Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-06-2011, 11:06 PM
 
15,107 posts, read 8,659,571 times
Reputation: 7457

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pro Astrologer View Post
This is the major challenge Spiritwalker. All over the world, the generation of Baby Boomers have aged, though in denial about it. Their impact on the economic Panic of 2007-08, the cause of the current world economic crisis, is the current problem worldwide and history will rightfully blame the boomer generation.

Just in the U.S., unemployment among Generation Xers (1961-75) is high because Boomers cut millions of jobs to make up for their huge losses when the market crashed.

The 16-24 age group has unemployment rates at 25% - an incredible but true number - as Boomers have taken the jobs of that age group too. So the next time people complain why young people can't make change without the cash register - blame a baby boomer.

I won't go into the astrological patterns I've seen ahead for the decade of the 2010s concerning this, but I will say that hard times are coming for the boomer generation and it will have been because of their extreme self-indulgence, neglect, corruption, greed and denial of the passage of time. That generation can blame no one else except themselves.

As for Solutions -

The fact that it was baby boomers who cut living facilities for the aged, and nursing homes; who ignored training and good salaries for Geriatric Physicians they now will need in a major way - I am not positive on what I see for boomers as elderly.

There are and will be millions of grumpy old men and women out there who've been in denial about aging all their lives. They have been abusing drugs all their lives and continue the habit. A majority of baby boomers are overweight with all the medical maladies which come with it, so it will not be a pretty sight at all going forward.

Generation X will soon be the new establishment. This generation has double the work of previous generations because they have to work for the future while at the same time cleaning up all the messes of the recent boomer past.

The first wave of Gen X are in their 40s, and the second wave in their mid-to-late 30s, so most of the solutions will come from this generation that were born in the 1960s and 1970s.

The problem is that the longer the boomers stick around doing their 'make work' in a fruitless effort to save money for the retirement they've been in denial about for 30+ years, the worst things are bound to get.

The party is over, but many boomers remain in denial. Society cannot function with workers over the age of 60. It is the young who produce and the middle age who lead and manage.

Boomers are past both life cycles as the elderly but they want to slow down society to the point where progress is not made so all the attention - and resources - are geared fully to them. That is why there is hardly any money out here and economies are in the dumps.

There is no easy way out except for the baby boomer generation to accept that they dropped the ball big-time and now have to begin to live with the consequences.

And, those consequences would have been easier if they retired earlier before the crash, rather than try to hang on to the very end, which they intend to do - with disastrous implications for everyone.

The solutions rest with Generation X. This is the new incoming establishment and they've been left a total mess on their hands that they had nothing to do with creating, but will have to solve.

The boomers have treated Gen X as if they were invisible all their lives, but it is this very generation that will keep the lights on and the economy running - so baby boomers had better start kissing ass because the **** they've dumped on Gen X (a generation they treated like dirt) requires major ass kissing.

None of the problems caused by the baby boomer generation will be solved by them. Not one. That much is clear from the astrological transits I've read.

The social anthropologist Margaret Meade once wrote that she thought the baby boomers were a 'terrible generation.' She said this in the 1970s before she passed away. Her view, from what she observed of the behavior patterns of the boomers from the 1960s into the 1970s showed her that the boomers would cause many more great problems than they solved. Meade was spot on.

The sooner Generation X hits the ground running - the better for everyone.
You .... unlike the other guy are so full of vitriolic nonsense, I've got no problem telling you what moronic nonsense this is.

Those who have a faint clue about life, and what has transpired in this country understand that we are suffering from the actions and rewards gained by 1/2 of 1 % of the population, that have run this country into the ground, and it has nothing to do with the average schmo, and most certainly not a single generation.

Are you even aware of the fact that 400 families possess more wealth than the bottom 50% combined? No you aren't. You're clueless.

You and your ideas have as much validity as claiming the moon is made of cream cheese, and I doubt you could fix a flat tire, let alone the problems you don't even understand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-06-2011, 11:12 PM
 
Location: Flippin AR
5,513 posts, read 5,247,360 times
Reputation: 6243
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymous View Post
I like to think that my generation will be the one to solve the problem of environmental unsustainability. Maybe that's too big of a task, but who knows.
We already know the answer to this problem, and there is only ONE answer: The worldwide population must be eventually be reduced to sustainable levels (unless we want to accept billions of hungry humans), and zero population growth established. If we do not accomplish this ourselves, then nature will step in and re-establish the balance between population and environment through mass starvation, pandemic or both. We can push the boundaries of carrying capacity through technology, but we cannot circumvent the fact that the earth is a limited resource.

It is best to stabilize population with incentives (huge tax incentives for no children, small incentives for 1) combined with a societal understanding that each new human being brought into the world is incredibly costly and has a huge impact. Every large family is heavily subsidized through the tax system, the insurance system, the work world, and the "grandparent" system.

It is time we stopped rewarding people for doing things that damage society.
We need to stop rewarding women with gifts and congratulations and rewards (time off from work, subsidized pregnancy health care, etc.) when they get pregnant--it should be treated more like a major investment.

Unfortunately, the most powerful organizations (government and religion) also encourage the overproduction of children, because it serves their power needs. Government is never happier with large numbers of naive new people now ready to vote, without understanding that politicians and government itself are their greatest enemies. The more children keep the citizenry overwhelmed with their demands, the less the citizens can see the growth and abuse of government. Similarly, religion wants every follower to produce endless new followers to contribute to the church coffers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 11:12 PM
 
Location: bold new city of the south
5,821 posts, read 5,309,775 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
You .... unlike the other guy are so full of vitriolic nonsense, I've got no problem telling you what moronic nonsense this is.

Those who have a faint clue about life, and what has transpired in this country understand that we are suffering from the actions and rewards gained by 1/2 of 1 % of the population, that have run this country into the ground, and it has nothing to do with the average schmo, and most certainly not a single generation.

Are you even aware of the fact that 400 families possess more wealth than the bottom 50% combined? No you aren't. You're clueless.

You and your ideas have as much validity as claiming the moon is made of cream cheese, and I doubt you could fix a flat tire, let alone the problems you don't even understand.
Yeah, I think Pro As' tears, are brown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 11:29 PM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
8,182 posts, read 9,226,432 times
Reputation: 3632
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnPaul View Post
The United States Census Bureau considers a baby boomer to be someone born during the demographic birth boom between 1946 and 1964. Baby boomer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Exactly, they are going by raw numbers, not peer personality. They end the "boom" in 1964 because 1965 was the first year in several where we fell below 4 million births. The birth rate was already dropping. Their dates have nothing to do with how a generation looks at each other, I know very few people born in 64 who identify with the 60's and 70's. They are more Michael J Fox than a hippie type.

Read up on Strauss & Howe, they are the best demographers around. Strauss-Howe generational theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 11:32 PM
 
1,457 posts, read 2,030,127 times
Reputation: 1407
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
Exactly, they are going by raw numbers, not peer personality. They end the "boom" in 1964 because 1965 was the first year in several where we fell below 4 million births. The birth rate was already dropping. Their dates have nothing to do with how a generation looks at each other, I know very few people born in 64 who identify with the 60's and 70's. They are more Michael J Fox than a hippie type.

Read up on Strauss & Howe, they are the best demographers around. Strauss-Howe generational theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I would believe my own thoughts on the subject, and as well the US Census bureau, but thanks all the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 11:36 PM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
8,182 posts, read 9,226,432 times
Reputation: 3632
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnPaul View Post
I would believe my own thoughts on the subject, and as well the US Census bureau, but thanks all the same.
Well I have researched demographics for 20 years, I'll stick with the overwhelmingly massive amounts of research on the subject. The "Baby Boom" and "Boomers" are not the same BTW but you already now all of this so no use learning the difference.

I understand the fear of new information, it can changed minds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,583,836 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
Exactly, they are going by raw numbers, not peer personality. They end the "boom" in 1964 because 1965 was the first year in several where we fell below 4 million births. The birth rate was already dropping. Their dates have nothing to do with how a generation looks at each other, I know very few people born in 64 who identify with the 60's and 70's. They are more Michael J Fox than a hippie type.

Read up on Strauss & Howe, they are the best demographers around. Strauss-Howe generational theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The boomers are broken into 2 subgroups.

Baby boomer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Baby Boomer cohort #1 (born from circa 1946 to 1955), the young cohort who epitomized the cultural change of the sixties
Baby Boomer cohort #2 or Generation Jones (born from circa 1956–1964)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 07:56 AM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
8,182 posts, read 9,226,432 times
Reputation: 3632
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
The boomers are broken into 2 subgroups.

Baby boomer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Baby Boomer cohort #1 (born from circa 1946 to 1955), the young cohort who epitomized the cultural change of the sixties
Baby Boomer cohort #2 or Generation Jones (born from circa 1956–1964)
YOU missed this line.
"Authors William Strauss and Neil Howe, well known for their generational theory, define the social generation of Boomers as the cohorts born from 1943 to 1960, who were too young to have any personal memory of World War II, but old enough to remember the postwar American High.[9]"

Generations are not defined by birth rates but by their peer personalities and shared life experiances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top