Without taxes, there would be nobody to defend your legal right.
Not entirely true. There is the 2nd amendment which gives you the means to defend your legal rights from individual agitators to government tyranny.
Note* I am not making the argument that all taxes are theft or w/e just that one of the legal rights you have is self defense.
I would also say it is a stretch to say that taxes pay for the concept of legal rights. Rights do not come from the government and their application are the extremes of government policy and individual action. Sure, certain rights have a monetary cost like the right of a fair trial i.e. the costs of a lawyer. But the government exists to protect those rights and its citizens. Taxes are an agreement between two parts of society to help facilitate the goals of the government one of which (the most important) is to protect the rights of citizens.
Hey, don't shame retards you ablelist scum! Retards are capable of rational (albeit limited) thought just like everyone else.
I see you like to move goal posts. My guess is you like to feel morally superior in these kind of conversations. Which is why you would use such strong language like "enemies". First, it was they weren't people because enemies. Now it's they are people just not equal because of disagreement and I am all knowing? Just remember I pointed out an example where someone was being a racist in the democratic party and trying to expand social justice political power and ideology which is a dangerous ideology. I am literally making the argument that you should not judge people by their skin color and that justice should be blind.
Here, let me share with you a few lessons from history. It is a bad idea to judge people by their skin color and restrict access to various institutions and political organizations purely on arbitrary characteristics such as race. Another one; segregation does not work and does not promote equal opportunity. If you want an even older lesson, the sins of the father are not the sins of the son; the son of a thief is not a thief until proven.
Equal outcome is a bad thing. Judging people on race is a bad thing. Shutting down white people because "white privilege" is a bad thing. People forgetting those lessons and the lessons that made western culture a good thing are stupid because they don't know history and they ignore reality.
I don't know everything but I know dangerous rhetoric when I hear it. Shaming white people for being white is dangerous even if it is the fad from media and social justice cliques. Shutting down political disagreement with claims of *isms and *ists is a bad thing. Redefining justice to not be blind is dangerous. Blaming the past on people that did nothing wrong is dangerous.
How far do I have to go to explain to you why people like Sally Brown are stupid and dangerous?
The ads are absolute cancer. I never realized how bad TV ads were until I would visit the in-laws and sit down to watch whatever was on to pass the evening by. Holy shit. They hit all the right buttons to get my attention or to get me to stare at the screen and I felt stupid after a set of commercials. I don't know what it is but I know I don't want it in my life.
How would this change with Clinton as potus? America would still be "dumbing down" because MIT Technology Review would still be technologically stupid using buzzwords. Thanks for injecting politics where it has not place.
Good gravy get over it already. Politics does not have to be apart of every conversation. It gets old in topics that has nothing to do with politics. This is coming from someone that loves political conversations (yes am masochist leave me alone).
You may not have been influenced but did you not think there was something strange about the floods of anti-Clinton messages, not least on this site?
No more than I saw anti-Trump and anti-Sanders (general election and primary election) messages paraded everywhere from Correct The Record. I was even accused of being a Russian troll when I posted my opinions on Clinton (negative). Everyone is trying to convince you of something. Why is this any different?
While I am no fan of the Don he does deserve and is entitled to be president because he won the contest(s) that decided who is deserving and entitled to hold that position. That contest does not pick the best and brightest because democracy isn't about picking the best and brightest. While that isn't a great thing it is still the best thing we have for government.
According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security report, Russia's goals were to "undermine public faith" in the US democratic process and "denigrate" his Democrat opponent Hillary Clinton, harming her electability and potential presidency. "We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election." http://www.bbc.com/news/world-... [bbc.com]
This is a fair assessment and while I can agree with the concept, there is one thing that really bugs me about this. It assumes that the average US voter is so pathetically inept, that bad stories about a political (who had some of the worst favorably ratings even before the election!) some how translates into undermining public faith in the democratic process. Just... no.
Clinton was hated long before the 2016 election. She had a lot of baggage and any party revealing the details of that baggage no more undermines faith in the democratic process than any other leak of government personnel and processes.
Did revealing Anthony Weiner's digital escapades undermine the faith in the democratic process in NY? Why would it be different for Clinton? There have been scandals since there has been politicians and to assume that some bad press will up end centuries of democracy in this country is laughable. Clinton was a terrible candidate who dug her own shitty campaign.
Yes, it is illegal to hack the DNC, a private company, just like it was illegal to hack Ashley Madison. The later did not undermine the institutions that were caught up because of work emails found in those hacks and why would it? The people involved were shitty and we found out the details of their shittiness but that does not translate to a complete distrust and lack of faith to the institutions involved. Especially institutions that have survived for centuries and far worse than airing of bad laundry.
I participated in all parts of the election season. I was not influenced by Russia anymore than the BBC stating how bad Trump was/is. I saw both candidates and I consumed as much information as I could about both for the topics that concerned me as an American. Clinton's actions, rhetoric, and campaign hurt her electability. She was a poor candidate who ran a poor campaign with a poor message. No one is to blame but her for that.
Enemies? That is quite strong. I think you use that word as it is commonly used by progressives and SJW types which is sad because that is how you get to violence. I don't have enemies and I don't hate people I disagree with. I understand they are people albeit retarded and dangerous. How easy is it to justify violence to a group you harbor resentment? Not much. No thank you. I do not flirt with that totalitarian bullshit.
Also, white privileged is bullshit. I understand exactly what it is and it is retarded.
why have courts if you do not demand justice from them?
Because you are missing the point that justice is blind. "Demand justice" for who? in what case? for what law? What is the just process for changing a law? The people will be forced to follow the law and they vote for the legislature that write the laws.
You do not have justice if a judge has an agenda before seeing the facts of the case. Nor do you have justice if a judge does the job of the peoples representatives.
Is it not just to allow the elected legislature write the laws the people want? If so, then it is also just that any judge must not be an activist judge by changing the law to fit their definition of "justice" because you are not being just to the people and the legislature they elected for the intent of writing the law.
Justice cannot be blind if you are willing to have judges rewrite the laws to their prejudices.
Some are elected it just depends on the state. I know that all federal judges are not elected. I think all state supreme justices are not elected (although they could be). After that it is all over the place and it depends on the state.
Why are you so desperately trying to blame the plight of the younger generation on environmental issues?
There is a cost to everything and a lot of historical economic power was externalized to the environment. There will always be a cost with any source of energy or resource commoditization.
Probably legit for all of US history though. I think he's talking about the New Deal, the economic mobilization for WWII, and the top marginal tax brackets being north of 70% to help pay for it. All that happened during the greatest generation and they beat their depression and whooped the nazis. Loooots of money moved around, the "wealth transfer" he's talking about. That, and since all the previous great powers had the shit kicked out of them, helped America rise to the status of super-power. Times were good and prosperous. It set the stage for the Baby Boomers. That's the world you grew up in and inherited. Times were also pretty good when America became the sole super-power after the collapse of the soviets. That's my childhood. Wish that had lasted, but workers just aren't needed in the new economy. Not highschool grads anyway like when you were 18.
How old do you think I am? Hint: am millennial.
I don't know specifically what he is talking about but I will address what you say and not speculate on MightyMartians thoughts however fun that maybe. Yes, war happened and to the victor go the spoils. Those spoils did propel the US to be a superpower. So what? How does that help me or any young person get a job today? How does that help anyone anywhere trying anything to better their circumstance?
All good things must come to an end and those good times ended. We are in a time of economic uncertainty for a variety of technological and sociological reasons. I think no one alive can predict what the future will bring. The past can help understand the present but it cannot predict the future. Pointing the finger at Boomers will not help you prepare for the restructured economy. You can argue about specific solutions to help people in that new economy and I would be glad to do that but the moment it becomes "but but Boomers had it better!" I lose respect for you and your "solutions". Call me callous. Call me cold. I don't care because I am more interested in ideas that can benefit society and the individual than bear some collective guilt or resentment because "muh boomers".
So it means (more) kids these days need a (useful) degree. OH LOOK! That's getting really fucking expensive. Sucks to be them. It's like they're not really that well off or something. We've come full circle back to the article.
What is the new reading, writing, and arithmetic of the 21st century? If there are skills that are necessary for an average citizen to participate in the global economy, there is already an institution of learning that is provided by that government. High school. It would be an easier sell to say "fix high school to better accommodate the restructured economy and promote trade schools" than to say free college for every snow flake to get a gender studies who then then protests free speech and the very society that bore them that entitled spoiled life.
I would have more sympathy for college education funding if colleges were not producing what appears to be indoctrinated cultural maxists. I have seen too many examples of universities and students decrying and working against the freedoms and liberties this nation was built on that too many people have died to gain and protect.
Yes, it has been tradition that the children have a better future than their parents and millennials are the first to not get that. There are a lot of economic reasons for that beyond college being expensive.
People acting in their self interest is not a bad thing. Every generation has their own challenges to overcome. Bemoaning another generation is not how you overcome your challenges of your time.
yes... #notall. But anti-liberal/anti-west is a common theme with younger students in university across the west. remember #notall the next time you bemoan any group, ya? Like your troll post of demographic bemoanment which started this as you described people that voted differently than you as a "bunch of self-entitled arseholes". #notall.
You can argue a better system all day but considering what you said was: "now fuck off and give me my cheap health care!" when Obamacare placed much of the financial burden on young people I find rich. Obama was supported by lots o young people as was his wannabe-successor. Don't bitch about shooting yourself in the foot.
"give me my cheap health care" Does that mean you oppose Obamacare? After all, it is funded by student loan debt interest and young healthy individuals.
I would have more sympathy if millennials weren't going around burning "free speech" signs on university campus bitching about how expensive university and how oppressed they are because someone in STEM makes more money.
I am a millennial and no generalization like that bother me because it doesn't apply to me. If your kids aren't lazy whiners and they are trying to better themselves by taking advantage of the opportunities available to them, they and you shouldn't care what the generalization is either.
Tell me more about crime rates. Or threat of nuclear war. Or removal of lead from our environment. Or longer life expectancy. Or lower infant mortality. Or better access to more advanced health care. Or lower poverty rates. Or high education rates.
The only uncertainty is the economy and that has always been true for every generation not embroiled in existential war. Like the 70's uncertainty of stagflation. Or the oil shock. Or. or. or. The actors are different but the stage is the same.
What is not better that hasn't been true for any other previous generation?
Yes and get off my lawn you kids. Damn kids and their rock n roll. This new generation will be the end! (tm).
Every parent wants their kids to have a better life. When does that ideal reach a point where that cannot be achieved wholesale without destruction to the environment? What cost are you willing to pay to get yours?
Largest wealth transfer in human history? Stop the hyperbole and stop the collective guilt. I am responsible for me and my actions.
unskilled Babyboomer could literally walk into a high paying unskilled job
So what? The global economy is more competitive. What is true for some is not true for others. That is not an excuse to complain about being the most well off and most spoiled generation in history.
their fathers and grandfathers, who did have to work their fucking asses
Hard work is a good life lesson. I learned a lot of good life lessons from my father that resulted in my relative success (honestly not that successful just enough to pay off student loans and have a mortgage). But I don't live in an expensive city or state so is affordable.
Babyboomers are the luckiest human beings
You are too resentful to see anything clearly. Stop blaming and resenting others for their success or luck when you have opportunity and freedom to change your circumstances.
Wages are down for a number of reasons that we readily see on/.. Such as automation, globalization, immigration, etc. There are a number of policies that have been tried some successful some not. No generation gets a picture perfect setting for life. Complaining because someone else had it better is not a good idea to fix your problems.
property prices
Vote with your feet. The US is a very big place.
college debt
And that college debt increased the availability of college education. With increased demand you have an increased supply. Yes, deregulation made it so lenders do not bear the risks and all risk is put on the students but that means more responsibility in the choices a student makes. If you get a degree that is over priced and under valued, you shouldn't blame boomers for getting that degree.
Forgive me if I sound callous, but I started college in 2005. The same year the student loan industry was deregulated. No one knew exactly what would happen with that policy change and "get a college education or else burger flipper" was the mantra. I still have 30k in student loan debt from a variety of predatory practices that I was too young and care and too naive to understand. All the shit from the studies and reports about how bad student loans are or how bad diploma mills are are because of those first few classes that were the test subjects like me. I was apart of that and everyone else learned from those first few years that "college is overpriced, not for everyone, don't take student loans out, don't go to University of Phoenix". My only saving grace was getting a degree in STEM.
I don't like talking about my personal experience online because it doesn't matter to any argument but its personal for me (losing my job and having Sally Mae ask me how much money is in my account and that I should beg my family to pay off interest accrued that month isn't a happy moment for me). I would love to just hand wave it away but even after all that I still don't think college should be free.
your far too wealthy to understand what most Gen. Y'ers
lol, tell that to my bank account because it isn't what you think it is. My liability far FAR exceeds my assets. Only recently have I had some financial freedom because I have been adamant about paying off my debt because I understood I have no financial future with student loans. Not even Social Security or 401k retirement.
I am where I am because of choices I made and because my father taught me valuable lessons in life.
baby boomer in disguise.
Thanks. I'll take that as a compliment because of the respect I have for my parents.
Very true. I probably should have only limited that to masters because that is less likely to be paid for and many people do pay out of pocket for it. I almost did. (I thought it was a good idea to get a masters directly after but after I saw price tag figured I would try and get employer to pay).
Slashdot Mirror
Without taxes, there would be nobody to defend your legal right.
Not entirely true. There is the 2nd amendment which gives you the means to defend your legal rights from individual agitators to government tyranny.
Note* I am not making the argument that all taxes are theft or w/e just that one of the legal rights you have is self defense.
I would also say it is a stretch to say that taxes pay for the concept of legal rights. Rights do not come from the government and their application are the extremes of government policy and individual action. Sure, certain rights have a monetary cost like the right of a fair trial i.e. the costs of a lawyer. But the government exists to protect those rights and its citizens. Taxes are an agreement between two parts of society to help facilitate the goals of the government one of which (the most important) is to protect the rights of citizens.
Hey, don't shame retards you ablelist scum! Retards are capable of rational (albeit limited) thought just like everyone else.
I see you like to move goal posts. My guess is you like to feel morally superior in these kind of conversations. Which is why you would use such strong language like "enemies". First, it was they weren't people because enemies. Now it's they are people just not equal because of disagreement and I am all knowing? Just remember I pointed out an example where someone was being a racist in the democratic party and trying to expand social justice political power and ideology which is a dangerous ideology. I am literally making the argument that you should not judge people by their skin color and that justice should be blind.
Here, let me share with you a few lessons from history. It is a bad idea to judge people by their skin color and restrict access to various institutions and political organizations purely on arbitrary characteristics such as race. Another one; segregation does not work and does not promote equal opportunity. If you want an even older lesson, the sins of the father are not the sins of the son; the son of a thief is not a thief until proven.
Equal outcome is a bad thing. Judging people on race is a bad thing. Shutting down white people because "white privilege" is a bad thing. People forgetting those lessons and the lessons that made western culture a good thing are stupid because they don't know history and they ignore reality.
I don't know everything but I know dangerous rhetoric when I hear it. Shaming white people for being white is dangerous even if it is the fad from media and social justice cliques. Shutting down political disagreement with claims of *isms and *ists is a bad thing. Redefining justice to not be blind is dangerous. Blaming the past on people that did nothing wrong is dangerous.
How far do I have to go to explain to you why people like Sally Brown are stupid and dangerous?
The ads are absolute cancer. I never realized how bad TV ads were until I would visit the in-laws and sit down to watch whatever was on to pass the evening by. Holy shit. They hit all the right buttons to get my attention or to get me to stare at the screen and I felt stupid after a set of commercials. I don't know what it is but I know I don't want it in my life.
Shhh... Don't let my boss find out!
How would this change with Clinton as potus? America would still be "dumbing down" because MIT Technology Review would still be technologically stupid using buzzwords. Thanks for injecting politics where it has not place.
Good gravy get over it already. Politics does not have to be apart of every conversation. It gets old in topics that has nothing to do with politics. This is coming from someone that loves political conversations (yes am masochist leave me alone).
You may not have been influenced but did you not think there was something strange about the floods of anti-Clinton messages, not least on this site?
No more than I saw anti-Trump and anti-Sanders (general election and primary election) messages paraded everywhere from Correct The Record. I was even accused of being a Russian troll when I posted my opinions on Clinton (negative). Everyone is trying to convince you of something. Why is this any different?
Don't deserve to be president?
While I am no fan of the Don he does deserve and is entitled to be president because he won the contest(s) that decided who is deserving and entitled to hold that position. That contest does not pick the best and brightest because democracy isn't about picking the best and brightest. While that isn't a great thing it is still the best thing we have for government.
According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security report, Russia's goals were to "undermine public faith" in the US democratic process and "denigrate" his Democrat opponent Hillary Clinton, harming her electability and potential presidency. "We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election." http://www.bbc.com/news/world-... [bbc.com]
This is a fair assessment and while I can agree with the concept, there is one thing that really bugs me about this. It assumes that the average US voter is so pathetically inept, that bad stories about a political (who had some of the worst favorably ratings even before the election!) some how translates into undermining public faith in the democratic process. Just... no.
Clinton was hated long before the 2016 election. She had a lot of baggage and any party revealing the details of that baggage no more undermines faith in the democratic process than any other leak of government personnel and processes.
Did revealing Anthony Weiner's digital escapades undermine the faith in the democratic process in NY? Why would it be different for Clinton? There have been scandals since there has been politicians and to assume that some bad press will up end centuries of democracy in this country is laughable. Clinton was a terrible candidate who dug her own shitty campaign.
Yes, it is illegal to hack the DNC, a private company, just like it was illegal to hack Ashley Madison. The later did not undermine the institutions that were caught up because of work emails found in those hacks and why would it? The people involved were shitty and we found out the details of their shittiness but that does not translate to a complete distrust and lack of faith to the institutions involved. Especially institutions that have survived for centuries and far worse than airing of bad laundry.
I participated in all parts of the election season. I was not influenced by Russia anymore than the BBC stating how bad Trump was/is. I saw both candidates and I consumed as much information as I could about both for the topics that concerned me as an American. Clinton's actions, rhetoric, and campaign hurt her electability. She was a poor candidate who ran a poor campaign with a poor message. No one is to blame but her for that.
Enemies? That is quite strong. I think you use that word as it is commonly used by progressives and SJW types which is sad because that is how you get to violence. I don't have enemies and I don't hate people I disagree with. I understand they are people albeit retarded and dangerous. How easy is it to justify violence to a group you harbor resentment? Not much. No thank you. I do not flirt with that totalitarian bullshit.
Also, white privileged is bullshit. I understand exactly what it is and it is retarded.
Why do you dislike the senate? The same reasons for the Senate in the Congress is the same reason for the Electoral College in the Executive.
wait. how would hillary be president if elections have consequences and Trump won fair and square?
I am still trying to figure out what the difference is between "colored people" and "people of color".
Or you have real world examples like the head of the Idaho Democratic party that stated un-ironically: "shut other white people down".
Perhaps you should step outside of your echo chamber.
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
Every week is the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
Thank you. I wasn't sure. I figured that the state could have elected supreme justices but I hadn't heard of any specific example.
why have courts if you do not demand justice from them?
Because you are missing the point that justice is blind. "Demand justice" for who? in what case? for what law? What is the just process for changing a law? The people will be forced to follow the law and they vote for the legislature that write the laws.
You do not have justice if a judge has an agenda before seeing the facts of the case. Nor do you have justice if a judge does the job of the peoples representatives.
Is it not just to allow the elected legislature write the laws the people want? If so, then it is also just that any judge must not be an activist judge by changing the law to fit their definition of "justice" because you are not being just to the people and the legislature they elected for the intent of writing the law.
Justice cannot be blind if you are willing to have judges rewrite the laws to their prejudices.
Some are elected it just depends on the state. I know that all federal judges are not elected. I think all state supreme justices are not elected (although they could be). After that it is all over the place and it depends on the state.
Why are you so desperately trying to blame the plight of the younger generation on environmental issues?
There is a cost to everything and a lot of historical economic power was externalized to the environment. There will always be a cost with any source of energy or resource commoditization.
Probably legit for all of US history though. I think he's talking about the New Deal, the economic mobilization for WWII, and the top marginal tax brackets being north of 70% to help pay for it. All that happened during the greatest generation and they beat their depression and whooped the nazis. Loooots of money moved around, the "wealth transfer" he's talking about. That, and since all the previous great powers had the shit kicked out of them, helped America rise to the status of super-power. Times were good and prosperous. It set the stage for the Baby Boomers. That's the world you grew up in and inherited. Times were also pretty good when America became the sole super-power after the collapse of the soviets. That's my childhood. Wish that had lasted, but workers just aren't needed in the new economy. Not highschool grads anyway like when you were 18.
How old do you think I am? Hint: am millennial.
I don't know specifically what he is talking about but I will address what you say and not speculate on MightyMartians thoughts however fun that maybe. Yes, war happened and to the victor go the spoils. Those spoils did propel the US to be a superpower. So what? How does that help me or any young person get a job today? How does that help anyone anywhere trying anything to better their circumstance?
All good things must come to an end and those good times ended. We are in a time of economic uncertainty for a variety of technological and sociological reasons. I think no one alive can predict what the future will bring. The past can help understand the present but it cannot predict the future. Pointing the finger at Boomers will not help you prepare for the restructured economy. You can argue about specific solutions to help people in that new economy and I would be glad to do that but the moment it becomes "but but Boomers had it better!" I lose respect for you and your "solutions". Call me callous. Call me cold. I don't care because I am more interested in ideas that can benefit society and the individual than bear some collective guilt or resentment because "muh boomers".
So it means (more) kids these days need a (useful) degree. OH LOOK! That's getting really fucking expensive. Sucks to be them. It's like they're not really that well off or something. We've come full circle back to the article.
What is the new reading, writing, and arithmetic of the 21st century? If there are skills that are necessary for an average citizen to participate in the global economy, there is already an institution of learning that is provided by that government. High school. It would be an easier sell to say "fix high school to better accommodate the restructured economy and promote trade schools" than to say free college for every snow flake to get a gender studies who then then protests free speech and the very society that bore them that entitled spoiled life.
I would have more sympathy for college education funding if colleges were not producing what appears to be indoctrinated cultural maxists. I have seen too many examples of universities and students decrying and working against the freedoms and liberties this nation was built on that too many people have died to gain and protect.
Yes, it has been tradition that the children have a better future than their parents and millennials are the first to not get that. There are a lot of economic reasons for that beyond college being expensive.
People acting in their self interest is not a bad thing. Every generation has their own challenges to overcome. Bemoaning another generation is not how you overcome your challenges of your time.
yes... #notall. But anti-liberal/anti-west is a common theme with younger students in university across the west. remember #notall the next time you bemoan any group, ya? Like your troll post of demographic bemoanment which started this as you described people that voted differently than you as a "bunch of self-entitled arseholes". #notall.
You can argue a better system all day but considering what you said was: "now fuck off and give me my cheap health care!" when Obamacare placed much of the financial burden on young people I find rich. Obama was supported by lots o young people as was his wannabe-successor. Don't bitch about shooting yourself in the foot.
"give me my cheap health care"
Does that mean you oppose Obamacare? After all, it is funded by student loan debt interest and young healthy individuals.
I would have more sympathy if millennials weren't going around burning "free speech" signs on university campus bitching about how expensive university and how oppressed they are because someone in STEM makes more money.
I am a millennial and no generalization like that bother me because it doesn't apply to me. If your kids aren't lazy whiners and they are trying to better themselves by taking advantage of the opportunities available to them, they and you shouldn't care what the generalization is either.
Tell me more about crime rates. Or threat of nuclear war. Or removal of lead from our environment. Or longer life expectancy. Or lower infant mortality. Or better access to more advanced health care. Or lower poverty rates. Or high education rates.
The only uncertainty is the economy and that has always been true for every generation not embroiled in existential war. Like the 70's uncertainty of stagflation. Or the oil shock. Or. or. or. The actors are different but the stage is the same.
What is not better that hasn't been true for any other previous generation?
Yes and get off my lawn you kids. Damn kids and their rock n roll. This new generation will be the end! (tm).
Every parent wants their kids to have a better life. When does that ideal reach a point where that cannot be achieved wholesale without destruction to the environment? What cost are you willing to pay to get yours?
Largest wealth transfer in human history? Stop the hyperbole and stop the collective guilt. I am responsible for me and my actions.
unskilled Babyboomer could literally walk into a high paying unskilled job
So what? The global economy is more competitive. What is true for some is not true for others. That is not an excuse to complain about being the most well off and most spoiled generation in history.
their fathers and grandfathers, who did have to work their fucking asses
Hard work is a good life lesson. I learned a lot of good life lessons from my father that resulted in my relative success (honestly not that successful just enough to pay off student loans and have a mortgage). But I don't live in an expensive city or state so is affordable.
Babyboomers are the luckiest human beings
You are too resentful to see anything clearly. Stop blaming and resenting others for their success or luck when you have opportunity and freedom to change your circumstances.
Wages, job availability for that matter,
Wages are down for a number of reasons that we readily see on /.. Such as automation, globalization, immigration, etc. There are a number of policies that have been tried some successful some not. No generation gets a picture perfect setting for life. Complaining because someone else had it better is not a good idea to fix your problems.
property prices
Vote with your feet. The US is a very big place.
college debt
And that college debt increased the availability of college education. With increased demand you have an increased supply. Yes, deregulation made it so lenders do not bear the risks and all risk is put on the students but that means more responsibility in the choices a student makes. If you get a degree that is over priced and under valued, you shouldn't blame boomers for getting that degree.
Forgive me if I sound callous, but I started college in 2005. The same year the student loan industry was deregulated. No one knew exactly what would happen with that policy change and "get a college education or else burger flipper" was the mantra. I still have 30k in student loan debt from a variety of predatory practices that I was too young and care and too naive to understand. All the shit from the studies and reports about how bad student loans are or how bad diploma mills are are because of those first few classes that were the test subjects like me. I was apart of that and everyone else learned from those first few years that "college is overpriced, not for everyone, don't take student loans out, don't go to University of Phoenix". My only saving grace was getting a degree in STEM.
I don't like talking about my personal experience online because it doesn't matter to any argument but its personal for me (losing my job and having Sally Mae ask me how much money is in my account and that I should beg my family to pay off interest accrued that month isn't a happy moment for me). I would love to just hand wave it away but even after all that I still don't think college should be free.
your far too wealthy to understand what most Gen. Y'ers
lol, tell that to my bank account because it isn't what you think it is. My liability far FAR exceeds my assets. Only recently have I had some financial freedom because I have been adamant about paying off my debt because I understood I have no financial future with student loans. Not even Social Security or 401k retirement.
I am where I am because of choices I made and because my father taught me valuable lessons in life.
baby boomer in disguise.
Thanks. I'll take that as a compliment because of the respect I have for my parents.
Very true. I probably should have only limited that to masters because that is less likely to be paid for and many people do pay out of pocket for it. I almost did. (I thought it was a good idea to get a masters directly after but after I saw price tag figured I would try and get employer to pay).