649
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 187 points 8 months ago

Boomer elites did this, not the boomer people making smart choices for themselves. Just like Gen X, Millennials and Gen Z, the boomers who came out of college weren't making the laws. It's good to be reminded that these laws are shit, but I think there's a better question. Why are there so many anti-boomer articles coming out when it's the bank managers, the politicians, etc., making these laws and most of the US just votes at best?

This is a vote, vote, vote for people that will help build the middle class up again, that means all ages at the local levels. Also, it means break up the monopolies so we can build a better working environment. This is a distraction, please don't fall for it.

[-] alvvayson@lemmy.world 121 points 8 months ago

Boomer elites will transfer their money to millennial elites.

These articles are an attempt to create an age based division.

The problem is, it never works. We all have parents and grandparents. Many of us have kids. And we tend to love them, regardless of social, economic or political differences.

Solidarity between generations is extremely solid and very hard to break.

These articles are just weak and failed attempts to sow discord.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 44 points 8 months ago

BINGO. THANK YOU.

I'm so tired of the Millennial-Boomer division that the corporate media constantly stokes.

[-] TechyDad@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

Once again, GenX elites are ignored!

[-] instamat@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

Well you guys are just sort of there. Do something, or make some noise at least.

[-] Flambo@lemmy.world 35 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

vote for people that will help build the middle class up again

The point of the middle class is to split the working class in terms of income and wealth, so they spend their time antagonizing each other and mostly ignoring how the upper class is stealing everything.

We don't need a middle class; we need a strong working class.

You want a class that's got more education? Educate the working class. You want a class that's got more wealth? Enrich the working class. You want a class that's got the time and inclination to make informed political decisions? Deliver workday/workweek reform for the working class.

[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

I think the middle class and the working class are the same? But yes, do all of those things. Free healthcare, college and university education.

[-] Aleric@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

I think the middle class and the working class are the same?

Yes, but the corporate media does its best to portray the illusory "middle class" as somehow different from working class or the socalled "lower class". It's just more divisive bullshit to try to make the working class fight over crumbs.

[-] makyo@lemmy.world 33 points 8 months ago

This, absolutely. We need to realize that it’s always the rich vs. the rest of us. Anything else that draws lines to separate people only serves the rich. They win without fighting when we blame anyone but them for the mess we are in.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 24 points 8 months ago

I don't disagree with your general point, but the idea that we can just vote these systems away is just as much as a distraction that you shouldn't be falling for, as the generational division.

Modern "democracy" exists to uphold capitalism, and capitalism needs these divisions, along with a desperate working class, to exist. When you agree to only play within the rules they've set, you've already lost, they've made sure of it.

[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

We are stuck with a corrupt capitalism right now, so voting at the local level as well as the federal level is one of the only ways. Trump was killing our country with his covid shit, then Biden came in and fixed it. That's an obvious reason why voting works. At local levels, you'll have good transit and your utility companies aren't bending you over if you vote well. We have to fix this shit because the greeds are in office constantly trying to break it in their favor. It's exhausting but we have to do it.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I never said "don't vote", what I am saying is - harm reduction is all well and good, but don't think it will actually change anything fundamental about the status quo, because it won't, if it did, they wouldn't let us do it, as the saying goes..

It’s exhausting but we have to do it.

much more worth it then to invest energy and other resources in things that actually will create change, like organising within your community to actively support each other instead of waiting for the system to do it, because it won't. Building solidarity not only among workers, but within all communities, and from there creating dual power structures (communal food banks and kitchens, child care, hobby clubs, youth clubs, libraries for books but also toys and household items, as well as potentially groups doing direct action and those who support them from the backlines from medics to propagandists, there is something for everyone).
Create the roots for a better way of living, then destroy this one. They are never going to give it up willingly (or "legally", again, according to the "laws" they write, including those of "democracy").

[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago
[-] Davin@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

I think it has to be both.

There are many times throughout the history of the United States where a community came together and became prosperous only to have everything taken away by people supported by the state through shit laws and/or law enforcement turning a blind eye. Look at Black Wall Street aka the Tulsa massacre.

I get that corruption is prevalent and is difficult to clean out, but there was massive sea change after the 1930's crash that lead to the US having a massive, strong, and healthy middle class.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 24 points 8 months ago

the boomers who came out of college weren't making the laws.

But guess who spent the last 50 years voting for the politicians that did make those laws?

Yup, boomers. They, as a generation, overwhelmingly voted for this.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 17 points 8 months ago

Yup.

'Boomers' is an ageist term at this point. We have to judge people as individuals. Not based on race, age, or generation.

Shifting blame for what a few elites have done over decades and decades, onto an entire generation, is, as you said, a distraction.

[-] pizza_the_hutt@sh.itjust.works 29 points 8 months ago

Except Boomers, as a whole, swallowed right-wing bullshit and voted again and again for politicians and policies that fucked things over for future generations to come. They enjoyed the post-war economic boom fueled by socialist government policies and then promptly shut the door on their children and grandchildren by killing those same socialist programs. Time and time again, they fell for corrupt conmen, ultimately leading to the election of Trump and a resurgence in fascism.

No, not every boomer voted for right-wing assholes, but virtually every boomer fails to take responsibility for the current economic environment, choosing instead to blame immigrants, minorities, politicians, or China. No wonder Trump appealed to them.

[-] alvvayson@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

People lose their mind as they get older. But blaming them gets us nowhere.

Boomers also elected Clinton, Obama and Biden.

Yeah, I am more progressive than the average boomer.

But there are also alt-right millenials and Gen Z.

Age based politics is dumb and will never succeed. It really only appeals to a small minority of people.

I'm not going to throw my parents under the bus and neither are most people.

[-] Nudding@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Clinton, Obama and Biden.

Business as usual neoliberals?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Sharklaser@sh.itjust.works 17 points 8 months ago

Well said, generational division is pure divide and conquer. Fortune.com isn't in the business of agitating for class consciousness.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 76 points 8 months ago

You’ve probably heard about the “great wealth transfer.” It’s the $72 trillion stack of assets that baby boomers are sitting on and going to pass onto millennials someday, thereby solving many of the economically beleaguered younger generation’s problems.

take your carrot and stick and shove both up your ass, no one in the lower class is gonna see a cent of that hoarded wealth.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago

They could fix that sentence by specifying that it's elite baby boomers that will pass it on to elite Gen Y.

[-] Gargleblaster@kbin.social 4 points 8 months ago

That's right. All the Baby Boomers had kids at the exact same time. They totally didn't give birth to Gen Xers or Millennials.

All their money will go to one generation.

It's a well-established pattern that, as soon as generations come up for discussion, shit gets dumbed down fast.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

In general, I value Adam's take on the notion that generations don't really exist and view it mostly as a tool of marketing and the elite.

The corporate media narrative of the Boomer-Gen Y division is a classic case in point. Looking back, there was the Boomer vs. "Greatest" Generation narrative. Watching the current narratives of Boomer vs. Gen Y and more recently Gen Y vs. Gen Z is like watching re-runs.

[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Generations only exist for marketing companies categorizing everyone so they know how to market to you.

[-] roguetrick@kbin.social 59 points 8 months ago

No war but class war

[-] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 56 points 8 months ago

Far and away the greatest wealth transfer was between the poorest half of the world to the wealthiest 1%. This is just noise caused by that statistic. That's the culprit of that, not some boomer with a vacation home that they're struggling to manage the payments on.

No war but class war.

[-] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago

What? Boomers with vacation homes likely doubled their net worth in like 2 years. All the houses doubled in value, and they have more than 1. Talk to any real estate agent. The only people buying houses are boomers rn. On the occasion it's a younger person, they usually have help from their boomer parents or an inheritance from boomers. The scales were already tilted in their favor, and the pandemic response was to lower interest rates and let them buy more of the already scarce housing at unbelievably low rates or refinance their existing mortgage for a lower payment while first time homebuyers got outbid by people with more equity, and larger down payments. (See: boomers). They absolutely gained the most from the pandemic response, and if the high rates ever cause the correction it was designed to do, I won't feel the least bit bad if they lose their ass and didn't plan for it / have to go back to work (again).

[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

Wow, that's a whole lot of sugar coat of the actual problem with housing. Corporations bought up a lot of the apartment buildings to convert to short term rentals and price fixed the long term rentals, that's why there's a shortage of housing.

[-] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

2 things can be true. Most boomers I know participate in rent seeking to some degree. Corpos buying up housing didn't help either. Nor did foreign buyers. They also benefited massively from the low covid rates and were outbidding the families those rates were supposed to be helping with. The whole housing market is fucked, and our spineless, property owning politicians aren't going to do anything about it any time soon.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

Bank of America says

Were they bragging?

[-] Luckybuck@ttrpg.network 13 points 8 months ago

GOOD NEWS: YOUR PARENTS ARE GONNA DIE! MAYBE EVEN BEFORE 2030!

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Also, that $72 trillion will go to ~72 million millennials completely evenly--about $1M per millennial across the board. We won't have issues where having rich parents meant you did well yourself, and the proportionately more money you inherit will be extra rather than catchup. Nope, boomer hoarding will all work itself out in the end. We don't need any government policies to change.

[-] Something_Complex@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Why does it matter at that point so are we

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] theodewere@kbin.social 11 points 8 months ago

and too many Boomers turned into assholes who voted for Trump and obstructionist Republicans

[-] JdW@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Baby Boomers transferring wealth to Millenials? Over Gen X's dead body!

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 4 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


You’ve probably heard about the “great wealth transfer.” It’s the $72 trillion stack of assets that baby boomers are sitting on and going to pass onto millennials someday, thereby solving many of the economically beleaguered younger generation’s problems.

No less a figure than Ray Dalio, the billionaire and former leader of what was for many years the world’s biggest hedge fund, wrote on his LinkedIn page in August about a “coordinated government maneuver” that left household balance sheets rich and the state effectively broke.

Fortune has reported extensively on how millennials have not enjoyed a boomer level of success as they struggled to afford to buy a home for years before facing off with an overpriced, ultra-competitive pandemic housing market.

In addition to low interest rates and inflated housing prices boosting asset value, a 2020 Deutsche Bank report found that boomers shelled out less for education than millennials did and won’t have to pay for the environmental damage caused by the carbon emission-releasing companies they invested in.

While boomers have still had their fair share of economic challenges, like the Great Inflation of the 1970s, BofA found they ultimately benefited in the long run from an economy that’s set them up pretty nicely for wealth accumulation.

Dealing with a hefty price tag for a college education and ensuing student debt, many young adults graduated into a post-recession thorny job market, bouncing around to find a well-paying role.


The original article contains 1,014 words, the summary contains 237 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Boomers will eventually go to a nursing home, hospital, or hospice. The money will dry up from these and if they still have money left over, there is the estate tax. The children looking longingly at the large bags of money the parents have won't get as much, and some of this captured money will begin to circulate again.

[-] Then_I_said@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The estate tax in the US only affects estates worth more than ~$12,000,000

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
649 points (97.0% liked)

politics

18069 readers
5308 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS