity.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:53:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I certainly tend to believe in that myth... (0+ / 0-)

              Humans evolve and so does human society, generally for the better.  Not sure I'm ready to let go of that, though your caution is taken.

              Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

              by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:57:02 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  There's really no reason to believe it (0+ / 0-)

                and honestly it's based on some pretty hefty racial and social assumptions, especially around industrialization and other production revolutions.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:51:44 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Not in my case... (0+ / 0-)

                  I at least like to think my optimism is based around continuing human evolution as a species and of our society as a summation of our growing wisdom, adding in our wonderful new electronic media, particularly the Internet, which I think pushes us in a more anarchic egalitarian direction.

                  http://www.leftyparent.com/...

                  Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                  by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:33:56 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  boomers have been telling us since we were kids (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            that we were never going to do as well as our parents and grandparents. see also: half the news reports and movies made in the 90s.

            •  Well that may have been realistic... (0+ / 0-)

              based on looking at the world economic trends.  Not so much a saying that your not as good.

              Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

              by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:58:28 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  it's not some inexorable trajectory (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                it's the result of policy decisions, of disinvestment in education and the economy, of lowered tax rates, of sacrificing the future in a vain hope that in doing so capital and privilege could be hoarded. it was a choice, not an unavoidable fate.

                our elders made this world, and knew what they were doing when they made it, the proof of which is that as many as two or three decades ago, they began telling us outright that it would play out this way. over and over again.

                the thing those people forgot is that society and the economy are one organic whole, indivisible, and if you immiserate one segment of it, it eventually undermines the whole as well. i hope that eventually people realize this truth, so that we can change the pattern of disinvestment and get out of this abyss.

                •  Seeing a trend & being able to "bend the curve"... (0+ / 0-)

                  are two very different things, though I take your point.  We were perhaps naive at best or negligent to not ponder more the implications of those trends.

                  Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                  by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:36:11 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  And their parents have far more money than (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Shahryar

          boomers, if you are looking for someone to blame, try your grandparents.  They have pensions, SS and are trying to pull up the social safety nets with their votes.  People over 65 far more likely to be teabaggers and conservative R's.

          •  I think this whole consumerist materialism... (0+ / 0-)

            really got rolling after World War II and IMO from studying history is all collateral damage from the inane unnecessary apocalypse that was World War I.  That war wreaked the spirit and the "immune system" of Western culture, and most of the calamities of the 20th century follow from there.

            See my piece on that topic... http://www.leftyparent.com/...

            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

            by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:02:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  My take is it's not so clear cut! (0+ / 0-)

        Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

        by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:44:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  NEARLY HALF SENIORS BELOW POVERTY LINE (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      greengemini, Shahryar, marina

      Her article is a specious lie.

      Just saw the charts today: nearly half of all seniors in the U.S. are facing life below the poverty line, and 60% of senior women.

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...

      Boomer bashing gives the 1% the cover to slash Social Security and Medicare, as lousy a safety net as they are already.

      The war is against the 99% of us.

      As Firedoglake summed it up:

      Esquire Magazine: Writer wanted to help convert class war into generational war. No skills required; pays top dollar.

      http://my.firedoglake.com/...

      •  The majority of Seniors are not boomers n/t (0+ / 0-)

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:52:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Are Boomers on average in better (0+ / 0-)

          or worse financial shape than seniors?

          •  Not sure, but think better on average! (0+ / 0-)

            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

            by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 03:37:33 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Wrong. (0+ / 0-)

              My father retired with a mortgage free house, a pension, social security and savings.

              I'll have Social Security, and that's it.

              Pensions are things of the past in private industry the Republicans spent 30 years eliminating them. As for a house -- ha! The Boomers have been screwed out of their houses.

              Savings? Pffff. My father saved money when interest rateshe were good 50s-60s, and the dollar bought more, and his salary was worth more than they are now.

              I've lived through a number of recessions: the '70s, the '90s, now.

              •  How you are doing has nothing to do (0+ / 0-)

                with what is average.  I don't know whether boomers are doing better than seniors are on average, but your specific situation is not proof either way.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:12:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  Generalizations about the generations (10+ / 0-)

    rarely sit well with me.  I'm a Boomer who had kids late, so instead of having a Gen X kid I have, I guess, a Millenial and then a Gen Z.  My husband and I will still be working for a long time.  Neither of us got anything from parents; my husband, in fact, was orphaned at age 8.  So our 2 kids when we die will at least have our house, such as it, to sell.  They will also have some life insurance and savings from us.  In that respect they will be better off than either of us.

    •  Fair enough... So you don't think it is ever... (0+ / 0-)

      useful to compare the different milieu that each generation may find itself or perhaps as your own kids how they react to this article?  I think that would be an interesting exercise on your part to do so, and I would love to have you report what their thoughts are!

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 01:34:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You have written a thorough diary (4+ / 0-)

        I'm simply tired of Boomers being portrayed by some as complacent fat cats.  Many of us arent't.  We made our choices and live with them.
             Our son is a college sophomore and he says he feels guilty when he doesn't do well in a class because he sees how ridiculously expensive college is (we are fortunate to be getting some financial aid).  Our daughter is in 7th grade and has no opinion about these things just yet, but I'm sure she will at some point.

        •  Thanks for clarifying that... (0+ / 0-)

          I agree with you that there are many boomers that are certainly not doing that well.  But I do think there is a generational privilege, particularly when your population is so large and the beneficiary of boom decades in the American economy.  

          The danger as I see it is that one will fall into a path of least resistance and not stop, look and listen to what might be "going down".

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:01:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Again, "generational privilege" didn't (4+ / 0-)

            extend to everybody.  There was a recession when I got out of college in the 70s;  another bad one in the early 80s, another one after 9/11.  A recession when you are just of school is discouraging;  one when you have kids and a mortgage can be catastrophic.  My husband lost his job in the most recent recession but was somewhat lucky that it happened at the beginning, in 2007, rather than in 2008-9 when most jobs were lost.  He freelances now and fortunately does pretty well.

                And the downside of being in the largest generation has been fierce competition for every job, ever since I can remember.  There were just so many of us.

            •  I have had my job losses too... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wu ming

              Including some significant periods of unemployment, but overall have been blessed with good jobs including one now with a stable company and good prospects for keeping it for the decade ahead.

              But whether we have done well or not so much, our generation's issues are front and center at the top of the country's agenda.  I think that counts as some form of privilege.  And when I got out of college (for the second time) in the mid 1980s with my IT degree, I didn't have to do an unpaid internship for six months before I could get a paying job.

              Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

              by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:37:21 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  But you have savings and retirement funds (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wu ming, leftyparent

              Something that a lot fewer young people will have when they are your age.   The point is decidedly not that you had it easy or started in a great place, it's that most of us these days don't have a reasonable path to anything resembling a decent retirement and old age.

              If social security goes away then I get to work forever.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:22:45 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  And the solution to this is to demonize (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                greengemini

                Boomers? Good luck with that. An alternative approach would be to suppose that no one in this country should be jobless and without housing and health care, and see who's willing to help you fight for that. Maybe that's too hard.

                •  Oh good lord, grow up (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  wu ming

                  No one demonized boomers, unlike you demonizing younger people in your other comment.

                  You need to take step back and stop the generational warfare you so eagerly accuse others of.

                  There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                  by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:33:17 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I didn't write the diary or the divisive article (0+ / 0-)

                    it promotes. I'm not the one seriously engaging in generational conflict, I'm trying to show you how false and unconstructive the generalizations are. I'm a grownup, thanks. That's one reason I don't blame generations for society's problems.

                    •  You clearly didnt read the diary or the article (0+ / 0-)

                      If you think it is just generalizations. And if you think insulting groups of people is a good way of pointing out generalizations then you really do need to grow up.

                      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                      by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 12:30:24 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  AoT... I think you have hit the nail on the head.. (0+ / 0-)

                That is the message that I think we Boomers need to hear, understand and start to process.

                Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:03:55 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  Fine. It's not your fault, OK. Feel better now? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AoT

      There is no way to discuss generational issues (or a great number of other things) without using generalities. In fact discussing specifics is forbidden on this and most sites except for those few public figures.

      My parents are (perhaps) similar to you, they did not advocate nor participate in the crimes of their generation, in fact they spent (sacrificed) the majority of lives fighting against them. That does not absolve their generation from guilt.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

      by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:08:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Lots of buttons being pushed... (0+ / 0-)

        One of the limits of this sort of online discussion is we can't look each other in the eyes and see all those intense feelings.

        I do agree with you when you say...

        There is no way to discuss generational issues (or a great number of other things) without using generalities.
        Those are the discussions that are the most meaningful to me, though the disclaimer about over-generalizing is always appropriate as we go forward with that discussion.

        That said, not sure how seriously you are using the word "crimes" here.  That's a big step beyond naiveté or failure to see repercussions of ones path.

        Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

        by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:17:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Totally agree. Those face to face conversations (0+ / 0-)

          are, by far, the best. Additionally, there are far fewer miscommunications  when you see the non-verbal ques of the participants.

          Jokes frequently get me into trouble online, whereas IRL it's not an issue. I can be a pretty funny guy IRL (unless you don't think so, in which case you have no sense of humor).

          As for the those crimes, yes I do believe that is an accurate description of what so many of your generation did. In 1980 they turned on the world and did what they knew to be utterly wrong simply to avoid the discomfort of the changes that were happening. They cravenly hid behind the anonymity of the ballot and voted for Elmer Gantry because it was easy and believed there would be no personal consequences.

          I think that betrayal is far worse than an "Archie Bunker" that votes for what he believes in.

          I grew up surrounded by filthy rich, well connected, hard core, died in the wool conservative republicans, that was my mother's family (Barry Goldwater taught me about ham radio in his "shack"). Growing up we had arguments bordering on violence, our views were so diametrically opposed. But we all really did respect each other, sometimes for no other reason than that we honestly believed in our respective positions. But even they were disgusted by the so-called Reagan Democrats.

          Look what that betrayal has wrought. And look at what the guilt over doing it yields even today.

          "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

          by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 09:02:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  i'm glad the message is being heard by boomers (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, Mr Robert, Mogolori

    if we are to avoid falling into the trap of a generational zero-sum game, those with the money and power need to hear those of us who have spent most of our lives shut out of it. we're well aware of boomer internal discussions, and their generational perspective, because so much of the pop culture/media/information world broadcasts it at us as if it's universal and not just the experience/perspective of those born at the right time. but very little information and perspective flows in the opposite direction, beyond periodic outbursts seemingly without cause or context.

    we're in a trap right now, the locusts and speculators (not generationally-specific, BTW) have basically drained younger generations dry of any hope of living a decent stable life, by jacking our tuition up/cutting social benefits/depressing our wages, and they're coming for the boomers' wealth next. we can either get sucked into this dysfunctional battle, where young (millennial) and middle aged (gen x) people rage against boomers pushing the ladder away from the wall in vain hopes of preserving their privilege, or we can work together to try and build a just and equitable system where the really wealthy and powerful are forced to give their stuff up so that the rest of us don't have to fight to the death over the crumbs.

    but before that's possible, there needs to be a reconciliation, and honest communication between the boomers and everyone younger, because right now it ends up being mostly one-way, with periodic rage simmering up that confuses boomers who haven't been paying attention.

    a better world is possible. there are a hell of a lot of boomers who mean well, and who have helped their kids out, both personally and by voting for liberal candidates and policy. there are more, though, who do not grasp how desperate it has become for us younger generations, and how different the social contract looks to us than things did when you were our age.

    i hope this hasn't come off as too much of a scold. i really do want to get us to talk past these divisions, but man, it's getting pretty furious out here. the longer we wait to have this conversation, and reconciliation, the harder it will become.

    thanks for taking it seriously. it means a lot.

    •  likewise (8+ / 0-)

      those of us who are younger than boomers need to be really careful about falling prey to right wing distractions trying to play up the relatively more affluent and secure boomers as an enemy and the sole source of our insecurity and troubles as a way to distract us from the big money who are in fact the main ones profiting off of our misery.

      they will use this generational enmity approach in particular to try and get rid of social security, medicare, and other social welfare programs, to liquidate them before we get to draw upon them, ironically enough.

      we all need to resist the divide and conquer.

      •  Good point! An important note in this needed... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wu ming, Mr Robert

        discussion.

        That said, I think there will be a lot of pressure to change programs like Social Security, and the pragmatic political approach will present itself as leaving benefits alone for those of us in or approaching retirement, but change the rules for those younger.

        Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

        by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 01:52:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  that is how they will sell it to boomers (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mr Robert

          both sides will be used to weaken the system, at different ends, but the end goal is those programs dissolution, be sure of it.

          •  So what would be your recommendation... (0+ / 0-)

            on what to do with programs like Social Security & Medicare?

            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

            by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:10:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  medicare is simple (6+ / 0-)

              let everyone into it, and it will become both stable and cheaper, plus a far larger proportion of people will be invested with defending it against neoliberal privatization attacks.

              social security has two elements IMO. first, lift the contribution cap and bring the super-rich income into the pool. second is more indirect, we need to focus on changing the rules of the economy such that young people are making more money and having higher rates of full-time employment, so that they contribute more payroll tax towards the social security trust fund.

              •  How will you pay for (0+ / 0-)

                Medicare for all, when the current program is costing more and more every year to cover seniors only?
                Higher taxes? Then you have younger people with even less income. Younger generations seem to be more against the mandate in the ACA, so I'm not sure how paying for Medicare for all with higher taxes would go over.
                I agree that Social Security could be pretty easily fixed with raising the income cap, but Medicare is a much more complicated problem.

                If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

                by skohayes on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:39:19 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You pay with taxes instead of premiums... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Greyhound

                  paid to health insurers.  Really two different ways of obtaining the same thing IMO.  And I think Medicare can be run more efficiently than the for-profit health insurance industry.  But of course, others don't.

                  Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                  by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:49:51 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  the current medicare is expensive because (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT, meg, corinroyal

                  it only covers the old, who are disproportionately expensive due to disease and end of life issues. expand it to the young, who are both disproportionately less likely to have insurance (mostly because our job benefits fucking suck, we work disproportionately part-time and have no benefits, and there's disproportionately more that are unemployed) and tend to be a lot cheaper to cover (with the exception of pregnancy/childbirth), and medicare gets solvent + young people get decent healthcare for a change.

                  the mandate is exceptionable to young people because it forces us to pay money we don't have to crap corporate insurance that doesn't even cover us when we need it, when our income is so much lower than earlier generations, and our college loans and rent so much more onerous than earlier generations. there is a broad consensus among young people for a public option or single payer, and very few young people object to being forced to pay taxes in exchange for actual health care.

                  medicare for all polls very high among the young. it does so because it would be a lot cheaper than the crap they have now., if they're lucky enough to have it and can afford to pay it.

                •  A big part of the resistance to the mandate (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  corinroyal, wu ming

                  from younger people is that it isn't fully understood.  It really does look like the government is saying "Everyone has to buy insurance.  Yay! now everyone has insurance!"  Combined with rising insurance prices and no public option it really looks like insult on top of injury.

                  There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                  by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:18:37 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  I like that path, but easier said than done... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                It will put a big crimp in a huge for-profit medically and medical insurance industry.  We were barely able to get the health care compromise passed, let alone a version of single-payer.  Think we can get there some day, but may take decades still.

                Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:47:41 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  yeah, i think that fight will require (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT

                  pitting all employers who aren't insurance companies against  insurance company parasites, sort of in the way that a peasant revolt that allies with disaffected noblemen has a better chance of success than one that fights against a unified noble enemy.

                  but that means first breaking the solidarity of the wealthy, and getting some of them to recognize their interests in a healthy and secure populace/workforce/consumer base.

                  •  And that soldarity will not be broken. (0+ / 0-)

                    Keep in mind that the parasite class has existed and ruled for far longer than this nation has existed. They are not stupid and, since they made the game, they know very well how to play it.

                    You may not remember, you might not have even been alive then, but there was a bit of a stir in the 80's when some writer noted that 41 is related to Queen Elizabeth. A brief study of the European ruling class of the last 1,000 years will show you that, with very few exceptions, the ruling class of today are the ruling class of history. Individual names change over time because of marriages and changing fortunes, but in the end they are they and we are we.

                    One does not buy into the club, one is born into it.

                    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                    by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 11:39:11 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  We have lived in a "patriarchy" for 5 millennia... (0+ / 0-)

                      That is built around male supremacy, a pecking order, us and them thinking and violence and coercion to enforce it.  In my view of history we have actually begun to move beyond that old school way of organizing society in the last 500 years.

                      See my piece... http://www.leftyparent.com/...

                      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                      by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:09:32 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Thank you. Our perspectives on life, the universe, (0+ / 0-)

                        and everything seem quite similar. Have you read The Chalice and the Blade by Riane Eisler? If not, I think you would find it very interesting.

                        When I talk about the ruling, or parasite class, this is what I'm usually trying to get across or encourage others to learn, the hierarchical systems in which we live and hopefully to understand what they do and that are not necessary or even desirable.

                        Peace. Now.

                        "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                        by Greyhound on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 01:25:11 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Greyhound... Chalice & the Blade was... (0+ / 0-)

                          the most significant book I have ever read and none since has replaced it.  It is has the foundational principles that I have built my whole life's work around, cheerleading for human society's transformation from hierarchy to circle of equals...

                          http://www.leftyparent.com/...

                          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                          by leftyparent on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 07:26:05 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I kind of figured, but thought it might be good (0+ / 0-)

                            to let you know about it, just in case you got there by yourself, and would like to know there are others that understand this way is not the only way.

                            I read the piece you linked and have your blog bookmarked, since I sometimes get busy (not so much these days, but there's always the chance) and don't come here for extended periods.

                            "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                            by Greyhound on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 10:42:47 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Greyhound... thanks for thinking of me! (0+ / 0-)

                          With that reference to C&B!

                          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                          by leftyparent on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 07:27:01 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                •  Honestly, I think one of the best things we could (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  pigpaste

                  do is offer free medical school for anyone who can get in.  No loans, no stipulations, just free medical school.  Also not really doable, but a boy can dream.

                  There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                  by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:20:17 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Good idea, but I might add the stipulation that (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT

                    they'd have to work as GPs.

                    •  Maybe, though I think to start we should just (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      wu ming

                      have it be open for all and then change it later if we find that we aren't getting enough GPs.  I would hope that a lot of people would, minus money worries, would go for GP over specialization.  Either way, more doctors that don't have to pay off massive student loans couldn't hurt.

                      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                      by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:35:42 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  that would be an awesome undercutting (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT

                    of the med schools restricting the supply of doctors, and would be a precondition to being able to staff the rural and inner city clinics in any actual universal health care system. and it would have the added bonus of reducing student debt and allowing more students from poor and working class backgrounds to become doctors.

                    what lakoff would call a "strategic initiative," in that it fulfills several policy goals simultaneously while also playing to our symbolic worldview.

                  •  although while we're at it (0+ / 0-)

                    we might as well just make all public higher education free, and let that virtuous cycle extend to all of the educated professions.

                    •  California created the best secondary and post (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      wu ming, AoT

                      secondary education system in the world, and it was entirely funded through taxation (tuition free for residents). That system created nearly every world changing advance for a generation and even threatened the supremacy of the Ivy League in America.

                      Raygun began it's destruction and Jerry Brown (himself a beneficiary of it) finished it.

                      We have far more than enough for everybody, but everybody having enough is destructive to those that have everything.

                      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                      by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 11:48:12 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

        •  Something will have to be done (0+ / 0-)

          for Social Security and Medicare, to make sure they're there at all for the next generation.

          If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

          by skohayes on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:34:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  CW pushing "young = winger" since Dotcom era (7+ / 0-)

        The conventional wisdom since the late Clinton years has been saying that the kids raised on computers were all going to be geeky Galtoids who are going to tell Big Government and Big Business to fuck off.  The brave new world was going to revolve around the under-30s and be a place where tech gods who breathed pot smoke and had Starbucks for blood became billionaires overnight.  Stable career paths and making stuff were for fogeys; we were supposed to want the neoliberal paradise of contract work, cash instead of benefits, and bailing at the first opportunity for a better job, be it on the other side of the world or telecommuting while we did extreme sports.  All those old hippies don't know they're dead yet!

        Blah, blah, blah.

        Lifetime employment, full medical and dental, company-sponsored training, and a pension sounds like heaven on earth to this under-30 Gen Yer.  Fuck their Wild West nightmare.  If the private sector doesn't want to do all that, then I vote for a "Nordic Model" system where the government soaks the rich to provide cradle-to-grave social security and "free" education for retraining.

        Never attribute to stupidity what can be adequately explained by malice; stupid people couldn't hurt us so effectively.

        by Visceral on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:50:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  this 37 year old late x'er is 100% behind (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Visceral, AoT, SeekCa

          your final paragraph.

        •  I hear ya... and your passion behind your words!.. (0+ / 0-)

          I'd be comfortable with that "Nordic Model" but there are a lot of people my age or older that are probably going to have to die off before the U.S.  would contemplate such things.

          Hopefully your provocative comment will inspire others to chime in!

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:58:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I never got that memo (0+ / 0-)

          though the wild and woolly days of the dot com boom certainly produced a lot of young millionaires that acted just as you described, LOL.

          If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

          by skohayes on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:44:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Heh, "a lot" is fairly relative. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wu ming

            There certainly are some who made out like bandits, but that was the exception, that was the myth that started the giant transfer of money to the rich.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:22:03 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  noone counts young people of color (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AoT, leftyparent

              when they talk about "the youth." a huge % of our generation got stuffed in jail, but people don't think of black and latino gen x'ers when they talk of gen x.

              •  That's an important point! (0+ / 0-)

                Economic disenfranchisement causes a lot of collateral damage!

                Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:13:09 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  we all do better when we all do better (0+ / 0-)

                  conversely, if we screw a big chunk of the population economically, it's going to eventually hurt everyone else, as the economic pain moves through the economy as a whole. to say nothing of the danger in letting the fascists pioneer police state measures on marginal parts of the population unimpeded.

                  it always comes home to roost.

                  •  Decisions have so many consequences... (0+ / 0-)

                    that's why its so important to keep focused on our governance process itself and not obsess about the decision content so much.  Politics should not be a spectator sport.

                    Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                    by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:39:01 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  wu ming... your comment means a lot to me too... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wu ming, Mr Robert

      I'm glad you accept your end of a needed conversation.  

      It is certainly such a transformed world today from when I was a kid in the 1950s and 1960s.  Your perspective on it is bound to be way different on it than my own.

      You say...

      i hope this hasn't come off as too much of a scold. i really do want to get us to talk past these divisions, but man, it's getting pretty furious out here.
      It does not feel like a scold to me as long as you offer to engage in thoughtful dialogue.  Don't know your take, but I think Marche perhaps is guilty of taking a few wild angry punches, but I've thrown mine too from time to time.

      And it terms of the furiousness, I see plenty of anecdotes of that as I interact or at least hear about the trials and tribulations of the large circle of young adults that my own two kids (not 22 and 26) have in their lives.

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 01:46:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  the only solution that i can see is solidarity (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        leftyparent, Mr Robert, AoT, Mogolori

        but reconciliation is a precondition to solidarity, so it's the most pressing task at hand. in a lot of ways, i think that just getting the info out there, of how radically life as a young adult has changed since the 60s (hell, even since the 90s), is a big part of that, once older generations are open to hearing. i've watched my parents slowly get just how different things have become, through watching their own kids struggle just to make ends meet, and especially through getting involved with our expenses as they've helped us pay them at times.

        another thing that's pretty important is the idea of trans-generational political alliances, of the sense that to build the kind of political power necessary to change things, you need an alliance of segments of each generation aligned together. we've become so sectored-off, as a society, that it can be hard to even build the kind of conversations that could enable these ties, and temptingly easy to see other generations as abstract ideal generalizations, rather than human beings with politically crucial divisions and diversity within the categories. most of the time the main people from other generations that we come into contact with are in our own families, so that's often a good place to start, but online there's a real opportunity to do so as well, if we can all avoid going to battle stations the moment a topic is broached.

        one reason why i like the idea of medicare for all as single payer (or even as public option) is that it gives young people a stake in fighting for old people, and old people a direct financial interest in bringing young people into the insurance pool. the whole "young people rip off the system by not buying insurance" rhetoric, OTOH, is directly caustic to any possibility of solidarity, because it makes invisible the reason why young people are uninsured while portraying them as irresponsible, spoiled freeloaders while they're freaking out with the insecurity of being uninsured.

        in a nutshell, i think there are far more progressive policy solutions to things that appeal to both young and old than neoliberal or centrist ones. there is the economic fact of a disparity in wealth, income, and security between generations, and that needs to be acknowledged same as with racial or gender or class disparities, but ultimately these "pragmatic" solutions that sacrifice one generation for the other are absolute poison to solidarity, and should be treated with extreme suspicion when suggested.

        •  I agree with you... Including the "single payer".. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wu ming

          solution for health care.  Politically speaking though, it may take a generation before there is enough change in the U.S. electorate to make that a possibility.  I keep hoping optimistically that the current health care reform efforts will begin an expectation that will be unfilled by the current solution and move us toward the argument for single payer.

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:46:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  even a public option based on medicare (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            that was open to young people would be a huge step forward. i expect single-payer will come from the states, though, for the time being. not because of the electorate, though, so much as the political ruling class, which needs a generation or so of turnover before it's willing to actually represent the consensus starting to form in the electorate.

    •  So how do you convince the comfortable that (0+ / 0-)

      agree, to make the sacrifice necessary to realize that goal (a just and equitable system)?

      For example, I have a very good friend that toils daily to develop ever more effective means to kill and destroy people and structures for a defense contractor.

      He knows that what he does makes the world a worse place every day and he doesn't like it, But, whenever this comes up (usually after many drinks at the end of the week) his response to himself and others is, "I have a family to provide for". IOW, he is unwilling to make the very real sacrifice his conscience tells him must be made.

      He knows what must be done, he just hopes somebody else will do it.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

      by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:36:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's always a problem... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT

        but certainly calling it out puts more pressure on him to face his dilemma rather than deny it.

        Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

        by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:51:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  there are less and less comfortable all the time (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, pigpaste

        and even the comfortable don't necessarily ahve security, the sense that all this couldn't evaporate and one's family fall into the abyss that everyone else is being pushed into.

        there are two ways to play on that combination of comfort and insecurity, the right says "push everyone else into the abyss, and you can be secure." the left needs to say "there doesn't have to be an abyss, if we work together and pay out a bit more in taxes. isn't that sense of security worth a bit of money? how much would you pay to not have to worry about losing everything? taxes are a cheaper way to get that security."

        most of the microsoft worker bees and many of the MS execs are open to stuff like single-oayer these day, because even with their cash they know they're closer to the edge than they'd like. it's not an easy sell to everyone, but far from impossible.

  •  My husband's kids, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wu ming, Mogolori

    both now in their forties, will never have as comfy a life as I had....

    And let's not even talk about the environmental mess we're leaving future generations.

    "I can't do it by myself. No president can. Remember: Change doesn't happen from the top. It happens because of you." B Obama, 2008

    by nzanne on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 01:28:17 PM PDT

  •  Highly recommend. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wu ming, AoT

    The issue of institutionalized, concentrated wealth, power and influence in the Baby Boom generation cuts across just about every public policy crisis we face today.  This generation (of which I am a cusp member positioned to see both sides) faces another moment of sacrifice for the good of the country.  The first one was for civil rights and against compulsory military participation in American imperium.  The next will be in securing a future for younger generations replete with the opportunities they fought for and enjoyed.  For this to happen without social convulsion, the generation as a whole will need to cede meaningful measures of wealth, power and influence.  And our proximity to convulsion is palpable.

    "And now we know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." -- FDR

    by Mogolori on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 01:30:37 PM PDT

    •  Thanks for the recommend & curious... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mogolori

      what you think we Boomers can practically speaking "give up".  Is restructuring our Social Security & Medicare benefits based on some of the more moderate proposals a necessary step forward?

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 01:56:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd say the more immediate problems are (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, skohayes

        state, local and municipal.  Pensions, high-level administrative positions, out-year tenure positions are all demographically unsustainable and propelling governments and academic institutions into fiscal crisis throughout the country.  That problem is compounded here in California by Prop 13, which has substantially shifted the property tax burden to under-45s (we're paying $9000/yr in property tax on a small house our previous 70-year-old owners were paying $1,200/yr for when they sold).  The problem of regressivity in tax policy generally is about to be significantly magnified as Baby Boomers come off the earning line.

        The prevailing views I'm aware of are that Social Security is fine and fixable going forward, and that Medicare costs are symptomatic of our clustershaggalicious private health market.

        "And now we know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." -- FDR

        by Mogolori on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:33:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I am not a big fan of generational politics. (6+ / 0-)

    I think that they help to divide and conquer, which is a strategy of the right wing. The fact that all the income growth that has taken place in the last 30 years has gone to the wealthiest Americans, when coupled with the disappearance of many blue collar jobs, has made it far more difficult for our kids than it was for us. Thirty years of greed and tax cuts for the rich have made the rich richer at the expense of the rest of us.

    Restructuring Medicare and Social Security will take a disproportionate toll on poor and working-class Americans. If we want to move this country forward, we need to wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share.

    •  So you don't see value in a generational... (0+ / 0-)

      dialogue around political perspectives?  Even if it might build solidarity between young and older progressives?

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:48:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No. Fuck the entitlement generation and the (0+ / 0-)

        iPhones they rode in on. They're mostly unwitting Reaganites. The greatest failure of the Boomers is to have raised such self-absorbed, uninformed kids, who think we should go back to the days when being old meant living in poverty, and who are to stupid to realize that class means more than age.

        On the bus recently I was whacked in the head by a youngster of about 30 who nailed me with his backpack before sitting down, all the while staring into his phone. He looked up for a second and mumbled "sorry." "Everything all right on the internet?" I asked. No reply. I don't think he got the joke. Maybe that was Mr. Marche, researching his think piece.

        •  someone bumps you, says sorry, and you take that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT

          as proof that the youth are all ignorant, self-absorbed reaganites (never mind that they vote more left than anyone else in the country, age-wise).

          as if boomers don't own iphones.

          way to act the part of a tired stereotype, man.

        •  Wow, the hate is palpable (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          corinroyal, wu ming

          If it weren't so corrosive I would find your hypocritical generational hate amusing.  No one here is arguing that we need to punish boomers, but if you can't see the fact that they have significantly more money than the other gens, and on a greater scale than any previous age wealth gap, then you're simply ignoring the obvious.

          The real threat to social security is boomers and us later generations not standing together to protect the future of SS.  Whining about the ingrate youngster doesn't help anything.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:27:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

            •  Above where? n/t (0+ / 0-)

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:39:01 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Your head? Sorry--my comment above about snark. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PhilK

                This generational blaming is pointless. Back in the 60s, there was a real cultural divide between some of the young and many of the old. But now there isn't--there are plenty of Boomer progressives. It's a class issue, and Gen X and Y won't better their situation, I think, by casting older people as the enemy.  

                •  It's not *just* a class issue (0+ / 0-)

                  People of different ages have different issues to deal with.  Boomers aren't going to have to deal with the effects of climate change, at least not the worst of them, my generations will.  Does that mean you don't care about the issue?  Hell no.  I don't know much about you, but I assume that you care about climate change, but as a generation it is easy to put on the back burner because people who are older won't have to deal with it.  While the idea of a "generation" might be simplistic, it isn't completely wrong.

                  And don't get me wrong, there definitely is a class issue that plays into this, part of the problem is that people in my generation tend to be of a lower class so we have less clout.

                  There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                  by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:50:56 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  And you know who makes most of the money (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wu ming

          form those iPhones?  Yeah, they're boomers.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:28:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, it's fucked that anyone is making a living. (0+ / 0-)

            Don't trust anyone over 40, and vote for Ron Paul.

            •  What the hell? Ron Paul? (0+ / 0-)

              Good lord, you sure troll hard.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:43:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Are you not aware of the libertarian (0+ / 0-)

                sympathies of GenX and GenY, especially among tech workers?

                •  Sure, a few of them (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  corinroyal

                  And they have had no significant affect on the political system.  The majority of tech workers that I know, all of whom are my age, are definitely not libertarians.  The libertarians I know are more likely to have majored in business or have a non-tech job.

                  There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                  by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 05:06:12 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Busy worker bees, eliminating jobs right and left. (0+ / 0-)

                    I guess Boomers deserve blame for the tech revolution and the ensuing loss of many jobs that used to be done by people? If you all became Luddites---refused to touch electronic devices for work or recreation, but only for political action---I wonder what would happen.

                    •  And the boomer generation had *nothing* to do with (0+ / 0-)

                      the tech revolution.  It had nothing to do with the funding of all the companies and choose which job destroying technologies would make it out of development.  Yeah, people in my generation have done some stupid things, that's not the point, at all.  The point is that the boomers have far more political power and use it to move forward things that help them, even if that's at the expense of younger people.

                      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                      by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 05:31:22 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  That's the problem statement we're wrestling with! (0+ / 0-)

                        Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                        by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:16:21 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Sure, that's why no Boomers voted for Obama. (0+ / 0-)

                        Generalize away, pal. You're not making sense, but you are expressing a sense of entitlement that is scary. You appear to think that your demands should be satisfied while you vilify millions of people who have been supportive of your future, while you promise to reduce their circumstances. You complain that they have too much political power, resenting their ability to defend themselves from your crusade to make sure they will have to worry about their financial situation when they are too old or unhealthy to work. Some Boomers have made sacrifices for future generations that you can't conceive of making (they're even more substantial that delaying a smart phone upgrade), and you want to fuck them over. You are Scott Walker railing against government workers. You're all Thatcherites, you've absorbed Reagan's Welfare Queen myth and applied it to everyone born during a certain period. You should be poor, if being poor will teach you a little compassion.

                        (My post above clearly blames the Boomers for the tech revolution. Stop sniveling and try to pay attention.)

                •  do you actually know any young people (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT

                  besides the ones you bump into on buses? tech workers are a tiny % of gens x and y, for all the press they get.

  •  Thanks for the review (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks for the review of what seems to be a fairly interesting, if somewhat rhetorically overblown, article.

    I touched on the financial troubles staring my generation in the face a few days ago in a diary detailing my own impending student loan repayments.

    To be honest, I was sort of surprised at how apparently controversial the idea of making student loans easier for students to repay was.

    Anyways, thanks.  Nice diary.

  •  My generation were talking about this in those (0+ / 0-)

    "good old days" of the 80's referred to in the piece.

    I began a more thorough explanation of this, but it got too long for a reply. i guess I'll have to diary it.

    Anyway, the kid is right, you're (Boomers) screwing us and the world for no reason beyond continuing your status as Prince(esses).

    We should remember that the great majority of Boomers were never hippies even though the media consistently implies the opposite in order to discredit the ideals they promoted.

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

    by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 02:51:21 PM PDT

    •  Greyhound, so what's the path forward?... (0+ / 0-)

      I don't see much of one in your words, but appreciate your shared anger!

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:00:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think it is apparent. The path forward is, and (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chuckvw

        will remain, an increasingly worse world for the many in order to maintain and increase the incomprehensible amount of more for the very, very few and their protectors, the very, very comfortable.

        The alternative is to take back that more and share it amongst the many, which both of us know will not happen in my (our?) lifetimes.

        In the meantime we can look forward to more ineffectual placebos to keep the willingly deluded in line.

        "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

        by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:18:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No hope eh?... (0+ / 0-)

          Guess I'm too much of an optimist!

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:23:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No. Not until things get so bad that the choice (0+ / 0-)

            is forced upon us.

            What do you think can be done at this time? I've been looking for alternatives for decades.

            "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

            by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:38:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You may be right, calamity is a great motivator... (0+ / 0-)

              to move beyond conventional wisdom.  What do we all do in the meantime?  I'm going to keep calling these things out.  Maybe we'll be more ready to act when that calamity comes!

              Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

              by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:54:11 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm glad that you do and hope that I'm proved (0+ / 0-)

                absolutely wrong.

                When considering this issue (and many others), I usually end up thinking about the founding of this nation and the men and women that made it happen. They made real, dangerous sacrifices. They did literally risk (and more than a few lost) their fortunes (those that had them), their families, and their lives in a very risky venture to do what they saw as right. Put all the "Yeah, buts" aside and look at what they did, it was and remains truly heroic.

                I don't see any correlation in America today.

                "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:36:54 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  Break the power of money (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wu ming, pigpaste

        One of the problems is that Boomers have a lot more money and so have more influence.  End that and you have a situation where youth might actually feel like they can affect politics.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:26:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Going back to higher tax rates perhaps? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wu ming

          Particularly on middle-income wage earners and higher?  That seems a realistic way to move in that direction, though higher taxes is a tough sell these days!

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:34:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Indeed it is a hard sell (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wu ming

            And that's all part of the same thing.  Look at what the political priorities are and look which generation will benefit and I think you might notice something ;)

            That wasn't really what I meant.  I meant more along the lines of what OWS is advocating.  We need to completely uncouple political influence from political power.  Anything less than that and we will fall right back into the same hole we're in now.  Step one: stop acting like the rich are better than anyone.  Jobs and Gates are rich because they got lucky.  Yeah, there was hard work, but without luck it wouldn't have mattered.  Not to mention the fact that it was government and big business that made most of the rich these days.   Sure, there's the Walmart family, but they are second generation and an aberration.  This is one of the reasons Libertarianism is so attractive to some groups of younger folks, not because they made it on their own but because they see so many of the rich who got rich off of regulations and other crap.  That's a simplistic view, but it's tempting for a lot of people.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:44:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  How? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          chuckvw

          And before you say that higher taxes are an answer, realize that the people that matter hold assets, income is irrelevant to them.

          "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

          by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:41:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Taxes are a symptom, not the problem (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wu ming, chuckvw

            The problem is that the rich have too much influence.  I don't know the best way to go about it, but I throw a couple ideas out.  Delegitimize the corporate media and replace it with a media that provides actual information, alongside the current internet partisan media.  Second, we need to purge the Dems of big money.  We need to move to a people centered organization.  What exactly that looks like I can't tell you, but I think to '08 campaign is a decent starting place.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:51:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well, let's look at the '08 campaign. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              antirove, AoT

              It was the first ever Presidential campaign to win an award from the advertising industry, an indication, IMO, of what would follow. A national con-job, long on promise with no intention of ever delivering. Now, conning the suckers is nothing new or unusual, but this one was especially cynical IMO, the political equivalent of the mega-church system of preying on the desperation of the most desperate.

              Reversing the monopolization of media would be a great move, but how to do it, in light of the fact that is was carried out through one of those truly rare bi-partisan efforts, is the issue. Nobody that matters in either party wants it.

              And as for purging the $$$ from the Democratic Party, you might as well try convincing the NRA to come out in favor of outlawing hunting season.

              "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

              by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 07:46:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  And please don't misunderstand me, they conned me (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              pigpaste

              too. The Clinton campaign conned me in '92 as well.

              Perhaps voting for the lesser is the problem.

              "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

              by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 08:23:12 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Assets generally earn money... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chuckvw

            which can be taxed, if there is a majority with the will.

            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

            by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:55:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It is certainly possible to tax those assets, but (0+ / 0-)

              it has never been done so far. Look @ California's Prop 13. To this day you will hear Californians argue the property tax on Grandma's house is so high without ever considering, nor looking at the real reason that crime against Californians was committed nor the results of it.

              "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

              by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 08:05:33 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  not to mention that the grandmas of 1978 (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Greyhound

                have long since died.

                •  Exactly. Prop 13 had nothing to do with (0+ / 0-)

                  residential property taxes, they've gone steadily up and up for 35 years. But ConAgra etc. are still paying exactly the same number of dollars (no inflation adjustment here) today that they were 35 years ago on property that has increased 10000% or more.

                  I wonder why California, despite being the economic powerhouse it is, is in such an awful financial mess?

                  "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                  by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 10:30:02 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  prop 13's 2/3 requirement for taxes and budgets (0+ / 0-)

                    (we have just changed the budget rule) plays a big role as well, locking in a conservative veto at the very moment that they began to lose control of the CA state govt. when you can't win elections, change the rules to give yourself power in the superminority!

                    •  Actually the 2/3 requirement... (0+ / 0-)

                      is a CA constitutional thing impacting all tax proposals put in front of the voters, not just Prop 13.

                      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                      by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:18:31 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  nope (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        pigpaste, AoT

                        the requirement that all votes on raising taxes, whether at statewide or local level, must pass a 2/3 supermajority threshold was part of the prop 13 text, and was a significant change from the law before prop 13. that one vote in 1978 fucked this state up in profoundly destructive ways.

                        here's the text in question:

                        CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
                        ARTICLE 13A  [TAX LIMITATION]

                        SEC. 3.  (a) Any change in state statute which results in any
                        taxpayer paying a higher tax must be imposed by an act passed by not less than two-thirds of all members elected to each of the two houses of the Legislature, except that no new ad valorem taxes on real property, or sales or transaction taxes on the sales of real property may be imposed.
                           (b) As used in this section, "tax" means any levy, charge, or
                        exaction of any kind imposed by the State, except the following:
                           (1) A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the State of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege to the payor.
                           (2) A charge imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the State of providing the service or product to the payor.
                           (3) A charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to the State incident to issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof.
                           (4) A charge imposed for entrance to or use of state property, or the purchase, rental, or lease of state property, except charges governed by Section 15 of Article XI.
                           (5) A fine, penalty, or other monetary charge imposed by the judicial branch of government or the State, as a result of a violation of law.
                           (c) Any tax adopted after January 1, 2010, but prior to the
                        effective date of this act, that was not adopted in compliance with the requirements of this section is void 12 months after the effective date of this act unless the tax is reenacted by the
                        Legislature and signed into law by the Governor in compliance with the requirements of this section.
                           (d) The State bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a levy, charge, or other exaction is not a tax, that the amount is no more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity, and that the manner in which those costs are allocated to a payor bear a fair or reasonable relationship to the payor's burdens on, or benefits received from, the governmental activity.

                        CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
                        ARTICLE 13A  [TAX LIMITATION]

                        Section 4.  Cities, Counties and special districts, by a two-thirds
                        vote of the qualified electors of such district, may impose special taxes on such district, except ad valorem taxes on real property or a transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property within such City, County or special district.

                        •  I stand corrected... (0+ / 0-)

                          Prop 13 was the constitutional change that enshrined the 2/3s in the highest law (of maybe the "Gann Initiative" too).  But the 2/3s one way or another is chiseled into the CA constitution and not easily unchiseled.  A determined 38% GOP minority in the state legislature has successfully blocked lots of human and physical infrastructure spending.

                          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                          by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:42:48 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  the trick is to get them down under 34% (0+ / 0-)

                            which may well happen in the next election. with that supermajority, the marginal vote necessary to raise taxes are moderate democrats, not absurdly reactionary republicans in safe seats. so that should help things a bit.

                            then, all it takes to undo that requirement is another ballot initiative, which a 2/3 vote of the state leg can put on the ballot without having to gather signatures. pass that, as we just did with the budget, and the constitution is unchiseled. thankfully, you would only need a simple majority vote to remove the supermajority tax requirement.

                            of all of the prop 13 monkeywrenches, i think the last one to go will be the homeowner's property tax freeze. everything else, if separated out and run on their own merits, will be beatable before long. the electorate is shifting pretty quickly, away from those who worry more about paying taxes than about well-funded state programs.

                          •  I have hope too! (0+ / 0-)

                            Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                            by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 11:55:52 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  "nothing to do..." (0+ / 0-)

                    Do you mean that literally? Doesn't it severely restrict property tax increases unless the property is sold?

                    •  It does and coincides with CA schools... (0+ / 0-)

                      beginning their deterioration.

                      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                      by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 03:38:57 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  That is, and always was, the point. (0+ / 0-)

                      Grandma's house will inevitably be sold, and the tax assessment will adjust. But the agricorps and the other parasitic corporations are immortal and rarely, if ever, sell their property and so, as I pointed out previously, they pay exactly the same number of dollars into the pot that they did 33 years ago. And those dollars are worth far less today, so it purposely created a system whereby those that take the most from the state pay the least for that privilege.

                      That was the purpose of prop. 13. Grandma's property taxes were simply how they sold it to the suckers.

                      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                      by Greyhound on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 10:54:17 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

        •  Excuse me, (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Shahryar, Brooke In Seattle

          boomers don't all have a lot of money. Some boomers might, but that is usually because they started out wealthy.
          I have more money than a 20 something because I've worked all my life and put money away for retirement. I own my own home that I couldn't buy until I was able to afford it at the age of 43. I dropped out of college after two years because I didn't want to go into debt. I drive a 13 year old car.
          Of course I have more money than a 20 something.

          If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

          by skohayes on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:54:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So you agree that (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wu ming, Greyhound

            1)Boomers have more money in general
            2)More money means more political influence

            Therefore
            3)Boomers have more political influence.

            I'm not blaming every single person who is in the generation, and pretending like I am elides the fact that while you specifically may not be pushing for certain policies the boomer generation as a whole does benefit and has more money therefore their issues will get pushed.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:03:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  you have a house (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            that's an asset, one that is probably worth a fair amount more than you paid for it, even after the crash. you had a job that paid well enough to let you put some away for retirement, probably paid decent benefits, and that kept you on for 20 years. for the two years you were in college, you probably paid a fraction of what people today paid, and you were able to get a job even without a college degree.

            a 20 something who followed your life pattern, starting today, would end up with a lot less income, a lot less wealth, and a lot more debts than you. that's the point here.

            we need to fix that, because right now, people working hard their whole lives will be a lot poorer and less secure than you are today, and that means your social security, and the economy that moves your stock investments (if you have them) will do worse, and thus your own income will become less secure.

            we all do better when we all do better. stop being defensive and open your eyes to how the kids today are not getting the deal you got at their age.

            •  I have a 70 year old house (0+ / 0-)

              that is worth more because I took advantage of tax breaks given in the stimulus to upgrade the HVAC and install new windows. I live in an area that was not affected by the housing boom and bust, so no, it's not worth much more than I paid for it.
              I went to a state university, paid my way through by working, and when I got out, got an entry level job working on a farm, that paid minimum wage. I stayed with it not because I was making a lot of money, but because I loved it. I still don't make a lot of money, as a matter of fact, my nephew, who graduated with a degree in Chemistry in 2009, is making more than I do in his current job.
              It all depends on the choices one makes as to how things turn out when you become my age (55). I don't have a lot of debt, I don't have a lot of savings or a lot of money in retirement, because I don't make a lot of money.
              I'm being defensive because of all the generalizations being made here in the comments by people that don't know what they're talking about and find it easier to blame an earlier generation for their problems rather than the economy that has been run by blood sucking Republicans for the past 30 years.

              If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

              by skohayes on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 04:25:42 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  what you're not hearing (0+ / 0-)

                is that the same you, put through the same hard work and self-restraint as a 20 year old today, would not be able to accomplish the same degree of security, because the rules of the game have changed profoundly.

                we're not blaming you for the way the system has changed, well i'm not anyway, i'm just trying to make you understand how untenable things have become, and how different that is by generation.

                someone earning minimum wage today has to choose between rent and health insurance. that wasn't the case decades ago, because minimum wage's purchasing power was higher and costs like rent and insurance were relatively lower.

                privilege reveals itself in comparing like with like, not anecdote with anecdote.

        •  It's more accurate to say that people with a lot (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Brooke In Seattle

          of money have more money and thus more influence. Saying Boomers have more money is meaningless: if generation A is older than gehttp://www.dailykos.com/... B, generation A will probably have more money because they've had more time to accumulate it. The problems experienced by post-Boomer generations are not due to the influence of Boomers, they're due to the influence of money, which many Boomers do not have.

          The idiocy of these potshots at Boomers is compounded by the younger generations' enthusiasm for libertarianism, which is is all about giving power to those with the most money.

          •  Which ignores the fact that the wealth gap (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wu ming, Greyhound

            between old and young is far greater now than it has been since I don't know when.  I'm not so sure what the problem here is.  I assume you don't think that people with more money should have more influence.  Do you deny that boomer issues take precedence?  Or that more and more the compromises come on the back of the younger generation?  Just because there are poor boomers, which obviously there are, doesn't mean that their interests aren't served in some ways by the richer boomers.  Social security is a good example of that.  There is no way in hell that boomers are going to lose their social security and yet I am at real risk of losing mine.

            The idiocy of these potshots at Boomers is compounded by the younger generations' enthusiasm for libertarianism, which is is all about giving power to those with the most money.
            Yeah, potshots.  Pot meet kettle.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:08:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  asdf (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              chuckvw, Shahryar
              Do you deny that boomer issues take precedence?
              Ask the Catfood Commission. What takes precedence is shifting more money from the lower and middle classes to the wealthy, and destroying government's ability to improve people's lives. Do you think announcing oneself as a Boomer grants one access in Washington?
              •  The results of the catfood commission (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                wu ming

                would fall very heavily on younger generations, much more so than on people who are close to retirement.

                Do you think announcing oneself as a Boomer grants one access in Washington?
                This completely misses the point.  Boomers as a generation have far more power than their numbers, because of economic and other factors.  That means issues that affect them more will get dealt with first. It has nothing to do with you personally.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 05:14:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Exactly. How many of these proposals to fix a (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT

                  fictitious crisis specifically exclude anyone over 55 or 60 or anyone currently on mediwhicheverprogramtheywanttocut.

                  Look at Jerry Brown, one of their favorite sons. Born into the parasite class, attended college (UCBerkeley) on the taxpayers dime, and came into office through recognition of his family name and proceeded to be Raygun II on steroids. Sure, he got see Linda Ronstadt naked, which shot his cool factor through the roof, but look at what he did while in office the first time, and look at what he's doing now that he's back.

                  He may well be the very first conservadem to come into office and work every day to advance a republican agenda.

                  "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                  by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 08:16:30 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  (I have no idea how that link got there.) (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Shahryar

            Boomers should not be allowed to use the internets.

        •  OWS (0+ / 0-)

          Affecting politics without much money.

          •  Which is exactly why I quit my job and flew (0+ / 0-)

            across the country so I could be there from the very first day at Liberty Plaza.  Because money counts for too much.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 08:28:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Thought experiment: separate out liberal boomers (5+ / 0-)

    and we'd have a far more feral state than what we have now. Separate out conservative boomers and we'd have a far more equable state in most every sense.

    Data slicing by generation yields garbled information at best. Data slicing by ideology shows real, quantifiable and stark contrasts.

    The referenced article, as well done as it is, is merely one more addition to the politics of resentment, of which we already have too much.

    "I was a big supporter of waterboarding" - Dick Cheney 2/14/10

    by Bob Love on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:34:07 PM PDT

    •  I think its useful to slice both ways... (0+ / 0-)

      Philosophy is important but worldviews can differ based on your position on the timeline as well.  People with the same underlying philosophy may have the same list of "to dos" but may order what needs to happen first based on a generational bias.

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:22:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  God, I'm tired of this sh*t (6+ / 0-)

    I really don't know what the point of all this is other than "Let's blame the Boomers for today's problems."  OK... Fine... It's all my fautl.  Now, what do you want me to do about it?  No suggestions?  Then STFU.

    There's one thing that cannot be denied:  The Boomers' demographic bulge has left devastation in its wake.  When the Boomers entered college, there weren't enough seats for them, but when they left, a whole bunch of colleges went out of business.  When the Boomers became 1st-time home buyers (coinciding with record-high mortgage rates) everything went haywire.  When the Boomers started thinking about retirement, real estate in Nevada, Arizona, and Florida went BOOM!  then bust.

    We can expect more of the same when the Boomers retire.  (You know, they haven't actually retired yet... folks born in 1947 are just now turning 65.)

    Demographic bulges or dips are going to cause real problems in a nation's economy.  The Boomers are no exception.

    So, let's take a look at some of the complaints being aired out in this diary.  How about them cushy union jobs?  What in the name of Zeus are you talking about?  Unions were busted by Reagan and have gone nowhere but downhill for the past 30 years.  Oh, well it must be the Boomers fault because... um... maybe Reagan was a Boomer.  I lost my pension after 23 years, so don't come crying to me about how all those super-benefits are lost to those entering the job market.

    But how about Social Security and all the problems in that system?  NEWS FLASH.... Social Security has been subsidizing the Federal deficit for the past 25 years, and (as I mentioned earlier) the Boomers haven't even started taking the benefits!  And who came up with this grand Social Security Trust Fund concept anyway?   Must have been some Boomers.... WRONG!  It was Alan "I never met an asset bubble I didn't like" Greenspan and D.P.Moynihan, a couple of old farts (like Reagan).  

    Finally, can this crap about how most Boomers didn't serve in Vietnam.  Everyone was affected... there was this thing called "The Draft" don't you know.  I was lucky, but I also knew that f**king LBJ and his war-criminal generals were lying to the country, making "victory" seem imminent when it was a Pentagon wet-dream.

    Don't be a DON'T-DO... Be a DO-DO!

    by godwhataklutz on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:40:33 PM PDT

    •  IMO, hopefully our kids aren't so tired... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Greyhound, godwhataklutz

      and want to have this conversation with us Boomers.

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 03:58:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  touched a nerve, did it? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Greyhound

      And we sail and we sail and we never see land, just the rum in the bottle and a pipe in my hand...

      by Mortifyd on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:00:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, it did (0+ / 0-)

        I read Andrew Sullivan's blog regularly and he is also very much against the Boomers.  I haven't heard exactly what it is that my generation has done to deserve this ire, but he feels compelled to regularly blame us for whatever problem is currently at the top of his things-to-complain-about list.

        Don't be a DON'T-DO... Be a DO-DO!

        by godwhataklutz on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 06:01:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You do realize that "The Boomers" is not you (0+ / 0-)

          personally.  This is a discussion about generational politics and how the way things look right now, especially with the whole Third Way crap, my generation won't be getting SS because the politician are fine selling us out but not the Boomers.  In regards to unions, it is regular practice for contracts to have the long term employees be protected more than the future long term employees these days.  Is this all your fault?  Definitely not.  I imagine you probably aren't responsible for any of it personally.  But you will benefit from it, and Boomers have been fighting less for our generation than for theirs, especially when it comes to retirement.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 06:24:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  And as one of those condemned to living on the (0+ / 0-)

      scraps your generation deigned to drop in the gutter on your way to coronation, I'm tired of hearing about how none of this is your fault.

      You didn't end the war, those that threw themselves into the machine and were destroyed by it ended the war. And as soon as those same people ended the draft, and thereby eliminated the immediate threat to you, you took credit for their work and went to work on Wall Street to fuck the planet so you could drive a Beemer and pretend to be all grown up.

      Your generation sucked up the benefits your parents made for you and gave nothing back. You couldn't even leave the good you received for others to benefit from cause that would mean having to wait a few years to buy your McMansion behind the gates.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

      by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:48:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  As opposed to you guys, (0+ / 0-)

        who we can thank for getting us out of Afghanistan a year after the invasion, and for keeping us out of Iraq entirely, despite Bush & Co's desire to go in there, too.

        •  Um, a boomer was responsible for the invasion (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Greyhound, wu ming

          And boomers have pretty much complete control of the government.

          You do realizing that blaming us for not having political power isn't the best response to us complaining about not having political power.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 05:41:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Granted, the "boomer" presidents were the worst (0+ / 0-)

            Dubya (for obvious reasons) and Clinton (for enabling Dubya to get elected) are no doubt high on the list of worst-presidents-ever.  I apologize to other generations for these two despicable representatives from my own.  Clearly, we don't want to try another Boomer president.

            Don't be a DON'T-DO... Be a DO-DO!

            by godwhataklutz on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 05:49:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'm old enough as of this year (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              godwhataklutz

              You should elect me!

              I'll get us out of Afghanistan and reduce the armed forces by retraining them in manufacturing green technologies in worker owned worker run cooperatives.  Also, less nuclear weapons, cars, big banks, and weapons manufacturers.

              Plus I'm tall and have whiskers, I hear that worked for Lincoln.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 06:04:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You got my vote! (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Greyhound

                Would be nice to reduce the size of the Defense budget.  I seem to think that "more than the rest of the world combined" is a tad more than we should be spending.

                Don't be a DON'T-DO... Be a DO-DO!

                by godwhataklutz on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 06:40:18 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  For all our sakes, run! (0+ / 0-)

                @ this point I'll vote for a houseplant as long as it owes nothing to either party.

                "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

                by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 07:51:56 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  america needs some more whiskered presidents (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                the century-long tyranny of clean shaven faces must end!

                •  As long as it's a certified Heritage Beard. (0+ / 0-)

                  Isn't Boomer just a dog-whistle for dirty fucking hippies?

                  •  no (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT

                    most of the people you're trying to pick a fight with are dirty fucking hippies, just of a younger age. it's clear you can't be bothered to actually read anything people write in response, why don't you find another thread to troll?

                    •  Breaking: I didn't pick this fight. (0+ / 0-)

                      The unthinking, broad-brush accusations being tossed around sound like a discussion of San Francisco among untraveled wingnuts in a rural Oklahoma tavern. That's not my doing, nor am I responsible for the indignant responses to what is plainly snark. Trolling..hahahaha.

                      •  You did pick this fight (0+ / 0-)

                        And let's not pretend like the media doesn't make it perfectly clear how the boomers view themselves as a generation, it's most of what we get in the media. Considering you've been an asshole for the whole thread it isn't clearly snark.

                        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                        by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:49:06 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  asdf (0+ / 0-)
                          And let's not pretend like the media doesn't make it perfectly clear how the boomers view themselves as a generation, it's most of what we get in the media.
                          If it's most of what you get in the media, it's clearly true. You win.
                  •  I was always a wannabe dirty fucking hippie... (0+ / 0-)

                    and I took some pride in my kids describing their "hippie parents" to their friends.  I believe in "peace, love, joy" and try to be about people and ideas rather than the accumulation of "stuff".

                    Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                    by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:25:00 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Hippies are people, too, my friend? (0+ / 0-)

                      But the hippies were and are Boomers. You mean there are exceptions to the Boomers-are-wastrels meme? You admit to admiring some Boomers' values? That way is the way to disaster, my friend. A life of hopeless activism, low pay, and regular dents in the shiny, polished gadget (wireless download capability included) that is your self esteem.

            •  Reagan was not a Boomer, since you're (0+ / 0-)

              keeping score.

            •  Also, you don't need to apologize (0+ / 0-)

              You didn't fuck these things up, you just happen to be a part of the generation that did.  You can apologize if you aren't doing anything to fix it.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 06:26:20 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  And they had complete control of the (0+ / 0-)

            government during the Vietnam war?

            I don't recall that they did..

            •  how is Vietnam relevant? (0+ / 0-)

              You're just grasping at straws now.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 07:11:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Is Vietnam relevant? (0+ / 0-)

                Ask the person who dissed Boomers' efforts to end that war just upthread.

                •  It wasn't a boomer that got us out of Iraq n/t (0+ / 0-)

                  There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                  by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:50:18 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Who said it was? (0+ / 0-)

                    You're the one keeping score like that.

                    •  you have been conplaining about kids (0+ / 0-)

                      For the entire thread and then pretending it's snark I think you need to work on your communication skills and you definitely need to work on your reading comprehension given that you think this diary is about hating boomers.

                      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                      by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 12:21:24 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  The meaning of this is pretty clear (0+ / 0-)
                        Your generation sucked up the benefits your parents made for you and gave nothing back. You couldn't even leave the good you received for others to benefit from cause that would mean having to wait a few years to buy your McMansion behind the gates.
                        So you might want to lay off the insults and stick to the issues.
                        •  Oh, I see. It's fine for you but not for others (0+ / 0-)

                          And where was it that I insulted a whole generation?  Oh yeah, I didn't.  

                          I suggest you go back and read the article and diary again and figure out how to deal with the actual issues involved instead of your poor hurt feeling.

                          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                          by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 05:39:31 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

        •  Of course, it's our fault that we have no power.nt (0+ / 0-)

          "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

          by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 07:55:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Well, one of those problems will fix itself (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shahryar

        when everyone on Wall Street retires in the next 15 years. The total failure to recruit replacement workers from younger generations means the end of business.

        •  Boomer retirement will have very bad effects (0+ / 0-)

          Not just in the financial industry, but any company which is overweighted with Boomers.  The thing about retirement is that you pick the date, not your employer.  I have heard many stories of where a Boomer has had enough, is eligible for a pension, and just quits... no notice, no nothing, just quits.

          Don't be a DON'T-DO... Be a DO-DO!

          by godwhataklutz on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 05:53:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I have a McMansion? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greengemini, pigpaste

        What dream world are you living in?  Didn't you read my post?  I lost my goddammed pension and now have to save every friggin nickel I can in order to retire (i.e. to avoid a "work until you drop dead" end of my life).  
        This is the coronation that I've enjoyed?

        Don't be a DON'T-DO... Be a DO-DO!

        by godwhataklutz on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 05:58:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  What should I tell my boomer friends (0+ / 0-)

        who chose not to have kids, out of concern for the environment? They thought their decision would leave more resources for the next generation. Are you pissed because by not having children they reduced the size of your generation and made it harder for you to strip them of their Social Security benefits?

        Who knew you could experience the resentment of children without ever having any?

    •  You guys made disco popular too! (0+ / 0-)

      That was the lowest.......

      If Obama doesn't deserve credit for getting Bin Laden because he didn't pull the trigger, Bin Laden doesn't deserve the blame for 9-11 because he didn't fly the planes.

      by Bush Bites on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 01:34:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Have you ever heard (4+ / 0-)

    the old song by Mike and the Mechanics, called "In the Living Years"?
    First lyrics to the song:

    Every generation
    blames the one before.
    And all of their frustrations come beating
    on your door.
    I know that I'm a prisoner to all my father held so dear, I know that I'm a hostage to all his hopes and fears. I just wish I could have told him, in the living years.
    I hope you're having a good discussion with your son about this, I just think that laying the blame for all the wrongs around us are being laid at the wrong feet.

    If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

    by skohayes on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 04:05:17 PM PDT

    •  No... thanks for sharing... a good point there... (0+ / 0-)

      It is part of the developmental process to lay a profound critique on what has come before.  So much so that I think we have come to expect that and is behind good discussions like this one.  

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:29:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Interesting (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, greengemini

    I'm right on the line -- 1964 -- and it has been a lifelong observation that opprotunities have been shrinking and the boomers got all the low foilage.   I don't think it is generational as such though -- I think it is that with 300 billion Americans, and 7 billion peeps, everyone is fungible.  And many of y'all got yours before we came along, and are not about to surrender it to the rising hordes.  For the poorer boomers though, it is even worse -- too old to hire and missed the party.  

    Now the system is so large, and power so entrenched, that I'm not sure the thing is managable in a humane way without profound change.  That change may take several generations.  The boomers may have had the last good party in a long time...it does not endear you to us all..even us old ones...

    ...j'ai découvert que tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos dans une chambre.

    by jessical on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 06:01:04 PM PDT

    •  You paint a tough picture, but give some hope... (0+ / 0-)

      in generational change, which I agree with.  As more younger people become active voters and more of the older folks pass on, maybe there is an emerging majority that will support taxation and a safety net again.

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:32:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  leftyparent, thank you for one of the most (0+ / 0-)

    satisfying and informative diaries I have read here in years. You wrote a good diary brought up a touchy subject and shepherded it very well.

    And did it with class.

    Peace.

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

    by Greyhound on Sat Mar 31, 2012 at 11:26:01 PM PDT

  •  Give me health care and they can have my job. (0+ / 0-)

    I'll probably have enough to retire in 5 years -- 10 at the most -- but will need to work another 15 or 20 years because I'll need health insurance.

    If Obama doesn't deserve credit for getting Bin Laden because he didn't pull the trigger, Bin Laden doesn't deserve the blame for 9-11 because he didn't fly the planes.

    by Bush Bites on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 01:32:02 AM PDT

  •  The only boomers I've ever listened to (0+ / 0-)

    in my life are hippies. They, in a ddition to Native Americans are the only people to get it right in the last 80 years in this country. The rest of them claim "I didn't know what was coming" in a self serving way, 99% of the time claiming there's some bigger more auspicious "new thing" coming down the pike, if we weren't all so "bitter".
     It's really a waste of time listening to our elders in this society who haven't denied anything of the self, ever. Even their sacrifices were and are about the self. It's literally pissing in the wind talking to them any other way.
     The OWS "we're down with you" excuse is even wearing thin, the boomer media is who named the "struggle" one for the future of the "middle class". If the economic models that so thoroughly shot the world down don't need working people, why worry about a middle class anyway? The great unwashed made it big for a minute, and it ruined them, big deal. Move on, there are more important things to discuss.
    Love, a past bitter Xer.

    I will push back, rise up, and speak out against all forms of discrimination that plague our community. www.getequal.org

    by teloPariah on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 02:12:38 AM PDT

    •  So "survival of the middle class" is code for... (0+ / 0-)

      "survival of the Boomers"?

      Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

      by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:36:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And their kids, unless (0+ / 0-)

        they're not white or straight.

        I will push back, rise up, and speak out against all forms of discrimination that plague our community. www.getequal.org

        by teloPariah on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:23:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I had not thought of that before... (0+ / 0-)

          but I think that is an appropriate, though provocative, mapping of rhetoric (I keep thinking of Ed Schultz on MSNBC) and reality.

          Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

          by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 10:47:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I haven't met anyone involved in (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            OWS circles who don't understand that it's just a filter, BTW. But then, the baby boomers among OWS are generally hippies who chose a working life (usually self employment and or service, ie: social work, collectives like non-profits, etc.) deliberately, and so they tend to have a very different perspective from the money and power crowd.
             With this demographic, their greatest resignation almost always involves dealings with the rest of their cohort. They know what the crowd wants and will invest in reaching them up to a point and NEVER any further. They've been burned too, and have generally expended the time and energy it takes to navigate the dysfunction. Some people are resilient and it seems to me that involves a private commitment that they don't tend to talk about a lot.

            I will push back, rise up, and speak out against all forms of discrimination that plague our community. www.getequal.org

            by teloPariah on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 12:09:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Guess I see myself in that BB "hippie" crowd... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AoT

              though I don't think I was ever actually a "hippie", but just a wannabe.  For me it was a matter of rejecting most of that whole materialism, consumerism thing and trying to stay focused on simplicity and life around the abstract principles of humanism, ideas and human development.

              Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

              by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 12:30:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  And your peers? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                They are interested in your life choices? I'm thinking I know your answer, but I'll keep a lid on it.

                I will push back, rise up, and speak out against all forms of discrimination that plague our community. www.getequal.org

                by teloPariah on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 12:41:47 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The ones I associate with are interested... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT

                  in my perhaps unorthodox life choices though many of them aren't following a similar path, choosing to be more concrete and materialistic than I think I've been.

                  My partner Sally and I are resigned to be being "from another planet" than most people, accepting that, but continuing our "road show" or "ministry" or whatever the heck you call it.

                  Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

                  by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 12:58:58 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  This is so dead on. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              teloPariah

              Thank you for pointing this out.  It had been in the back of my mind but you really pointed out what had been floating around in terms of white boomer participation in OWS.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 06:07:37 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  GREAT DISCUSSION... I'M SO PLEASED... (0+ / 0-)

    everyone is chiming in with such greet thoughts and though there are some angry words here and there, mostly having a civil discussion about something critical.

    Please keep posting comments if you want, I just wanted to say that as the "moderator" as it were.

    Cooper Zale Los Angeles http://www.leftyparent.com

    by leftyparent on Sun Apr 01, 2012 at 09:38:25 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site