Jump to content

The Boomers Ruined Everything

TwiceHorn

By TwiceHorn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,507

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Fozzz said:

lol no they didn't.  Our society is predicated upon accumulation.  It is structured around the concept of greed.  

Greed as a base instinct, yes, and tempered by conscious altruism.  Not greed as a conscious choice, tempered by nothing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted
Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Greed as a base instinct, yes, and tempered by conscious altruism.  Not greed as a conscious choice, tempered by nothing.

You and I are nothing but utility-maximizers.  It is the "magic" of markets to turn that into something good for the general welfare.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4,580

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

No generation is any greater or any worse than any other generation. They are all just facing a different set of circumstances and trying as best they can to muddle through.

I disagree.   People are shaped by those circumstances you cite, and then as a result turn out differently than they otherwise would have.   People who grew up in the Great Depression and fought WW2, for example, likely aren't going to have the same views on government, on social safety nets, or a host of other issues as people who grew up in a post-war period of massively expanding national wealth and entitlement.  And then that leads to different trends of political thought that take over as people shaped by national events gain the power to shape events for future generations.   At least, that's how I see it based on how things have played out over the last century.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9,208

Posted
Posted

It's an interesting wheel, for sure. My money is on the Millennials and Gen Z doing quite a bit of fixing, and Gen Z having a bunch of asshole kids that mirror the Boomers. I'll be long dead before Boomers 2.0 run things, so that's good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4,580

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

That is exactly what I just said. 

Sorry, what I should have made more explicit was "and when generations turn out differently, some will turn out better than others.  And to varying degrees, some generations will not necessarily do they best they can muddling through, but will actually intentionally do harm to future generations to benefit themselves." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pig Bellmont

Pig Bellmont 8,719

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

Ok, and what was the bed/bath count?  How many car garage? What were the SDC costs associated with that development?...

You’re right. The reason his house cost ~$38,000 as opposed to 10x that amount was probably the bed/bath count and the size of the fucking garage. 🙄 Tell me more wisdom of how wages and buying power is the same 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21,154

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, GSU&UT said:

Bingo bango bongo. Don't lecture younger people when the overwhelming majority of you (at least the white boomers who complain the most) voted for Reaganomics, gutting unions, ignoring or outright denying climate change, etc.

You could have all been like chicago and let unions run wild.  180B behind, but who’s counting?  For the millionth time, not checking economic policies on the right AND left lead to disaster.  

And millennials started off like shit, and much of that was not their fault, but they’re doing much better now economically - while being socially responsible - a concept the boomers can’t even grasp, as a group (socialism?!?!).  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11,675

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

You’re right. The reason his house cost ~$38,000 as opposed to 10x that amount was probably the bed/bath count and the size of the fucking garage. 🙄 Tell me more wisdom of how wages and buying power is the same 

Of course, no one can live without 4 bathrooms and granite countertops.  The HORROR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1,798

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

You could have all been like chicago and let unions run wild.  180B behind, but who’s counting?  For the millionth time, not checking economic policies on the right AND left lead to disaster.  

And millennials started off like shit, and much of that was not their fault, but they’re doing much better now economically - while being socially responsible - a concept the boomers can’t even grasp, as a group (socialism?!?!).  

Cool man. These aren't mobsters no matter how much rich people want to paint them, they're a necessary resource to protect your basic rights as a worker against companies that absolutely do not care about your well-being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11,675

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Cool man. These aren't mobsters no matter how much rich people want to paint them, they're a necessary resource to protect your basic rights as a worker against companies that absolutely do not care about your well-being.

Tell it again.

But this time sub "government employee" in for "worker" and "government" in for "companies".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21,154

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Cool man. These aren't mobsters no matter how much rich people want to paint them, they're a necessary resource to protect your basic rights as a worker against companies that absolutely do not care about your well-being.

I agree.  But unchecked they’re literally mobsters. Lol

I can give you a great history here in Chicago.  And I didn’t make up the 180B number.  Mobsters were at the very top of many of those deals.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11,675

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Oh.

So how do you want to govern society, if at all?

With a government limited in scope and responsibility.  Definitely not a government that has organized blocks of employees that negotiate with themselves for entitlements. 

 

From the leftist hero du jour 

https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2013/aug/13/scott-walker/Did-FDR-oppose-collective-bargaining-for-governmen/

 

"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," he wrote. "It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management."

Roosevelt didn’t stop there.

"The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations," he wrote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,925

Posted
Posted
Just now, Incredulity said:

With a government limited in scope and responsibility.  Definitely not a government that has organized blocks of employees that negotiate with themselves for entitlements. 

They aren't negotiating with the government for entitlements. They are negotiating for compensation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16,946

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, GSU&UT said:

 

 and yes I am aware that there supposedly isn't enough skilled labor to fill these jobs. 

There are jobs out there but they are getting specialized as well.  I see geoscience jobs and there are 200 applicants.  My buddy at Exxon told me they had 1000 applicants for 2 jobs.  I know a PhD in Geophysics who just got a GeoTech job.  He post-doc'd after he got laid-off in 2015.   I occasionally get a call, and they want to offer me contract positions, with travel, and low wages.    I know another scientist who just returned to work.  She didn't bother because the cost to send her kid to daycare/hire a nanny was higher than the wages she was being offered.   

I am skeptical as hell when I hear about people saying they cannot find workers.  I highly doubt that.  They cannot find workers at the rates and conditions they are offering, I believe.   

To the above comment, Khan Academy and other Youtube videos are great.  But they don't prove shit.  No one is going to hire an reservoir engineer who learned his craft from youtube.  /end rant

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1,798

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Nivek said:

There are jobs out there but they are getting specialized as well.  I see geoscience jobs and there are 200 applicants.  My buddy at Exxon told me they had 1000 applicants for 2 jobs.  I know a PhD in Geophysics who just got a GeoTech job.  He post-doc'd after he got laid-off in 2015.   I occasionally get a call, and they want to offer me contract positions, with travel, and low wages.    I know another scientist who just returned to work.  She didn't bother because the cost to send her kid to daycare/hire a nanny was higher than the wages she was being offered.   

I am skeptical as hell when I hear about people saying they cannot find workers.  I highly doubt that.  They cannot find workers at the rates and conditions they are offering, I believe.   

To the above comment, Khan Academy and other Youtube videos are great.  But they don't prove shit.  No one is going to hire an reservoir engineer who learned his craft from youtube.  /end rant

Exactly why I said "supposedly" since this article came out how a lot of employers complaining about the applicant pool is because of their own bullshit.

https://www.vox.com/2019/1/7/18166951/skills-gap-modestino-shoag-ballance

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21,154

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

We no longer live in that world.

 

Oh we definitely do. They both suck.  Those doing the most good are like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.  I want to be taxed more - but not until the government fixes their spending problem.  You think it’s healthy to let some tyrant declare an ‘emergency’ to use tax dollars on a wall?  Fuck that.  Get the proper structure in place then tax away.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,925

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Oh we definitely do. They both suck.  Those doing the most good are like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.  I want to be taxed more - but not until the government fixes their spending problem.  You think it’s healthy to let some tyrant declare an ‘emergency’ to use tax dollars on a wall?  Fuck that.  Get the proper structure in place then tax away.  

That begs the question: what is problematic spending? Aid for the poor? Aid for children? Aid for the elderly? Military contracts? Tax cuts for the rich? Corporate subsidies?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21,154

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That begs the question: what is problematic spending? Aid for the poor? Aid for children? Aid for the elderly? Military contracts? Tax cuts for the rich? Corporate subsidies?

 

Military contracts.  Some subsidies.  I mean I could go on for years but I’ve got my own company to run.  Google is your friend if you truly don’t know ways in which the government wastes boatloads of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29,936

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Turkleton said:

Seems like with have this thread about every two years or so. Really not sure anything gets solved.

Well one thing I'd like to get established. When the time comes to euthanize the boomers, please just sneak up on me. I'll turn into a sniveling puddle if I know it's coming. 

It's not a lot to ask. Hell, you can do it tomorrow as long as I don't know about it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,925

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Military contracts.  Some subsidies.  I mean I could go on for years but I’ve got my own company to run.  Google is your friend if you truly don’t know ways in which the government wastes boatloads of money.

The problem is I might not view all of it as waste. That's politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21,154

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The problem is I might not view all of it as waste. That's politics.

Yes - but everyone can agree and choose to cut some.  Instead right now both sides agree to ok all of each other’s spending.  Then we all lose.  Neither side does fiscal responsibility.  And at this rate, it will fuck everything up even if you tax everyone at 80%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,925

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Yes - but everyone can agree and choose to cut some.  Instead right now both sides agree to ok all of each other’s spending.  Then we all lose.  Neither side does fiscal responsibility.  And at this rate, it will fuck everything up even if you tax everyone at 80%.

There's the rub. We can't agree on what to cut. Even a little.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4,580

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Oh we definitely do. They both suck.  Those doing the most good are like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.  I want to be taxed more - but not until the government fixes their spending problem.  You think it’s healthy to let some tyrant declare an ‘emergency’ to use tax dollars on a wall?  Fuck that.  Get the proper structure in place then tax away.  

You've got it backwards.  Nobody stops spending when they have an unlimited credit card they never have to pay.   It's not human nature.   People do stop spending when they have to pay for shit they regret and then don't have enough money left to pay for the things they really want.  That's why taxes have to be raised first to cover existing spending, and taxes shouldn't be cut again unless the money is freed by equivalent spending cuts.   That's the principle that deficit hawks should be fighting for:  first pay for what we've spent, and if you want to pay less in the future, you can get there by spending less going forward. 

And, as it happens, while there is no political party willing to cut spending, one party is willing to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans, while the other is content to borrow ever more (while bizarrely using regressive taxes in the form of tariffs as part of a bad trade policy).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...