Can we talk about ageism?

brianlux · May 25

Not because I'm a so-called "baby-boomer", or because I want to rant and rave at younger people, particularly so-called "gen-Z" people (don'tcha hate those labels?!)

No, more because I'm curious as to why it is such a thing these days. (If you don't think so, Google "Geb Z Ageism.)

A woman who is a friend and someone I used to work with who is 75 told me she is really bummed because she hears about it all the time. She has a used book store and still works as hard as she can to keep going. She recalled how when she and my wife were younger they struggled to make ends meet for many years. At that time, this friend lived it what had been a chicken coop and my wife at that time was living in a cabin that had no heat or running water. I had similar experiences. I lived in a converted chicken coop for a couple of years when I was younger. I also lived in my van for a few years. I've never lived "high on the hog".

That same friend keeps hearing young people say they are angry with "boomers" because they had it so easy and took everything and now everything is fucked up for them now because of us. She also told me that a lot of these people voted for d.t. because he (himself born the first year of baby boomer generation) is going to make everything better for them.

Yes, I know there were some very career oriented and greedy boomers in Silicon Valley, but that's not how all of us were/are. I don't understand all this hatred. Shit, I'm almost 74 and it looks like I'm going to have to go back to work again soon. WTF? I supposedly "have everything"? I don't get it.

Tim Simmons · May 25

Most of it comes down to over generalizations, but for the most part, that generation has controlled the world or been the main driver for policies (certainly the US) for the past 50 years, and like anything in life, if you don't have the control or power you grow to resent those that do (4 of the last 5 presidents have been of that generation). So any perceived ills have been driven by decision makers from and the values OF, that generation.

You add on that its the largest generation living and that has lived in a century. Their needs are going to outweigh others based on size alone (to say nothing of the statistical advantage of them having power because of those numbers). Again, a generalization, but people seeing others needs catered to, while their needs may or do go unmet, resentment builds.

At the end of the day, the culture has changed (though many boomers have too), but those in power are just out of touch with where the youth are and what their needs are.

Tim Simmons · May 25

At the heart of any of this, in America at least, is income disparity and lack of a robust social safety net. If people pay their fair portion based on their income and we have services available so that people don't die, or live on the street, or go hungry, and can get an education and have the opportunity to recover and build their life up, there would be less resentment.

cincybearcat · May 25

So…is it ageism if it is referencing real issues that have been dominated by a generation of people?

I don’t think it’s ageism at all. I do think it is 100% ignoring the good things that the boomer generation has given us though.

And I feel, at least for me, my frustration with the boomer generation didn’t start until 2016…cause I see them clawing at keeping power (in the USA) and it is time to pass the baton.

cincybearcat · May 25

I would like to add, all the comments about Joe and Trump being too old is spot on and not ageism. Is ability based

brianlux · May 25

Tim Simmons said:

Most of it comes down to over generalizations, but for the most part, that generation has controlled the world or been the main driver for policies (certainly the US) for the past 50 years, and like anything in life, if you don't have the control or power you grow to resent those that do (4 of the last 5 presidents have been of that generation). So any perceived ills have been driven by decision makers from and the values OF, that generation.

You add on that its the largest generation living and that has lived in a century. Their needs are going to outweigh others based on size alone (to say nothing of the statistical advantage of them having power because of those numbers). Again, a generalization, but people seeing others needs catered to, while their needs may or do go unmet, resentment builds.

At the end of the day, the culture has changed (though many boomers have too), but those in power are just out of touch with where the youth are and what their needs are.

The baby boomer generation did not control the world for 50 years, Tim. Highly wealthy people from the G.I. Generation and Baby Boomer (stupid fucking labels

) controlled the world. I sure as hell didn't. Nobody I've ever known of may age did. We are not, nor never have been "those in power".

cincybearcat said:

So…is it ageism if it is referencing real issues that have been dominated by a generation of people?

I don’t think it’s ageism at all. I do think it is 100% ignoring the good things that the boomer generation has given us though.

And I feel, at least for me, my frustration with the boomer generation didn’t start until 2016…cause I see them clawing at keeping power (in the USA) and it is time to pass the baton.

Same as above.

Tim Simmons · May 25

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Most of it comes down to over generalizations, but for the most part, that generation has controlled the world or been the main driver for policies (certainly the US) for the past 50 years, and like anything in life, if you don't have the control or power you grow to resent those that do (4 of the last 5 presidents have been of that generation). So any perceived ills have been driven by decision makers from and the values OF, that generation.

You add on that its the largest generation living and that has lived in a century. Their needs are going to outweigh others based on size alone (to say nothing of the statistical advantage of them having power because of those numbers). Again, a generalization, but people seeing others needs catered to, while their needs may or do go unmet, resentment builds.

At the end of the day, the culture has changed (though many boomers have too), but those in power are just out of touch with where the youth are and what their needs are.

The baby boomer generation did not control the world for 50 years, Tim. Highly wealthy people from the G.I. Generation and Baby Boomer (stupid fucking labels ) controlled the world. I sure as hell didn't. Nobody I've ever known of may age did. We are not, nor never have been "those in power".

fine. I'll concede 50 (certainly the past 30 with 4 out of 5 presidents being from that generation).

But how are you squaring saying that GI/Baby Boomers controlled the world and then say they were not in power?

static111 · May 25

I think a lot of the disdain for the boomer generation is their voting history bringing us to where we are now, as well as the smug know it all attitudes of many. You my friend are definitely an exception to most of the self centered selfish people of the boomer generation that I have crossed paths with.

Sure no group is a monolith, but even if 51% of folks have been voting a certain way for a number of years and holding on to assets and talking down to younger generations about bootstraps etc, fair or not generalizations will be made.

I don't see it as ageism, I see it as a critique on a set of cultural and political values of a majority of people that were born and came up at a certain time. None of the criticism has to do with age per se, just the perception with how policies brought about and supported by people from these generations have poorly affected the environment and society.

Take away the white male boomer vote and GWB and Trump wouldn't stand a chance.

brianlux · May 25

Tim Simmons said:

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Most of it comes down to over generalizations, but for the most part, that generation has controlled the world or been the main driver for policies (certainly the US) for the past 50 years, and like anything in life, if you don't have the control or power you grow to resent those that do (4 of the last 5 presidents have been of that generation). So any perceived ills have been driven by decision makers from and the values OF, that generation.

You add on that its the largest generation living and that has lived in a century. Their needs are going to outweigh others based on size alone (to say nothing of the statistical advantage of them having power because of those numbers). Again, a generalization, but people seeing others needs catered to, while their needs may or do go unmet, resentment builds.

At the end of the day, the culture has changed (though many boomers have too), but those in power are just out of touch with where the youth are and what their needs are.

The baby boomer generation did not control the world for 50 years, Tim. Highly wealthy people from the G.I. Generation and Baby Boomer (stupid fucking labels ) controlled the world. I sure as hell didn't. Nobody I've ever known of may age did. We are not, nor never have been "those in power".

fine. I'll concede 50 (certainly the past 30 with 4 out of 5 presidents being from that generation).

But how are you squaring saying that GI/Baby Boomers controlled the world and then say they were not in power?

Baby boomers did not control the world. Super rich people controlled the world.

static111 said:

I think a lot of the disdain for the boomer generation is their voting history bringing us to where we are now, as well as the smug know it all attitudes of many. You my friend are definitely an exception to most of the self centered selfish people of the boomer generation that I have crossed paths with.

Sure no group is a monolith, but even if 51% of folks have been voting a certain way for a number of years and holding on to assets and talking down to younger generations about bootstraps etc, fair or not generalizations will be made.

I don't see it as ageism, I see it as a critique on a set of cultural and political values of a majority of people that were born and came up at a certain time. None of the criticism has to do with age per se, just the perception with how policies brought about and supported by people from these generations have poorly affected the environment and society.

Take away the white male boomer vote and GWB and Trump wouldn't stand a chance.

I'm sorry you have known so many people my age who are so smug. I've lived most of my life in my home state of California, but I also lived in New York and Washington states and spend a good deal of time in Oregon. The people my age that I've known throughout the years and in various places mostly have been very decent folks. Maybe I'm just lucky?

As for GWB and T winning, that's not because of boomers. It's because this country has done a piss poor job of educating people, and that runs across all age groups. My understanding is that young gen z voters had a lot to do with T winning, but I'm not going to blame them. I blame it on ignorance which runs across all lines. That's why the environment has suffered so greatly. That was caused by the greedy power ultra rich few and the poorly educated. Some of the greatest environmental champions came out of the G.I. and Boomer generation. People like:

Rachael Carson
David Attenborough
Edward Abbey
Dave Foreman:
James Hansen
Paul Watson
Bill McKibben
Doug Peacock
Farely Mowat
Robert Hunter
Richard Manning
Edward O. Wilson
David Brower
Jane Goodall
Terry Tempest Williams
Julia Butterfly Hill
Winona LaDuke
Wangari Maathai
Chico Mendes
Gaylord Nelson
Penny Whetton

I'm sure there are others, but the only well-known young environmentalist I can name is Gretta Thunberg.

shecky · May 25

cincybearcat said:

I would like to add, all the comments about Joe and Trump being too old is spot on and not ageism. Is ability based

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/5021252/uploads/editor/p2/dyd9ic3klhs2.jpg

That's President Biden in 2023 on the left, and President Trump yesterday on the right.

static111 · May 25

What this exit data shows me is that white people specifically are the major problem with many of the policies that we are facing today. This is from the 24 presidential election by the way. GEN Z looks pretty evenly split. Age 30-forever in the white male category seems to be the biggest problem, with more and more conservative votes as we go up in age til about 65 when there is a slight decline to the majority conservative percentage. Right or wrong the conservative boomer majority taught the next generation and the next generation. Overall the trend looks good for the younger generations, maybe they will slowly reverse course. If we still have some semblance of the type of democracy we have enjoyed during my lifetime.

I get that you and many people of your generation are not part of your generations conservative majority, the conservative majority still exists. Which is the same for me and my millennial generation, we still unfortunately have a conservative majority, albeit smaller than the older generations.

If things continue to go the way they are and when my generation is in charge, I will have no problem if younger generations place blame on us for not doing more. It won’t be ageism, it will just be facts. And sure me and my friends are part of the blue bars, but that doesn’t take away that the majority of my generation and skin tone are voting for regressive policies, although we are doing it at smaller percentages than those older than us.

And I don’t mean any of this as a criticism, it’s just numbers. I also don’t think it’s ageism, no one is saying these things are happening because people are old etc, the point is these things are happening because people of a certain age and race are supporting them in larger numbers.

As for worrying about people like Biden and Trump being too old to hold office, again I think that isn’t ageism, more of a biological reality that as tasks become more and more demanding your body can handle less and less as you age. Hell there is a lot I can’t do in my 40s that I could in my 20s and none of those things is as demanding as running a country.

mickeyrat · May 25

if an accusation or list of grievances real or perceived dont apply to you personally, why do you seem to give great weight to it? like its a personal affront directly specifically toward you.

if those shoes fit, wear them. if they dont then move along.

brianlux · May 25

static111 said:

What this exit data shows me is that white people specifically are the major problem with many of the policies that we are facing today. This is from the 24 presidential election by the way. GEN Z looks pretty evenly split. Age 30-forever in the white male category seems to be the biggest problem, with more and more conservative votes as we go up in age til about 65 when there is a slight decline to the majority conservative percentage. Right or wrong the conservative boomer majority taught the next generation and the next generation. Overall the trend looks good for the younger generations, maybe they will slowly reverse course. If we still have some semblance of the type of democracy we have enjoyed during my lifetime.

I get that you and many people of your generation are not part of your generations conservative majority, the conservative majority still exists. Which is the same for me and my millennial generation, we still unfortunately have a conservative majority, albeit smaller than the older generations.

If things continue to go the way they are and when my generation is in charge, I will have no problem if younger generations place blame on us for not doing more. It won’t be ageism, it will just be facts. And sure me and my friends are part of the blue bars, but that doesn’t take away that the majority of my generation and skin tone are voting for regressive policies, although we are doing it at smaller percentages than those older than us.

And I don’t mean any of this as a criticism, it’s just numbers. I also don’t think it’s ageism, no one is saying these things are happening because people are old etc, the point is these things are happening because people of a certain age and race are supporting them in larger numbers.

As for worrying about people like Biden and Trump being too old to hold office, again I think that isn’t ageism, more of a biological reality that as tasks become more and more demanding your body can handle less and less as you age. Hell there is a lot I can’t do in my 40s that I could in my 20s and none of those things is as demanding as running a country.

"I get that you and many people of your generation are not part of your generations conservative majority, the conservative majority still exists. Which is the same for me and my millennial generation, we still unfortunately have a conservative majority, albeit smaller than the older generations. "

Right! I would have done well at the outset here to say that I have issues with all ageist biases. I've heard a few people my age generalize gen Z people, saying they are spoiled, lack creativity, addicted to social media, unmotivated, non-creative musically, etc. That might be true of some, but not all. So I call bullshit on that as well.

"I will have no problem if younger generations place blame on us for not doing more. It won’t be ageism, it will just be facts."

I don't at all see you as ageist or hateful, but I think that generalizing groups of people can go in that direction.

What I'm talking about here is the incidents of hatred of any particular group of people (although boomer hatred seems to be the most prevalent these days). Other than my feelings towards tyrants or people who commit heinous crimes, I don't have much tolerance for hatred.

mickeyrat said:

if an accusation or list of grievances real or perceived dont apply to you personally, why do you seem to give great weight to it? like its a personal affront directly specifically toward you.

if those shoes fit, wear them. if they dont then move along.

It's not something that I personally take as an affront. Generalized bigotry and/ or hatred are what I have issues with. I may have some misanthropic tendencies toward humans in general that run across all lines, but not toward specific groups. And I admit I have some general biases myself such as that I think a lot of people a half generation younger than me are pretty cool. I listen to bands like Pearl Jam and The Replacements more than I do Jimi Hendrix and The Who. I just tend to gravitate more toward that half-step younger age group. But I don't hate other age groups. So none of the boomer ageism is a personal thing for me.

shecky · May 25

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/5021252/uploads/editor/ph/hpfgw6ebjzsn.jpg

https://www.foxnews.com/media/mike-rowe-warns-declining-work-ethic-younger-generations#&_intcmp=fnhpriver_40

static111 · May 25

shecky said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/mike-rowe-warns-declining-work-ethic-younger-generations#&_intcmp=fnhpriver_40

Actor who has presumably never worked a real job in life criticizes others for not working hard enough, lol. Very insightful. Stick to promoting trades which is actually one of the things I respect him for, being a welder and welding inspector and coming from a trades background. Playing the political blame game and saying younger people don’t have work ethic really is not the way to go. The way I see it is companies are not offering enough to keep the younger generations at the table. When rent, groceries, gas etc is unaffordable and you are expecting younger people to work for $18 an hour and sacrifice 40 plus hours a week, you are part of the problem. 10 years ago that was a lot of money, the world has moved on. If companies want more young blood, they need to accommodate. I sure wish I wouldn’t have had to work as hard as I have to get where I am. Good on the kids for not accepting the bullshit crumbs that they are being offered.

Funny that all the younger folks I come across that have good pay and a pathway to advancement have no problem working. It’s almost like employers need to offer more.

shecky · May 25

static111 said:

shecky said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/mike-rowe-warns-declining-work-ethic-younger-generations#&_intcmp=fnhpriver_40

Actor who has presumably never worked a real job in life criticizes others for not working hard enough, lol. Very insightful. Stick to promoting trades which is actually one of the things I respect him for, being a welder and welding inspector and coming from a trades background. Playing the political blame game and saying younger people don’t have work ethic really is not the way to go. The way I see it is companies are not offering enough to keep the younger generations at the table. When rent, groceries, gas etc is unaffordable and you are expecting younger people to work for $18 an hour and sacrifice 40 plus hours a week, you are part of the problem. 10 years ago that was a lot of money, the world has moved on. If companies want more young blood, they need to accommodate. I sure wish I wouldn’t have had to work as hard as I have to get where I am. Good on the kids for not accepting the bullshit crumbs that they are being offered.

Funny that all the younger folks I come across that have good pay and a pathway to advancement have no problem working. It’s almost like employers need to offer more.

When were wages for young people ever "high enough", or rent, groceries, gas etc. ever "affordable"?

I left Ohio after high school in 1975 and hitchhiked out to California - "the land of dreams!". My very first job, making the minimum wage of $2.00 an hour, was working the night shift at a self-service gas station. I was robbed at gunpoint one night, so I quit the next day. I quickly found a better (and safer) job.

I never went to college but I always could find a job - usually hard, physical work but it "paid the bills". Eventually, one learns skills and gains knowledge so you start getting better jobs, where you not only can "pay the bills" but can save money, too.

Fast foward fifty years, and I was finally able to retire recently. Monthly, I collect Social Security (which I paid for from each paycheck over the years), a union pension check (which I paid for via union dues from each paycheck) and I also managed to save and invest over the years.

Besides young people complaining about it, I do get tired of people of my generation complaining that "the government doesn't take care of them"! You receive Social Security based on how much you paid in over the decades, and it never was intended to be a retiree's sole income. It's one's responsibilty to save up money over the decades for one's own retirement.

Life has never been easy!

static111 · May 26

shecky said:

static111 said:

shecky said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/mike-rowe-warns-declining-work-ethic-younger-generations#&_intcmp=fnhpriver_40

Actor who has presumably never worked a real job in life criticizes others for not working hard enough, lol. Very insightful. Stick to promoting trades which is actually one of the things I respect him for, being a welder and welding inspector and coming from a trades background. Playing the political blame game and saying younger people don’t have work ethic really is not the way to go. The way I see it is companies are not offering enough to keep the younger generations at the table. When rent, groceries, gas etc is unaffordable and you are expecting younger people to work for $18 an hour and sacrifice 40 plus hours a week, you are part of the problem. 10 years ago that was a lot of money, the world has moved on. If companies want more young blood, they need to accommodate. I sure wish I wouldn’t have had to work as hard as I have to get where I am. Good on the kids for not accepting the bullshit crumbs that they are being offered.

Funny that all the younger folks I come across that have good pay and a pathway to advancement have no problem working. It’s almost like employers need to offer more.

When were wages for young people ever "high enough", or rent, groceries, gas etc. ever "affordable"?

I left Ohio after high school in 1975 and hitchhiked out to California - "the land of dreams!". My very first job, making the minimum wage of $2.00 an hour, was working the night shift at a self-service gas station. I was robbed at gunpoint one night, so I quit the next day. I quickly found a better (and safer) job.

I never went to college but I always could find a job - usually hard, physical work but it "paid the bills". Eventually, one learns skills and gains knowledge so you start getting better jobs, where you not only can "pay the bills" but can save money, too.

Fast foward fifty years, and I was finally able to retire recently. Monthly, I collect Social Security (which I paid for from each paycheck over the years), a union pension check (which I paid for via union dues from each paycheck) and I also managed to save and invest over the years.

Besides young people complaining about it, I do get tired of people of my generation complaining that "the government doesn't take care of them"! You receive Social Security based on how much you paid in over the decades, and it never was intended to be a retiree's sole income. It's one's responsibilty to save up money over the decades for one's own retirement.

Life has never been easy!

Just because it hasn't been easy and that you and I have had to work hard doesn't mean that the kids shouldn't expect better. I for one am for them demanding more of employers.

Halifax2TheMax · May 26

static111 said:

shecky said:

static111 said:

shecky said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/mike-rowe-warns-declining-work-ethic-younger-generations#&_intcmp=fnhpriver_40

Actor who has presumably never worked a real job in life criticizes others for not working hard enough, lol. Very insightful. Stick to promoting trades which is actually one of the things I respect him for, being a welder and welding inspector and coming from a trades background. Playing the political blame game and saying younger people don’t have work ethic really is not the way to go. The way I see it is companies are not offering enough to keep the younger generations at the table. When rent, groceries, gas etc is unaffordable and you are expecting younger people to work for $18 an hour and sacrifice 40 plus hours a week, you are part of the problem. 10 years ago that was a lot of money, the world has moved on. If companies want more young blood, they need to accommodate. I sure wish I wouldn’t have had to work as hard as I have to get where I am. Good on the kids for not accepting the bullshit crumbs that they are being offered.

Funny that all the younger folks I come across that have good pay and a pathway to advancement have no problem working. It’s almost like employers need to offer more.

When were wages for young people ever "high enough", or rent, groceries, gas etc. ever "affordable"?

I left Ohio after high school in 1975 and hitchhiked out to California - "the land of dreams!". My very first job, making the minimum wage of $2.00 an hour, was working the night shift at a self-service gas station. I was robbed at gunpoint one night, so I quit the next day. I quickly found a better (and safer) job.

I never went to college but I always could find a job - usually hard, physical work but it "paid the bills". Eventually, one learns skills and gains knowledge so you start getting better jobs, where you not only can "pay the bills" but can save money, too.

Fast foward fifty years, and I was finally able to retire recently. Monthly, I collect Social Security (which I paid for from each paycheck over the years), a union pension check (which I paid for via union dues from each paycheck) and I also managed to save and invest over the years.

Besides young people complaining about it, I do get tired of people of my generation complaining that "the government doesn't take care of them"! You receive Social Security based on how much you paid in over the decades, and it never was intended to be a retiree's sole income. It's one's responsibilty to save up money over the decades for one's own retirement.

Life has never been easy!

Just because it hasn't been easy and that you and I have had to work hard doesn't mean that the kids shouldn't expect better. I for one am for them demanding more of employers.

Particularly given corporate profits and the income/wealth disparity.

brianlux · May 26

We're getting a bit off-topic here, but I'm going to jump in for a minute if for no other reason than to illustrate why I don't like labels and why I think you can have co-called conservative and so-called liberal viewpoints.

I agree with much of what Shecky said (yeah, you read that right). I'm pretty much what some would call "old fashioned" when it comes to young people entering the work world. I think it's good for young adults to struggle to some degree and that it's harmful to have everything come easy for them. As it was for me, kids who start their first job in high school or just after and are paid minimum wage, do hard work that involves more than sitting behind a computer, and who prove they have some ambition, and move up from there are not only going to be better off in the long run, they're also going to contribute more to their communities.

When I moved to New York State in 1975, I was nearly broke and could not find a job. I applied for assistance but told the people at the welfare office that I didn't want a hand out, I just wanted work. They were so used to people coming in and asking for handouts, they were amazed. They said, "Great, how about working at the local high school?" They need someone to handle the troublemaker/flunkies who couldn't or wouldn't keep up in regular classes. I accepted and was able to earn my monthly check. (And, by the way, those kids accepted me and we got along great because they respected how it was that I came to working with them, and I gave them boundaries but also respect, and we all were better off for the situation.)

Now, all that said, I have an equally strong feelings about grossly over-paid corporate heads who under-pay their slave labor and become mega rich people by profiting off the misery of others.

The healthiest and most fair system is one where young people pay their dues, and when those destined to do so become leaders and bosses, they ought to pay their employees a fair wage and treat them with respect and care. That just does not happen enough. But I know it does in small business sometimes. Ask the people who worked for my wife at the used bookstore she owned for 36 years. She respected and cared for them, and they loved her, every last one of them. If the store had a bad month, the employs got paid first. Some months, my wife took home nothing.

Zod · May 26

I'm in Canada, not the U.S., so maybe the experience is a little different up here. I'm also Gen X so I'm in the middle of these generations.

It does seem to me that economic circumstances have deteriorated as a whole here over the decades. I even saw it in my very first grocery store job in high school. It was a union job, and the union negotiated a contract for a different local that had far less wages then ours. It put pressure on my local, who then sold out future young people, through an option to buy people out and pay the replacement workers low wages, part time, minimal benefits.

The cost of housing here in Canada has sky rocketed over those decades.

Kids of today are faced with a tougher economic climate here. Real wages are lower, housing costs are considerably higher than generations past.

It doesn't mean everyone of older generations was able to figure it out (find their way in, develop a career, buy a home, and make better pay as they got older). What I think it means is there's considerably less opportunity to pull that off now than there was 40 years ago.

We also have the challenge in that our social services (except for things like CPP which are funded through savings/investments) operate somewhat like a Ponzi scheme. When those programs rolled out, because the boomer generation was young and working, and the silent generation was smaller. Working age employees outnumbered retirees considerably, meaning you had lots more people contributing to programs than using them. Now it's much les favourable, and it's one of the causes in struggle to pay for and maintain social programs. Ratio of working age people to retirees is about half of what it was, and ergo every worker would now need to pay considerably more tax to keep it going.

It's tough overall, but I do tend to agree with the concept. There's always outliers and situations, but overall, I truly believe every successive generation has had access to less than the one before it.

brianlux · May 26

Zod said:

I'm in Canada, not the U.S., so maybe the experience is a little different up here.   I'm also Gen X so I'm in the middle of these generations.

It does seem to me that economic circumstances have deteriorated as a whole here over the decades.   I even saw it in my very first grocery store job in high school. It was a union job, and the union negotiated a contract for a different local that had far less wages then ours. It put pressure on my local, who then sold out future young people, through an option to buy people out and pay the replacement workers low wages, part time, minimal benefits.

The cost of housing here in Canada has sky rocketed over those decades.

Kids of today are faced with a tougher economic climate here.   Real wages are lower, housing costs are considerably higher than generations past.

It doesn't mean everyone of older generations was able to figure it out (find their way in, develop a career, buy a home, and make better pay as they got older). What I think it means is there's considerably less opportunity to pull that off now than there was 40 years ago.

We also have the challenge in that our social services (except for things like CPP which are funded through savings/investments) operate somewhat like a Ponzi scheme. When those programs rolled out, because the boomer generation was young and working, and the silent generation was smaller. Working age employees outnumbered retirees considerably, meaning you had lots more people contributing to programs than using them.   Now it's much les favourable, and it's one of the causes in struggle to pay for and maintain social programs.   Ratio of working age people to retirees is about half of what it was, and ergo every worker would now need to pay considerably more tax to keep it going.

It's tough overall, but I do tend to agree with the concept. There's always outliers and situations, but overall, I truly believe every successive generation has had access to less than the one before it.

Good post, Zod, thanks.

I can appreciate the difficulties younger generations are facing. They are not the first to struggle. My parents generation lived through the Great Depression when they were young. So I can empathize with the difficulties they face.

Your mentioning the ration of working age people to retirees being much smaller today brings up an important factor here. Older generations like mine at times had more opportunities, but for many of us, our lives may not at all end well. Twenty five years ago, I work with the prof who was the head of a counselor training program at our local college. She once pointed out that when people her age and mine got old, we would have a difficult time because we will be too old to do certain things and there will not be enough workers to fill needs like medical care, housing, repairs, etc. She went as far as to predict that euthanasia of the elderly will become a reality in our life time.

That's something to think about-- that due to lack of services, I might be euthanized. Sounds far fetched, but it's not. I'm already noticing the effects. My wife and I have a hard time finding people to hire to do some of the things we can no longer do. I've had to wait as long as six months to get an appointment with a specialist regarding my autoimmune disorder and vertigo. Despite our having budgeted, spent carefully, and saved what we could, our income is not keeping up with inflation. I'm almost 74 and looking at having to got back to work part time.

So, yes, in some ways us boomers were born at a great time. Were we lucky? In some ways, sure. But we'll see. The end of our lives could turn out to make our timing of being here on earth an end-of-life curse.

cincybearcat · May 26

shecky said:

cincybearcat said:

I would like to add, all the comments about Joe and Trump being too old is spot on and not ageism. Is ability based

That's President Biden in 2023 on the left, and President Trump yesterday on the right.

Now show Trump walking down the ramp….

and then play the eating cats and dogs over and over again. He is not well. He is not smart.

brianlux · May 26

cincybearcat said:

shecky said:

cincybearcat said:

I would like to add, all the comments about Joe and Trump being too old is spot on and not ageism. Is ability based

That's President Biden in 2023 on the left, and President Trump yesterday on the right.

Now show Trump walking down the ramp….

and then play the eating cats and dogs over and over again. He is not well. He is not smart.

His posts sometimes are a big favor to me in that they shy me away from the toxic pit that is AMT.

Thank you, Shecky!

gimmesometruth27 · May 26

shecky said:

cincybearcat said:

I would like to add, all the comments about Joe and Trump being too old is spot on and not ageism. Is ability based

That's President Biden in 2023 on the left, and President Trump yesterday on the right.

i wonder why you did not post a pic of your boy drinking water with two hands from a sippy cup.

gimmesometruth27 · May 26

i do not think it is ageism for me to say that it is time for people like schumer and pelosi and all of the older folks in power within the democratic party to pass the torch. they have been in power for decades and they are actively working to keep younger folks with newer and more progressive ideas down. this is not good for the party or the country.

there is a time to exercise self awareness. there is a time to give up power and let the younger generations have the power. their time is past, and they are keeping the party in the past.

it's time for them to move aside. otherwise the dems will continue to lose.

brianlux · May 26

gimmesometruth27 said:

i do not think it is ageism for me to say that it is time for people like schumer and pelosi and all of the older folks in power within the democratic party to pass the torch. they have been in power for decades and they are actively working to keep younger folks with newer and more progressive ideas down. this is not good for the party or the country.

there is a time to exercise self awareness. there is a time to give up power and let the younger generations have the power. their time is past, and they are keeping the party in the past.

it's time for them to move aside. otherwise the dems will continue to lose.

Agreed, I'm very much in favor of those old politicians passing the torch. (Hell, I'm "older", Pelosi is flat out old

)

DE4173 · May 26

gimmesometruth27 said:

i do not think it is ageism for me to say that it is time for people like schumer and pelosi and all of the older folks in power within the democratic party to pass the torch. they have been in power for decades and they are actively working to keep younger folks with newer and more progressive ideas down. this is not good for the party or the country.

there is a time to exercise self awareness. there is a time to give up power and let the younger generations have the power. their time is past, and they are keeping the party in the past.

it's time for them to move aside. otherwise the dems will continue to lose.

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Donald Payne Jr. (New Jersey, died April 2024, age 65, heart attack complications)

Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas, died July 2024, age 74, pancreatic cancer)

Bill Pascrell (New Jersey, died August 2024, age 87, respiratory failure)

Sylvester Turner (Texas, died March 2025, age 70, unspecified health complications)

Raúl Grijalva (Arizona, died March 2025, age 77, cancer complications)

Gerry Connolly (Virginia, died May 2025, age 75, esophageal cancer)

brianlux · May 27

DE4173 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i do not think it is ageism for me to say that it is time for people like schumer and pelosi and all of the older folks in power within the democratic party to pass the torch. they have been in power for decades and they are actively working to keep younger folks with newer and more progressive ideas down. this is not good for the party or the country.

there is a time to exercise self awareness. there is a time to give up power and let the younger generations have the power. their time is past, and they are keeping the party in the past.

it's time for them to move aside. otherwise the dems will continue to lose.

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Donald Payne Jr. (New Jersey, died April 2024, age 65, heart attack complications)

Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas, died July 2024, age 74, pancreatic cancer)

Bill Pascrell (New Jersey, died August 2024, age 87, respiratory failure)

Sylvester Turner (Texas, died March 2025, age 70, unspecified health complications)

Raúl Grijalva (Arizona, died March 2025, age 77, cancer complications)

Gerry Connolly (Virginia, died May 2025, age 75, esophageal cancer)

Average age = 74.67 yrs.

Worried Old Man Images - Free Download on Freepik

Halifax2TheMax · May 27

brianlux said:

DE4173 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i do not think it is ageism for me to say that it is time for people like schumer and pelosi and all of the older folks in power within the democratic party to pass the torch. they have been in power for decades and they are actively working to keep younger folks with newer and more progressive ideas down. this is not good for the party or the country.

there is a time to exercise self awareness. there is a time to give up power and let the younger generations have the power. their time is past, and they are keeping the party in the past.

it's time for them to move aside. otherwise the dems will continue to lose.

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Donald Payne Jr. (New Jersey, died April 2024, age 65, heart attack complications)

Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas, died July 2024, age 74, pancreatic cancer)

Bill Pascrell (New Jersey, died August 2024, age 87, respiratory failure)

Sylvester Turner (Texas, died March 2025, age 70, unspecified health complications)

Raúl Grijalva (Arizona, died March 2025, age 77, cancer complications)

Gerry Connolly (Virginia, died May 2025, age 75, esophageal cancer)

Average age = 74.67 yrs.

Half a decade less than the average US life expectancy of 79.25. Must be the food in the cafeteria.

brianlux · May 27

Halifax2TheMax said:

brianlux said:

DE4173 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i do not think it is ageism for me to say that it is time for people like schumer and pelosi and all of the older folks in power within the democratic party to pass the torch. they have been in power for decades and they are actively working to keep younger folks with newer and more progressive ideas down. this is not good for the party or the country.

there is a time to exercise self awareness. there is a time to give up power and let the younger generations have the power. their time is past, and they are keeping the party in the past.

it's time for them to move aside. otherwise the dems will continue to lose.

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Donald Payne Jr. (New Jersey, died April 2024, age 65, heart attack complications)

Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas, died July 2024, age 74, pancreatic cancer)

Bill Pascrell (New Jersey, died August 2024, age 87, respiratory failure)

Sylvester Turner (Texas, died March 2025, age 70, unspecified health complications)

Raúl Grijalva (Arizona, died March 2025, age 77, cancer complications)

Gerry Connolly (Virginia, died May 2025, age 75, esophageal cancer)

Average age = 74.67 yrs.

Half a decade less than the average US life expectancy of 79.25. Must be the food in the cafeteria.

Phew! Good thing I mostly eat at home then!

tempo_n_groove · May 27

My sister suffered from Ageism for her work. She is a web designer. She had a very hard time getting work because of her age... She was 42.

Can we talk about ageism?

Comments