The baby boomers may have been raised with the concept of the importance of family and duty, but I'm not sure how well they have taken it to heart. Divorce boomed with the baby boomers, the draft ended with the boomers, and they certainly don't seem very concerned about the debt (and its consequences for their children and grandchildren) . . . except to the extent it may prevent them from getting SS and medicare benefits.I think there will be some strife, prehaps resentment towards the elderly by a youthful population. The thing about the baby boomers is that they are the sandwhich generation. They not only were raising kids of their own, but have also had to be primary caretakers for their parents as they got older and needed care. And their kids are likely going to have to do the same, the difference being that the baby boomers were still raised with the concept of the importance of family and duty. The generations after that don't find it nearly as important, and that is where the problems will come from.
The best way to minimize conflict between grandparents and the grandkids is "generation skipping" inheritance.
We got our kids started, paying their college education, and more. They don't stand to inherit much when the time comes.
2008 demonstrated a pretty significant political chasm between those under 25 and those over 50. The baby boomers are about to retire after spending themselves and the country into massive debt. They will ask the government (and, by extension, the young) to essentially bail them out after they completely ignored the consequences of their irresponsibility for the 25+ years they were in power. And the young will have little ability to do so without bankrupting themselves, considering the state of our nation's finances.
We haven't hit a breaking point yet. Politicians are still extremely careful about how they refer to the baby boomers and the elderly when they campaign (case and point, the medicare debate). But as more and more retire and begin to get angry that they are not receiving what "they were promised," and as the young begin to get angry that they are being forced to pay for it, what do you think will happen?
My question is, given the circumstances, are we headed toward a serious generational conflict in this country? A situation where the country becomes split more by age than by political parties?
The baby boomers may have been raised with the concept of the importance of family and duty, but I'm not sure how well they have taken it to heart. Divorce boomed with the baby boomers, the draft ended with the boomers, and they certainly don't seem very concerned about the debt (and its consequences for their children and grandchildren) . . . except to the extent it may prevent them from getting SS and medicare benefits.
From Paul Begala: The Worst Generation
I don't completely share his views, but I think this gives somewhat of a taste of how easy it would be to demonize this class of people in the future. It's something that both speaks to me and worries me a little bit.
No, but this will certainly make it more interesting to see if younger people (those under their late 50s) become a significant voting bloc.
If I ever see a dramatic movement of "don't trust anyone over 30", I will be siding with those above 30.
First off, you are wrong. The Baby Boomers have not been in power for that long. Secondly, it's the WWII generation that voted themselves massive social security benefits (after putting the program into place). It is entitlement programs that are bankrupting this country, and EVERY SINGLE ONE WAS PUT IN PLACE BY THE WWII GENERATION. This is a gross exaggeration and simplification of the situation.
Now then, there might be a chance of stresses between generations...however remember that one generation is the parent of the other. Children don't typically hurt their parents, which is part of the ongoing problem with entitlements.
The system would have worked fine if the retirement age had kept pace with the life expectancy.
There is a problem with simply increasing the retirement age because we are living longer. The length of old age is being extended more than the length of our productive years. This is especially true for those that do manual labor.
Well, quite honestly, we need to go back to the ideal of the elderly living with their adult children and helping to raise their grandchildren. Let the twenty-somethings and the thirty-somethings go out and work two jobs to support their families while their parents are ensuring that their children will enjoy some continuity of cultural values.
I don't do well with generalizations, so me being a tail-end baby boomer who is as cheap as the day is long can't really go with your take on the boomers.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?