Slashdot Mirror
Millennials Earn 20 Percent Less Than Boomers Did At Same Stage of Life (usatoday.com)
According to a new analysis of Federal Reserve data by the advocacy group Young Invincibles, millennials earn 20 percent less than boomers did at the same stage of life, even though they are better educated. Their median household income is $40,581, and their home ownership rate is lower, while their student debt is drastically higher. USA Today reports: The analysis of the Fed data (PDF) shows the extent of the decline. It compared 25 to 34 year-olds in 2013, the most recent year available, to the same age group in 1989 after adjusting for inflation. Education does help boost incomes. But the median college-educated millennial with student debt is only earning slightly more than a baby boomer without a degree did in 1989. The home ownership rate for this age group dipped to 43 percent from 46 percent in 1989, although the rate has improved for millennials with a college degree relative to boomers. The median net worth of millennials is $10,090, 56 percent less than it was for boomers. Whites still earn dramatically more than Blacks and Latinos, reflecting the legacy of discrimination for jobs, education and housing. Yet compared to white baby boomers, some white millennials appear stuck in a pattern of downward mobility. This group has seen their median income tumble more than 21 percent to $47,688. Median income for black millennials has fallen just 1.4 percent to $27,892. Latino millennials earn nearly 29 percent more than their boomer predecessors to $30,436. The analysis fits into a broader pattern of diminished opportunity. Research last year by economists led by Stanford University's Raj Chetty found that people born in 1950 had a 79 percent chance of making more money than their parents. That figure steadily slipped over the past several decades, such that those born in 1980 had just a 50 percent chance of out-earning their parents. This decline has occurred even though younger Americans are increasingly college-educated. The proportion of 25 to 29 year-olds with a college degree has risen to 35.6 percent in 2015 from 23.2 percent in 1990, a report this month by the Brookings Institution noted.
So, more younger folks have college degrees. Does that actually mean that those folks are better educated? Are a bunch of for-profit institutions just churning out worthless degrees, while saddling young students with debt that they have no chance of paying off?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
If you work hard, you will do better than your parents.
davecb@spamcop.net
Boomers had to wait for their favorite song to be on the radio or buy the CD. I can download any song, for free, instantly.
Boomers had to wait for their favorite TV show to be on TV and then watch it. I can download any TV show, for free, instantly.
Boomers didn't have video games. I can emulate tons of slightly older systems, with any game, for free.
And that's ignoring that my job is comfortably sitting at a computer programming. Boomers still had to do physical work in unsafe conditions.
So yeah, let them have their extra 20%. My quality of life is so much better.
But the median college-educated millennial with student debt... THAT my friends is the crux of the story! Millennials have been SUCKERED into thinking they HAVE to have a college degree. Most of them, in a field with a POOR track record of job advancement, or jobs at all! Suckers, that's what they are. And who profited from all of this? "Big college" that's who! Apparently economics isn't something they teach you in high school, or, perhaps they would figure out, that a four year teaching degree at a 4 year college, that puts you in 40,50,60 thousand dollars in debt, for a job that pays 30,40 thousand a year, ain't gonna cut it when you factor in your car(s), rent/mortgage, clothes, food and what not.
How does purchasing power compare? I'm not a boomer, but know that I can get for almost free what would have taken half a year disposable salary to get in the past. I couldn't do my preferred senior design project and had to change it because I could not afford the electronic components. Now the full BOM can be purchansed @1hr minimum wage rate
Damn, I should have known there was a catch!
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Meanwhile we have a "recovery" that's not actually a recovery but a bubble fueled by low interest rates and the Fed printing more and more money.
The "sharing" economy is crap. It's basically participated in by people who can't find an actual job, so the wages are very low. Apparently these gigs count as jobs anyway for some reason, so unemployment numbers don't look too bad.
Add to that job competition from poor immigrants at the low end of the wage scale, and job competition from severely underpaid H1B workers at the high end of the wage scale, and the average will drop.
The US managed to delay the fiscal crisis which was imminent in 2008 by bailing the banks out with debt, but we didn't actually fix the problems. There's still massive speculation. There is still too much debt. There's still a trade deficit. I think some of us are feeling a little bit euphoric stocks going up again, but it's artificial.
and was surprised they covered it until they blunted the impact of the story by going on about how millennials eat out a lot and have lots of gadgets (read:cell phones). Just another Straw Man argument. I'm embarrassed to say I fell for it. I started to argue with their Straw Man trying to justify millennial's purchasing decisions until I realized that how they spend money has nothing to do with their declining wages.
It's amazing the lengths the media goes to these days to avoid acknowledging growing wealth inequality. Not really surprising when you consider who owns them. As always, follow the money...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The article is saying the kids whine because they really are getting less income and they have more debt.
Of course they don't mention all the boomers who are now making less than they did when they were younger. Welcome to the precariate - never have so many worked and studied so many hours for so little.
The whining is justified. Two generations without a real increase in income while those at the top get richer will eventually result in more than whining.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
and he can't even land an interview. He's had to go through dodgy contracting outfits that take 50% of his pay. Crap work too. He doesn't make it through the HR filters.
Make no mistake. It's not like it was 20 years ago. Sure, if you've got a few decades of experience and a network of friends you might get by without a degree. But that doesn't apply to an 18 year old fresh out of high school. It's 2017 and they'll never get the chance to get experienced. Why the hell would I hire somebody without a college degree when all I have to do is go crying to congress and their give me as many H1-Bs as I want (since I couldn't find anybody with the proper experience: in this case a college degree).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
than other minorities in America. A study had controlled for family, education & environmental factors and found that, by and large, it was because for some reason they weren't constant victims of institutionalized racism. It had nothing to do with tough parenting and some nebulous "values". We just didn't shit on them like we do the blacks and Latinos. If I had to guess I'd say that's why those demographics are doing better. If nothing else we've made a lot of progress in that area.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
My buddy is in his 20s, was a solid C student in HS, no college experience, not a coder or anything. He makes around $400 a day busting his ass hustling online. Fiverr, mturk, other sites. Laugh or whine all you want but it can be done.
I grew up with all of my peers having just one working blue collar parent. I dont know of anyone today at any age group where that is true.
Funny thing about workers in other countries - they kinda don't want to bust their ass for meager wagers so that Americans can enjoy a standard of living higher than they deserve. The inevitable outcome is an equalization of income, where wages in established nations stagnates while wages in developing countries rises.
Two generations without a real increase in income while those at the top get richer will eventually result in more than whining.
That's how we got Trump. If the powers that be don't see that for the warning it is, then they deserve what comes next.
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
PolygamousRanchKid writes:
> So, more younger folks have college degrees. Does that actually mean that those folks are better educated?
It's a good question to ask. Somehow the number of college degrees has risen while the general understanding of science has fallen, to the extent that around half the US population has voted in a science denialist for President. The rest of the world is still picking its collective jaw off the ground at this. It's like a terrible quality B-movie with a script so ludicrous that you just want to get up and walk out.
This is what happens when you give people just enough rope to hang themselves, which they;re doing by misinterpreting scientific skepticism as opportunity for science denial. A little education can be a dangerous thing in the hands of those who lack basic understanding.
The answer to your question is a clearcut "No". The wave of anti-intellectualism that is sweeping America has taken its toll, and the population is far less well educated now than when degrees were fewer in number.
Worldwide, millennials are doing great. The World Bank Forecasts Global Poverty to Fall Below 10% for First Time.
The problem for Americans is that we can't exactly ask the Chinese to go back to having 45 million people starve to death in a new "Great Leap Forward", no matter how much taking their labor skills off the capitalist market might improve the labor demand for unskilled white Trump voting high-school dropouts. Globalism is a bitch if you were used to getting a free ride.
I rather call us the 'Morlock' generation. Now shut up and get back to your lever-pulling!
love is just extroverted narcissism
Was thinking the same thing. A additional 15% took an extra 4 or 5 years of partying before starting work. Graduate dumber, but better indoctrinated, than when they started.
Not just 'for profits', all schools are offering lots of watered down degrees, not that * studies wasn't already worthless 30 years ago.
It could also be globalism.
Jobs leaving the country create an excess of workers, so the remaining jobs can be offered for lower salaries. It's simple supply and demand.
Is there another economic explanation that could account for the difference between then and now?
Ignoring government numbers because of various controversies in how they are measured, the Gallup Poll survey puts us at 9.2% real unemployment, and less than half of those are rated "good" jobs.
We're supposedly out of the depression, the economy is doing great, and yet people are making 20% less than average from 30 years ago.
What other major economic forces could account for this?
It used to be that college was less than a thousand bucks. What happened? A) Expansion B) Deep cuts in federal and state financial support. Basically, colleges were forced be become more like private entities because of tax cuts. Now the people that forced this behavior are blaming the colleges for doing what was required. The same people are also enjoying a glut of employable people so they decided that they aren't worth as much and thus paying them less.
"Boomers" and "Gen X" are crushing "Millennials" with debt and then turning around and blaming colleges for their own reprehensible behavior.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
I doubt Trump will help.
I suspect it will get worse. Look at his cabinet nominations.
People voted anger, not intelligence.
Dear boys and girl; when I was young a college education was a broad preparation for participation in worldly affairs. One learned languages- Greek, Latin, German, possibly French. One learned geography, history, literature, art, music and philosophy. There was extensive, though informal, focus upon social behavior (which is sorely missed in these days). One might opt for some training in business, accounting, law, medicine, etc if there was a need for earned income.
College education today is job training. And as jobs vary ever more widely and specialties form in ever narrower fields, that training is extremely vertical such that any change in the job market sends you back to square one. Today's programmers, lawyers, doctors and auto mechanics are required to continually update their training as knowledge and technology change. Because machines will adapt to those changes more effectively than humans, there will be fewer opportunities for humans.
There are fields that remain relatively stable and somewhat immune to automation. Management, sales, teaching, the arts, mattress tester... The kind of science we associate with Einstein; imaginative and inspired is a bright possibility. Inventors (real inventors, not the corporate kind) can also take leaps beyond logic. And while computers can compete, ultimately the best work in the arts will be done by humans. Young people might want to explore such areas rather than those of rapid change.
...omphaloskepsis often...
In the mid 1990s, you could find a job right out of high school at places like a telemarketing company, some tech support job, at $8 to $12 an hour. A car cost about $10-15k for a decent new one. A job out of college would get you $36,000, with your salary rising very quickly as you gain skills and specialization. You could buy a house for about $100-$150k.
Look at the times now. Those entry level jobs are now in India, so at best there is food service or retail. College grads are making $36,000 a year coming out, if they actually find work. Raises? The only way to really find pay hikes is to jump companies. Of course, a house is now $500,000, and a decent car is $40k.
One reason is that so many jobs have moved overseas. Manufacturing went to China and Mexico. Any tech support or phone bank support is now in India. Stuff that can't come by boat is made in Mexico. Globalism has made a select few rich, but it has done nothing for people in the US or Europe.
No, it's not "despite being better educated", it is because being better educated. Millennials lost 4-10 years of earnings and earnings growth relative to people who started working right out of highschool. For many college majors, the gain in post-college earnings isn't worth the cost.
The other significant influence is that all the employer mandates, healthcare, insurance, and benefits come out of salaries. Healthcare costs alone likely account for a large chunk of the earnings gap.
The article is saying the kids whine because they really are getting less income and they have more debt.
The issue is they are getting less income for the same amount of work, and having to go vastly deeper into debt just to get the job in the first place.
There is a perception that Millennials are lazier and or less qualified than their predecessors. Having seen the quality of resumes coming in the door, I fully understand that conclusion even though it is incorrect. The reality is that 50 years ago, there were vast numbers of jobs that any idiot could do, and thanks to the new deal and unions, those jobs paid well enough to live on. Today, those jobs pay significantly less than they did, and there are fewer of them. Inflation adjusted, the jobs on the bottom pay 30% less than they did in 1970, and many of them are being lost to automation. Its small wonder no one wants those jobs. So now all Millennials, not just the qualified ones are submitting resumes in the "shotgun blast" approach to job hunting. There are plenty of jobs at the top of the spectrum that pay decent, but all the qualified people are already employed, and much as anyone would like to pretend, you just can't take someone with a 90 IQ and teach them to be a programmer. It just ain't gonna happen. Millennials are not any more or less capable, its just Millennials are the first generation where the inept ones don't exercise any restraint in applying for jobs they are absolutely unqualified for, so now you get buried in resumes from unqualified applicants because the same inept 10,000 are applying for every god-damn job. In the end, the same 10% that was always capable is still out there, just they are no longer a significant fraction of the applicants floating around, the 50% that used to settle for a job as a ditch digger, suddenly find themselves in a world where there are far fewer ditch digging jobs, and the jobs that are available, they don't have a prayer of being able to do.
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
I blame the party who put on the ballot the only person in the country that Trump could beat.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Oh look, someone complaining about how selfish and hedonistic the up and coming generation is. How original, it's not like every older generation has done that since the beginning of humanity. While you're at it why not take a stab at how some recent invention is ruining the new generation. Here's some previously used examples to get you going: smartphones, the internet, video games, television, radio, rock and roll, automobiles, jazz.
If they added in the underemployed and those who've just given up, I suspect the numbers would look a lot different.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I'll say it's mostly an R thing. There are some folks on the D side like Warren, Alan Greyson and (sorta kinda) Bernie (yeah, I know he's running as an I, but come on, he's so tight with the Ds the whole I thing is just to keep them on their toes). I haven't once seen anyone from the R side raise the issue of income inequality except to say it's either a) not real or b) the fault of anyone making less for not working hard enough. I'm open to being proven wrong, but I literally don't know of any. Maybe John Boehner, but he retired.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The myth of 'education' is a lie. It hasn't ever meant shit, and still doesn't. There is no secret formula, no automatic guarantees in life. Offer something of legitimate value in a way the truly benefits others, and you will find success. If you hope to coast on credentials, heaven help you and the debt you have accrued in your misguidance.
By and large the Boomers are leaving the work force, and it is that massive wealth retention that that generation holds that is at least partly to explain. These people are living longer than their parents, and creating a huge demographic bubble that is raising all sorts of costs. I can't really think of any population boom, at least in the West, quite like the Baby Boom. Maybe in the wake of the Black Death or something when populations rebounded, but the Baby Boom is a pretty unique demographic phenomenon.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Neither really existed in the extent that they do for current career entrants/re-entrants.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
If half of the safe space dwellers were to take half the energy they devote to figuring out how oppressed they are and instead put into learning a useful skill or trade like physical science, engineering, welding, or woodworking, then maybe there'd be more wealth created here so that we're not all dragged down by the dead weight of talking heads and grievance mongers demanding that we hire more degenerates and mental defectives at 15/hr to sit on their asses and preen in the proverbial mirrors of their facebook pages.
At least the education and degrees are all but guaranteed to be real on this side of the border.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Yes, indeed. When I left university, in 1976 with a UK degree in Computer Science (that's what it was called then), I was the first of a breed.
Employment was assured. I worked at Plessey for a few months, on the radar system for SE England (cool), then fled to the continent where I was paid quite astonishing amounts of money. First building a nuclear reactor monitor (even cooler), then a packet switching system for Holland (yup, that's the predecessor to our beloved Internet).
I made so much money [new sports car = 1 months disposable income] that after a few short years - ie when I was 25 - I took my money, bought an ocean going yacht and set off for a pretty decent adventure.
A couple of years later, I decided to stop (in USA), and ended up in Australia, still with enough money to pay for 1/3 of a house. (Houses were about 2-3 years salary at the time, really should have bought several).
So yup, I was definitely richer than today's poor kids, who get to leave university with huge debts, struggle to get an internship (otherwise known as slavery), then maybe, just maybe get a sensible job after a year of unpaid labour.
Then they might try to buy a house, now at 1 million dollars, 10 years salary (if you don't eat). Good luck with that. And have kids - can they afford to breed?
So they might have the internet, mobile phones, and great flat screen TVs, but they sure as heck aren't richer. I was way, way luckier with my timing.
"Cats like plain crisps"
I am continually surprised by those who are not knowledgeable about (or misattribute) the bigger macroeconomic factors that have driven our prosperity. The American economic miracle, the American dream, is largely a by-product of a brand new territory, open for expansion, a growing population whose material needs and wants grew to match the space for it. And where demand for services and goods made by those people exceeded the supply of labor to produce it. Not to mention 2-4 major wars and post-war booms that produced a huge demand for labor and the attendant growth of wages that comes with.
So for 6-7 generations, we came to associate American success with hard work, determination, education -- where I would argue that yes, while these factors have something to do with it, we were just mainly beneficiaries of a great macro situation. Factories, heavy equipment, washing machines, cars, steel -- these were the things we needed as a society that we would pay for, and they were produced here by labor that couldn't be substituted.
Now, we find that our post-war boom is over, the demographic curve has to support an increasing number of people who are no longer in their prime productive years, and a global market for the best / traditional jobs that has sapped the domestic demand for labor physically based in the US.
And so parents look at their kids and ask, "hey, why aren't you out there getting a job and using your skills like we did, after all that college and education?" Well, Dad, I can't get a job the way you did, because people aren't hiring hand over fist just because they need bodies to fill an assembly line because people want to buy washing machines as they move into their newly constructed 3 bedroom house in Levittown.
The harsh truth many are waking up to is that not everything grows forever, and perhaps this is the aftereffect of what happens when a society stabilizes, and other peoples/countries around the world start to experience the growth that we once had (and of course helped by the internet, trade, and information).
Taxes were higher during the post-war economic boom.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
One could argue that increased corporate tax rates and regulations have made it more difficult to start new businesses, and increases in health insurance costs (benefit packages are labor costs) thanks to Obamacare have made it more expensive to hire inexperienced workers. The government itself, i.e. The Democrat platform itself, is to blame.
Who knew that when you make it harder to run businesses, fewer people get employed (forcing them into part time work) and the average wage goes down?
You got modded to oblivion, but I think that's an insightful post. It suggests an alternate explanation without rancour.
We need to be able to say "the other side did this" without assigning blame and getting into name calling. I don't care what polarity (left or the right) the position is, so long as it's to our benefit.
Looking at your post, I note that the Democrats did, indeed give us Obamacare, it was widely advertised as being a good thing, and it's widely viewed as being a problem at this point in time.
Some ACA aspects were good - getting everyone insured and eliminating "pre-existing conditions" clauses among them - but the end result was a fiscal runaway that's causing a lot of grief among the people.
I note that Republicans (house *and* senate) have already voted to repeal the ACA without having a replacement on hand, and that will probably mean that we go back to pre-existing conditions, dropping coverage after an accident, and insurance companies charging whatever the hell they want.
Which is not at all a good thing, right or left.
Trump said he wanted to get rid of Obamacare and replace it, but he specifically said he wanted the replacement in place *first*. So now we're left to trust that he will do the right thing when the bill comes to his desk. That'll be a good test of his character. If he dumps Obamacare without a replacement and a lot of people lose insurance because of it, it would be a betrayal of our trust.
We really need to fix healthcare in this country. We're paying 6x as much as other countries, and only getting 3rd world care for it.
It's only wealth retention when it can be converted to other assets. We're heading for another housing bubble bust as boomers try to sell their homes to the next generation who just doesn't have the money to purchase that particular asset, even at zero interest 30 year mortgages. Those assets will start depreciating damn fast over the next 15-20 years.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Whether you believe globalization is good or bad, the free movement of capital and work, wages will stagnate or go down (at least in the near to mid term).
In Bill Clinton's Global Challenges speech at Yale is, perhaps, one of the clearest articulations of the goal of achieving an integrated global community characterized by "shared responsibilities, shared benefits, and shared values." If the goal is to "bring economic opportunity to the 50 per cent of the globe's population which lives on $2 a day or less" then that will involve capital flowing from wealthy countries to less-developed countries.
I think the vision is that the money supply would grow fast enough to minimize or eliminate the impact of the capital outflow. Unfortunately, the evidence shows that the bet did not pay off.
I just got done saying something (not really explaining) that education is lousy in general at this YouTube discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Ha! We as a planet are doing very little in comparison to what we could be doing. That being the case, I hardly care to give any respect to any of our government partisans from time immemorial! War... do you really think that is a great way of handling things? Just one glaring example.
There's no way he can earn respect. Nor can anyone else for that matter, except for those actively working to break us free from the shenanigans we call society. The presidency is a sham post for a sham way of doing things called countries, in a sham world providing little education.
I'm not sure why you doubt that PeOTUS will help. It's pretty clear from his public history that he is part of the problem. That isn't unusual. All of the candidates were part of the problem one way or another. We simply choose the least best one.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
And the part time employment rate skyrocketed under the ACA.
But I don't expect them to back it up with actions. Mainly I don't expect then to end visa abuse. They can't bring back manufacturing. There's too much automation. Bringing it back just means a few dozen engineers...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
People voted anger, not intelligence.
Indeed. They let themselves believe the lies, because then they could just be angry at others and never even start to find fault with themselves. Hence absolutely nothing will get better. If people stop striving to better themselves, then a country dies. Whether that is because they have stopped to realize that in the end it is up to them and demanding things never has made them magically materialize, or whether it is because improving their education and skills does not pay off anymore, because the rich have taken over and are preventing most others from getting anywhere. The sad thing is that the people that voted for Trump are mostly the same people that would have badly needed an entirely different candidate.
Now, a large part of the reason Trump got into power is of course the really bad alternative. But it is highly telling of the overall failure of society that these two really bad candidates ever got to be candidates. And it is highly telling who actually expects Trump to make things better for them, despite extreme indicators to the contrary. The average person understands almost nothing. Add bad education, arrogance and a culture of blaming it on others and you have a catastrophe in progress.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Not really. There are PhDs in biosciences who are doing similar things right now, and of course other areas.
The fact of the matter, which you forgot to mention, is that that is perfect possible for the 0.01% who happen to fall on the right path.
Of course it never happens for the average, because, quite obviously, it cannot.
And anyone who cannot understand that, wont be part of those 0.01% (or top 1%, or probably 10%..) sorry.
The reality is that 50 years ago, there were vast numbers of jobs that any idiot could do, and thanks to the new deal and unions, those jobs paid well enough to live on.
Well yes. Society has failed to adjust sufficiently to changes circumstances. The only ones to blame for that are the individuals that have failed to realize that however. It is not a surprise in any way that modern society requires far more insight, education and flexibility from its members than it used to. It is what was predicted and did constantly happen since the start of the industrial age. It was extremely obvious. Yet droves of people chose to be intellectually lazy and just expected to float on hard work by others. That does not work when more than a smaller minority does it. What it does though, is that it creates a lower-class of people that will never get anywhere in life. A lower-class that has absolutely no understanding that, as a class (not individually), it created its current situation by itself. And a class that falls for the first demagogue that tells it that others are at fault.
Now Trump cannot actually make things much worse or much better. He has far less influence on things than he thinks and massively less influence than he claims to have. The processes that can make things better or worse are running in the multiple decades for significant changes. The only thing Trump can to is prevent the stupid from seeing reality for a few more years and that delays fixing anything for those additional years, making the lower-class just a bit larger and the problem just a bit less solvable. I do believe however that Hillary would have done just the same, likely with a little less catering to the stupid, the angry and the arrogant. The difference would not have mattered much. The US presidential election was lost for basically everybody as soon as the candidates were selected.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
That's the half glass full interpretation I take it. A lot of companies whittled down their workforce to part time because ACA fines/fees/taxes don't apply, a LOT of companies, pretty much all small businesses had to lay off or reduce work hours just to avoid the taxes. Sure it gave Obama a very nice 'lowest unemployment' number but all these people got screwed over big just to fix the numbers.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Well, I am an Eloi, but I feel for you people...
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
The worth of the work-hour has gone down dramatically. Ever heard of "working poor"? That class of people is growing and it is a really sad thing.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
The world is getting more complicated. This has been a steady process since industrialization started. Only the truly insight-less manage to ignore that.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I find it curious that asians are often omitted in such articles.
I'm convinced that it is partly because they had realistic expectations and took jobs that there was a demand for. I know very few people from my parents generation who had non-jobs, they did things like work in a trade like construction or in a factory. They had no expectation of being a sports phycologist or new media analyst, but most of the young people I know have no expectation of doing a real job. With ever increasing population we see massive migration of people to do these jobs from economically disadvantaged countries because nobody wants to do those jobs. We end up with 1000 young people after the same non-job. I am surprised that as many of them find employment as they do to be fair.
Whites still earn dramatically more than Blacks and Latinos, reflecting the legacy of discrimination for jobs, education and housing.
Random reminders of racism, often of dubious intellectual merit, randomly injected into articles not about racism. I don't think it's an evil tinfoil hat conspiracy so much as lefties overcompensating in their horror of the Trump phenomenon and thinking that the proper solution is to start subtly injecting their opinions everywhere, but it's starting to rub me the wrong way. And I'm afraid it'll backfire again, and once again wind up operating in exactly the opposite direction as intended (making racism more acceptable.) So, let's not let this shit slide any more:
1. The discrimination against Blacks did obviously have and still has a profound effect on their socioeconomic status, although it is ostrichlike head in the sand behavior to casually imply that other factors do not exist. In particular, I suspect that many black subcultures, which were indeed originally formed as a direct result of racism, nonetheless will not be found to promote such as academic achievement to the same extent as their white counterparts. This should not be any more controversial to suggest than it is to suggest that Han Chinese, Japanese, and Ashkenazi Jewish subcultures probably tend to promote academic achievement to a greater extent than most white subcultures. This has nothing to do with genetics.
2. The casual accusation that discrimination against Latinos is entirely or primarily responsible for their lower average socioeconomic status is far more contentious. First off, all of the objections from #1 apply here. Additionally, unlike black people, tens of millions of them have only been here for a generation or two, and those ancestors did not arrive on slave ships. Their socioeconomic status is thus quite heavily influenced by how poor they were when they (or their parents, or grandparents) arrived from Latin America, and it is additionally negatively affected by the fact that 11 million of them arrived here illegally, meaning that they face significant employment barriers that are not the result of discrimination, but rather are a result of their conscious decision to break the law[1]. The number of people who do not yet speak English fluently (a minority, to be fair) is also very relevant to the average socioeconomic outcome and the deleterious effects this has on job-hunting is not primarily a result of racism.
There are, of course, some far-left people who will deny both of these latter points and insist any limits or barriers to immigration is inherently racist and so is any insistence on a shared common language as a prerequisite for citizenship (without which the melting pot cannot function and over time the society and nation will inevitably fracture along ethnic lines, as history has repeatedly showed.) If you want to have that debate, sure, let's have that discussion some time. I'm actually for increased legal immigration overall, with a few caveats about things that need to be fixed first.
But cut it out with the snarky attempts at cultural mind control with these one-line assertions. You're not helping. You're simply feeding the right and alt-right narratives of the biased and lying mainstream media and mainstream academia. It's really, really hard to continue pushing back against the alt-right when you keep ensuring that ~30% of what they say is more or less correct.
1. I don't say they're evil people for doing so, just that it's not some kind of big secret that it's going to be harder getting a job if you're not here legally, and the primary responsibility for that outcome must therefore fall on their shoulders.
It's a point I've given a great deal of thought to - in my case, for Brexit.
imho, there's an argument for "People did consider 'things may get worse, faster'", with a view to "so maybe we can actually get these issues addressed".
Sometimes it's got to get worse before it gets better.
What other major economic forces could account for this?
That one's easy. 1989/1990 also marks the end of the only large-scale, competing economic system to capitalism: socialism. Before, the stakeholders of capitalism had to prove that the masses benefit from it. This restriction is gone. Unrestricted capitalism benetfis capital, not people.
THE WAGE GAP IS A MYTH!!!
It feels more like 30~50%. But I'm sure trickle-down turbo-inequality will start to pay off for for the middle and lower classes any day now.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
It would be interesting to see a whole life estimate, something that takes into account (perhaps) reduced burdens on Milllenials for caring for aging parents if the parents are so rich or increased contributions from parents towards education healthcare or housing. I don't see boomers keeping in the money away from their kids to the same degree that the top 1% keep the money away from the lower 99%.
It would also be good to see this in a global context rather than just for a small geographic area
This shouldn't be cast as boomers vs millenials, if society were working properly we would all live to see our children prosper more than we did and not just inside some arbitrary historical border, but for everyone
Nullius in verba
No argument or data is given for this claim.
This is one of the things that we mean, when we say the media is biased.
Somebody's irrelevent personal opinion is given as the supposed cause for a thing.
As if it's proven or self-evident that discrimination is still rampant today and the reason for a purported wage difference.
Two generations without a real increase in income
GenX: So ignored we don't even come up in a rant on a message board.
Part of me wants to think that Trump is purposely setting himself up to fail. Why would he do this? Because if he, with all of his money and influence, can fail, maybe we as a nation will see that money does not, and should not, equal "right", and will finally vote for change.
Of course, then the rational side of me speaks up to remind that this would be the most un-Trump thing ever and that he's going to fail despite his best efforts. We're fucked.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Two generations without a real increase in income
GenX: So ignored we don't even come up in a rant on a message board.
I'm referring to chronological generations - 25 year periods. The last 50 years most certainly covers GenX. Remember, GenX, GenY, Millennials, that's all just marketspeak concocted by snake oil salesmen in pursuit of unicorns. After all, if they can divide people into artificial groups, they can conquer them more easily.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I'm referring to chronological generations - 25 year periods
Millennials are the last ~20. GenX is the ~25 before that. Boomers are the ~25 before that.
The last 50 years most certainly covers GenX
The "Boomer" generation is generally considered people born before 1964. 1964 is 52 years ago. Boomers are outside your "last 50 years" threshold.
So yes, you did skip GenX.
that's all just marketspeak concocted by snake oil salesmen in pursuit of unicorns. After all, if they can divide people into artificial groups, they can conquer them more easily.
Even easier when the people supposedly railing against that ignore 25 years worth of people.
and how he got our Hawks under control he damn well did deserve that prize. A lot of Americans wanted blood and he calmed that crap the hell down and averted Iraq II (electric boogalo).
Obama has also done a metric ton of diplomacy that doesn't make the news because it's not obvious and it's not sexy. See, that's the trouble with Obama. He's a great compromiser. He's fantastic at making the best of a horrible situation. But that kinda patchwork never makes people feel good. They'd rather the whole thing go to hell and then get cleaned up. That's much more cathartic. It's also a big part of what got us Trump...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The boomers are still alive - and they too have suffered income declines in the last 50 years. Many are currently living in poverty, with no prospect of ever getting out of it. Imagine you're a senior citizen and your pitance is still being garnisheed for student loans ... they should have declared bankruptcy when it would have cleared those loans, instead of doing the right thing. The negative impact on their health from that debt overhang and reduced income is going to end up costing taxpayers more in increased health care costs than if the loan had just been written off.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
When the economy crashed in 2008 everybody took a massive pay cut. They were told this was necessary to keep them employed (nevermind that all the loses were paper. It's not like we had a war or something). The economy recovered in about 4 years, but the rich got all gains from that recovery.
During the boomer's time the government stepped in and spread wealth around. Taxes were high. 90% top marginal high. And there weren't a lot of tax havens. That meant you had to use it or lose it. The rich are siting on 2 _trillion_ dollars in just cash. Nevermind what they've socked away by just buying crap (I"m in the market for a home and I'm having to compete with Chinese investors looking to hide money from their government...).
We just handed the entire economy over to the 1%. The boomers didn't have that. They fought in WWII so they had a sense of entitlement. And that's exactly why the rich have been pushing a bullshit narrative that millennials are entitled pricks. It's to chip away at their sense of entitlement and stop them from questioning their crummy lot.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
but I'm starting to think violence is.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
and is horrifically arrogant. She didn't campaign in the rust belt because she took it for granted that no sane person would vote Trump. Her voters (Young people, Blacks and Latinos) stayed home. The 538 blog has a nice analysis of all this.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It was a move by the Nobel committee to,try to influence him to act in a certain way.
They do it to someone nearly every year that doesn't "deserve it" yet.
If it was for actual actions it would have been given to Arafat and Begin after Israel and Palestine were at peace - but it's an encouragement award instead of really being a "Peace Prize". That all sounds a bit slimy in comparison to their awards for Physics etc but maybe we're just translating the award name wrong.
To sum up - he deserved it just as much or more than Arafat did.
I like how you respond to forgetting about GenX by saying how hard it is to be a Boomer.
I like how you respond to forgetting about GenX by saying how hard it is to be a Boomer.
I did no such thing. GenX is not a generation. Neither is GenY, or the boomers, or the millennials. These are all marketing bullshit terms. A generation is the time between the birth of a child and the birth of that child's children.
You need to step out of your post-reality fake news advertising-driven bubble, because no matter how much you want to believe otherwise, a generation is not what you claim it it. It's based on biological reproduction, not new-speak.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
If so, the committee was incredibly stupid. "I've already gotten the prize, so everything I want to do must be great." Given Obama's narcissistic inability to understand that he can make mistakes, no other outcome was possible.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
GenX is not a generation
That's hilarious, that's the way we've always been treated. It's OK with me, fits my personality style to be mostly invisible. The stealth generation.
Our parents didn't pay any attention to us either. It was great.
Baby boomers are not a generation either. Or did you miss that part when I said that a generation is the length of time between the birth of a child and the birth of that child's children. A generation is simply a unit of time. It has always been used that way.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
You could think that way or you could consider that the prize actually doesn't mean what you (and most people) think it means and the committee have different aims to what you think they are.
It's more of a political statement by the committee, about what the committee likes, than rewarding anything that has actually been done yet.
I thought pointing out that Arafat got the award should make it more clear. Surely you are old enough to have heard of Arafat? Do you really think he deserved something called a "peace prize" if it really was actually a "peace prize"? The perceived irony of a warmonger winning the "peace prize" happens probably around every three to five years.
It's just a sideshow to the real awards for Physics etc anyway.
I did no such thing. GenX is not a generation. Neither is GenY, or the boomers, or the millennials. These are all marketing bullshit terms. A generation is the time between the birth of a child and the birth of that child's children.
Yet you keep talking about Boomers as if they are a generation.
Gee, it's almost like you're still searching for a way out of your gaffe instead of just saying "Oh yeah, GenX too".
Well I got my Computer Science degree during the middle of the dot-com craze, and graduated in 2000, just prior to the entire mess poping like the rest of my dreams... That said, I think I've done alright, but not the life of grandeur I thought might be headed my way... Graduating a couple years earlier might have been a different story.
At any rate, all you have to look at for this trend in average salary is what percentage of the workforce was unionized then VS now. I bet if you had the statistics to remove both salaries from the average equation (the 60% then, and probably the 10% now), the difference might not be so alarming. Unions have taken a beating the last 20 years or so and wages reflect this.
It's only wealth retention when it can be converted to other assets. We're heading for another housing bubble bust as boomers try to sell their homes to the next generation who just doesn't have the money to purchase that particular asset, even at zero interest 30 year mortgages. Those assets will start depreciating damn fast over the next 15-20 years.
I'd say it's already happening. That's literally what those voters that switched sides in places like Ohio were saying "Our houses aren't appreciating in value and our children can't buy them still." There is still growing housing markets, but they are in the urban centers where the jobs and economy are. Small town, or even small city USA where they used to do manufacturing just isn't there anymore. Places like NYC, SF, and Seattle have already forced out boomers with gentrification. My boss has said he couldn't even pay the tax on the house he grew up in because it's value has gone up so high. I've looked back at the housing market where I grew up, flyover state town, and I could buy a house there outright just by writing a check. I could buy ten for what I bought a house for. Now the housing in the hot coastal cities may depreciate also in the next 15-20 years, but it won't be because of the boomers selling.
You've failed to refute anything.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.