MiddleClassCentrist Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/boomers-generation-had-everything-it-wanted-and-it-still-does/article2387987/ When is this attack on the younger generation going to end? It sickens me. The young have high debts and trouble finding good work... but who careas about them... let's make sure every boomer can start getting OAS at 65! New employees getting a pension? NO... But Baby Boomers are grandfathered. Livable working wages? You guessed it, NEW employees get lower wages than those who started a long time ago when inflation is factored in. Cutting back in the public sector? Yep... that means firing young workers and keeping the old ones... Baby boomers parents tended to save money for future generations, Baby Boomers tend to spend it on themselves. So the children who are footing the bill for the extra health care can't even look forward to family assets being increased from generation to generation. Baby Boomers also had dirt cheap education and rarely graduated with debt. My father was able to get factory jobs in the summer that paid for his ENTIRE year of student living... that didn't exist even 9 years ago when I was in University. ----- Our federal and provincial governments keep talking about austerity... But all they mean is that anyone under 35 is going to be paying to keep the entitlements of the Baby Boomers running. Edited March 31, 2012 by MiddleClassCentrist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Canada will still be one of the best countries to live in, in the world, 20, 30, 40, 50 years from now. Our hardships are nothing like most of the worlds. I'm not going to complain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Perhaps if the young spent more time voting, it might be different: The voter turnout in Canada among young voters is at a lower rate than all other age groups.[1] There is a general trend of decline in electoral participation among the youth and younger population. It is a serious ongoing issue in democratic countries all over the world, especially in Canada. “The youngest age cohort did experience a bump upwards in estimated voter turnout from 37% in the 2004 federal general election to 43.8% for following election, before descending to 37.4% for the 2008 federal general election.”[2] Moreover, the percentage of provincial election participation was 28% in the youth aged 18–24 in 2001. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_voter_turnout_in_Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Perhaps if the young spent more time voting, it might be different: It wouldn't be different, NDP would pander to the baby boomers more than the tories, liberals too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 It wouldn't be different, NDP would pander to the baby boomers more than the tories, liberals too Then stop whining..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Then stop whining..... read my first post, I was doing the opposite of whining Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 read my first post, I was doing the opposite of whining "your hardships"....poor babies! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 "your hardships"....poor babies! This is what I said "Our hardships are nothing like most of the worlds. I'm not going to complain. " Oh, I am being trolled aren't I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 This is what I said "Our hardships are nothing like most of the worlds. I'm not going to complain. " Oh, I am being trolled aren't I You don't have any hardships compared to "most of the worlds". Stop complaining! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) You don't have any hardships compared to "most of the worlds". Stop complaining! ... that is the same thing as I said just worded differently... Edited March 31, 2012 by stopstaaron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 ... that is what I said... You said 'Our hardships'....what hardships? Video games cost too much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 This is what I said "Our hardships are nothing like most of the worlds. I'm not going to complain. " Oh, I am being trolled aren't I You don't have any hardships compared to "most of the worlds". Stop complaining! Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) This is what I said "Our hardships are nothing like most of the worlds. I'm not going to complain. " Oh, I am being trolled aren't I You're only being trolled if you choose to respond.... Try this technique... "You have chosen to ignore all posts from: bush_cheney2004" Silence is golden... Edited March 31, 2012 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/boomers-generation-had-everything-it-wanted-and-it-still-does/article2387987/ When is this attack on the younger generation going to end? It sickens me. The young have high debts and trouble finding good work... but who careas about them... let's make sure every boomer can start getting OAS at 65! New employees getting a pension? NO... But Baby Boomers are grandfathered. Livable working wages? You guessed it, NEW employees get lower wages than those who started a long time ago when inflation is factored in. Cutting back in the public sector? Yep... that means firing young workers and keeping the old ones... Baby boomers parents tended to save money for future generations, Baby Boomers tend to spend it on themselves. So the children who are footing the bill for the extra health care can't even look forward to family assets being increased from generation to generation. Baby Boomers also had dirt cheap education and rarely graduated with debt. My father was able to get factory jobs in the summer that paid for his ENTIRE year of student living... that didn't exist even 9 years ago when I was in University. ----- Our federal and provincial governments keep talking about austerity... But all they mean is that anyone under 35 is going to be paying to keep the entitlements of the Baby Boomers running. Yup...Can't disagree... The most selfish/self serving generation,outside of Calgula's Rome? the worlds ever seen... They took all the acrifices of The Greatest Generation (mostly their parents) and kept it for themselves... Sadly,they vote...So they get what they want... Edited March 31, 2012 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TSS- Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 The angry exchange of words between generations is always so entertaining. I know what I'm talking about; we in Finland have a very large proportion of the population born in the late 1940's and now they have all either retired or are just about to retire. However, all this talk about the looming labour-shortage is nothing short of pissing in the face of the unemployed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 The angry exchange of words between generations is always so entertaining. I know what I'm talking about; we in Finland have a very large proportion of the population born in the late 1940's and now they have all either retired or are just about to retire. The problem with their narrative is that the expensive social programs were created by and benefited the "Greatest Generation" first, not the Boomers. Milestones in Canada's Social Security 1940 - Unemployment Insurance Act - created the Unemployment Insurance Commission (UIC) Fund; set benefits at 50% of wage with 15% additional for married; benefits and contributions wage related; not flat-rate as in Britain; first large program to have appeals 1943 - Report on Social Security for Canada - This report, written by Dr. Leonard Marsh of McGill University, detailed the need for comprehensive and universal social programs. Marsh suggested Canada should establish a "social minimum," a standard aimed at protecting the disadvantaged through policies such as social insurance and children's allowances. His report was influenced by Sir William Beverage's Report on British Social Security, which recommended comprehensive health insurance, and income security. 1944 - Veterans Charter - provided over $700 million to assist veterans returning to civilian life; funding to allow former soldiers to attend college or university; Veterans' Land Act helped demobilized soldiers buy houses and farms. 1944 - Family Allowance Act - set up to protect the rising generation and maintain purchasing power of families; first universal program (as opposed to a targeted program); the “baby bonus” provided $5 to $8 for every child in Canada under the age of 15. 1944 - National Housing Act - created the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), to promote construction of new houses, renovate and modernize existing housing, and to create work in postwar Canada. 1951 - Old Age Security Act - $40/month to everyone at ages 70; universal, a bare minimum; removed notion of personal failure; twenty year residency requirement 1951 - Old Age Assistance Act - $50/month for age 65-69; a means test; Government to recover cost of pension from estates of pensioners 1956 - Unemployment Assistance Act - Federal sharing of costs 50%; for those not covered by existing categorical programs; a needs test as opposed to a means test ; hope that assistance would rise 1965 - Canada/Quebec Pension Plan - a wage-related supplement to Old Age Security; contained first automatic Cost Of Living Allowance (COLA) program; wide coverage; advanced concept of social minimum 1966 - Canada Assistance Plan - consolidation of federal-provincial programs based on means tests or needs test into a single program 1971 - Unemployment Insurance Act - extended coverage to cover more people; eased qualifying conditions; benefits raised to 2/3 of wage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Our federal and provincial governments keep talking about austerity... But all they mean is that anyone under 35 is going to be paying to keep the entitlements of the Baby Boomers running.I've been saying this for many years now. What's coming down the pipe is much, much worse than anyone is anticipating or willing to admit. Youth need to begin putting away money right away. However, they can't. Their unemployment rate is double the national average and they're crippled with debt right out of college/university. Forget home ownership. That's well below the national average in young adults as well. When you look at the job situation, as you rightfully pointed out, they're no longer getting pensions and when they do they're a fraction of what the boomers were given and their wages have remained stagnate for more than a decade. Add to that the reduction in benefits, including health and dental, spouse coverage, children's coverage, etc. and the overall compensation package for young employees is a fraction of what the boomers received. Of course, that doesn't stop the boomers from doling out unhelpful advice: "Kids just waste their money these days. I was able to save when I was younger. That's what they need to do, but they're too lazy and irresponsible to do it." And let's not forget the dismantling of public services and the incremental shift towards a healthcare system for the rich vs the healthcare system for "everyone else." When the youth are ready to retire, the boomers will have dismantled the system they leeched off for so long. Leaving the youth to pay out of pocket for things like their healthcare by the time they're able to retire (much later of course). Except, where's their income going to come from? They'll be broke and the safety net will be gone (or considerably dismantled). The boomers are too young to remember why these things are in place and are under the mistaken impression that anyone can have what they had. They don't realize their affluence, passed down from their parents in many cases, is a direct result of the rapid economic growth following WWII. They don't see a reason for the social safety net, but they're going to reap its rewards before pulling the plug. And the youth are outnumbered at the polls, even if they were to mobilize. Those that study society may talk of class warefare, but what they've been missing is the hidden generation war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 I'm not going to complain. First time for everything, I guess. jk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 When is this attack on the younger generation going to end? It's not an attack on anyone. It's math. The young have high debts and trouble finding good work Yep, somebody young, that hasn't worked for very long will have a higher debt than somebody that's worked many years more and payed it off. That's just common sense. And yep, finding good work during a recession can be difficult. Again, common sense. New employees getting a pension? NO... But Baby Boomers are grandfathered. It depends on what industry you work in, and what you do. But no, the pyrmid scheme of definited benefit pension plans are no longer an option. Because like I said, they're pyramid schemes. Livable working wages? You guessed it, NEW employees get lower wages than those who started a long time ago when inflation is factored in. Once again, it depends on what industry you're in, and what work you do. And a so-called living wage is completely objective. Cutting back in the public sector? Yep... that means firing young workers and keeping the old ones... Yep, that's the way unions work, especially public ones. First in, last out. Baby Boomers tend to spend it on themselves. So the children who are footing the bill for the extra health care can't even look forward to family assets being increased from generation to generation. Complete nonsense. Many boomers have saved money. Our federal and provincial governments keep talking about austerity... But all they mean is that anyone under 35 is going to be paying to keep the entitlements of the Baby Boomers running. Under 35 huh? Tell that to somebody 37, or 39, or 44, etc. Anyways, your whine is almost as bad as the entitled individuals you're referencing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 Doesn't it depend where these baby boomers live? Ontario, some of those boomers are out work, have to rely on RRSP's, savings, welfare, working 3 part time jobs and then their kids come home because they lost their jobs. All the governments around the world are letting the corporations rule the world. They go where they want to go and don't really care how many families are affected by it. Let's face it, for Ontario, if the Auto Pact had been renewed, there wouldn't be so many people out of work. Now, we have people making 10.25, can't buy a house on that, and if you can only work part time, 20 hours, 200.00 won't even pay rent. So it really isn't a generation thing its more a rich vs middle/low income thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 Yup...Can't disagree... The most selfish/self serving generation,outside of Calgula's Rome? the worlds ever seen... They took all the acrifices of The Greatest Generation (mostly their parents) and kept it for themselves... Sadly,they vote...So they get what they want... Its rather ironic that the generation that is benefiting the most is the Boomer Generation.. but that has little to do with it size as much as it has to do with Politics. It just happens to be that the boomer generation came in after their parents created the Social Welfare State...and its been a good thing.. if you like HealthCare, Pensions , etc.. The thing is the Politics of the Boomers.. about 40% OF THEM is on course with alot of the x gens who have bought into the myth that the benefits they received can't be passed on to the next generation for xyz reasons... pick one. It has to do with politics.. If you want something .. VOTE... Those who believe voting doesn't make a difference... don't realize these things just don\t get given to you.. you have to fight for a piece of the pie... and you have to fight for your share... And I laugh at the statement that it would be worse with the NDP... The argument is normally the opposite... You would get all these things.. and the economy would crash.. so goes the myth... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 Doesn't it depend where these baby boomers live? Ontario, some of those boomers are out work, have to rely on RRSP's, savings, welfare, working 3 part time jobs and then their kids come home because they lost their jobs. All the governments around the world are letting the corporations rule the world. Well many many many corporations in the US earn more monies then many countries.. so its going to be the norm when corporations have more inoome then Canada has GDP and its not unusual for corporations to call the shots.. its always been that way.. they just have more power today then they ever had... Peoples power is in their vote.. look at voting trends and look at their individuals economic outcomes.. Lower voter turnout then we have ever seen before and the first generation to earn less then their parents is now in the pipes... There is an old saying in the US from the dirty 30s... If you don`t vote.. you don`t matter.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 And a so-called living wage is completely objective. Then why is it "so-called"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 Then why is it "so-called"? Because there's no such thing. A wage is a wage. A so-called living wage is a term invented by the far left, completely subjective, and not predicated on actual economics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WLDB Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 People complaining about the youth being entitled will likely never end. Once we are older I wouldn't be surprised if we started saying some of the same things about the generation that follows us. Its been that way for centuries, hell millenia. Plato talked about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.