Dear boomers: I’m a millennial, 36, and it looks like I will never get to retire

[Aristides]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

Shouldn't the economy generally improve the life situation if workers over time?

Only if you believe in infinite growth. Failing that, only technology can do it.

We went from an age where debt was expensive and eliminating it was a priority, to making money almost free and encouraging debt to keep juicing the economy. People and governments became addicted to it as they were intended to . That has limits as we are now finding out on a personal level. Governments will too.

Edited April 9, 2023 by Aristides

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

1. Only if you believe in infinite growth. Failing that, only technology can do it.

2. That has limits as we are now finding out on a personal level. Governments will too.

1. I don't understand that statement, because technology does drive growth.  What do you mean?

2. Maybe they will stop cutting taxes to encourage trickle down investment.

[Aristides]

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I don't understand that statement, because technology does drive growth.  What do you mean?

2. Maybe they will stop cutting taxes to encourage trickle down investment.

I mean we are depleting the earths renewable resources faster than they can replace themselves. We can't just rely on infinitely increasing GDP. Technology has made many things better and can do more in future without growth. 

 

I haven't seen any tax cuts lately, I have seen a lot of new taxes and fees. 

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok, but in general SHOULD the economy provide a better life as time goes on?

2. It's a significant, and increasing share of after tax income.  And let's leave owning a home aside - renting is also at the point of becoming unsustainable and not just in big cities.

3. As long as we're being anecdotal, I have never known another boomer who was unable to buy, or rent in Toronto.  I am also a boomer.  Toughing it out is just not an option..

4. Ok, I will look at examples not in Toronto, point taken.  Focussing on millennials because they need the most help 

  

1. Shoulda, coulda, woulda but, it does not always work out for everyone.

2. There were and are parts of society that could or would never be able to buy a home and struggle with rent and cost of living, when economy was/is good or was/is bad.

3. I know many that could not buy in Toronto (or Vancouver or Victoria). They had to move way outside the city. Remember the urban sprawl up to Barrie or out east to Oshawa and farther. The Go Train was built for Toronto commuters and look at the range it is.

4. You focus too much on the now generation, the me generation, the millennial. It is actually our fault for bearing those kids and giving them so much that they have such high expectations without knowing the price to pay for or effort required those expectations.

It has been a pleasure discussing this with you but, you cannot convince me that times now are harder than the times were for me back in the 70's and 80's. Expectations are certainly different but the struggle was/is the same.

[ExFlyer]

58 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You didn't notice any corruption or how the influence that lobbyists and government's deal in skewed the playing field one way or another?

You're either oblivious to this or simply believe the effect on the economy is too negligible to be worth worrying about.  Or perhaps you're someone who believes corruption is an integral part of the economy and we would all suffer without it.

How would we ever know though without being able to see what public officials and private corporations are discussing?  You've made it pretty clear you don't like the idea of the public sticking it's nose in the public's business.  

In the meantime...

OTOH

Like I said, there are other perhaps more important reasons why millennials can expect a more meagre future than we might lived in expectation of.

 

Your obsession with corruption and determination that it is the root af all economic issues and problems in nonsensical.

Yes, i agree that there is and has been misuse but corruption being the cause of economic woes , that is conspiracy theory at it's best.

As for millennials expecting a more meagre future, well, that all depends on their expectations of their future and if they achieved it or not. Your crystal ball 50 years into the future is clearly more concise than mine

[Michael Hardner]

27 minutes ago, Aristides said:

1. Technology has made many things better and can do more in future without growth. 

 

2. I haven't seen any tax cuts lately, I have seen a lot of new taxes and fees. 

1. See my previous comment: technology drives growth.

2. You sound like a commoner.

[Aristides]

38 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. See my previous comment: technology drives growth.

2. You sound like a commoner.

1. Growth in what? It can make our lives better but it the earth has finite resources.

2. Yup, that's me. 

[myata]

On 4/5/2023 at 8:36 PM, CdnFox said:

But honestly - i'd rather see you vote ndp or green than justin That guy has GOT to go

For more effective and dynamic solutions to modern problems (nobody promised that they would be exactly like those of two hundred years ago) one would need more modern and dynamic governance systems. It's a sheer fantasy to believe that changing a figurehead in a system entrenched for generations would and can change anything in essence. You can vote in a limited to the absolute minimum system all you like but it won't create new approaches, new governance models and you could change only the rate of accumulation of them. Then, a breaking point. A system that cannot evolve and modernize itself will be brought down by a changing environment. Nothing personal, only the basics of evolution.

[ExFlyer]

32 minutes ago, myata said:

For more effective and dynamic solutions to modern problems (nobody promised that they would be exactly like those of two hundred years ago) one would need more modern and dynamic governance systems. It's a sheer fantasy to believe that changing a figurehead in a system entrenched for generations would and can change anything in essence. You can vote in a limited to the absolute minimum system all you like but it won't create new approaches, new governance models and you could change only the rate of accumulation of them. Then, a breaking point. A system that cannot evolve and modernize itself will be brought down by a changing environment. Nothing personal, only the basics of evolution.

So, you do not like democracy. You think it is outdated. You want it abandoned.

Your "effective and dynamic" solution is?

Your new form of governance would be what?

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Your obsession with corruption and determination that it is the root af all economic issues and problems in nonsensical.

I don't believe that and you have no way of really knowing what the extent of the cost of corruption or how it contributes to things like inflation.  According to the various international organizations that are even more obsessed it's around 5% of GDP world wide. But corruption is one of these things like CO2 emissions that governments probably don't want to look at too closely and track accordingly.

What I'm obsessed with is how pathetic our institutions of accountability are so we could actually gauge and plan more effectively either for it or against it as the case maybe.

Has it even really been determined whether corruption is or isn't a benefit to Canadians? For example where might we be if we didn't have an apparently healthy money-laundering industry in Canada servicing corrupt people from abroad?

At 5% or more of global GDP, 2 to 3 trillion, that's a lot of cheddar.

Edited April 9, 2023 by eyeball

[ExFlyer]

13 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I don't believe that and you have no way of really knowing what the extent of the cost of corruption or how it contributes to things like inflation.  According to the various international organizations that are even more obsessed it's around 5% of GDP world wide. But corruption is one of these things like CO2 emissions that governments probably don't want to look at too closely and track accordingly.

What I'm obsessed with is how pathetic our institutions of accountability are so we could actually gauge and plan more effectively either for it or against it as the case maybe.

Has it even really been determined whether corruption is or isn't a benefit to Canadians? For example where might we be if we didn't have an apparently healthy money-laundering industry in Canada servicing corrupt people from abroad?

At 5% or more of global GDP, 2 to 3 trillion, that's a lot of cheddar.

Right back at you "I don't believe that and you have no way of really knowing what the extent of the cost of corruption or how it contributes to things like inflation. " because if you did, and had proof,you would splash it over every news organization and website you could.

According to "various sources" that 5% can easily be about only 5 countries, particularly China, African and some other dictatorships. Your assumption or extrapolation that every country is 5% corrupt is a rectal pluck.

Back at you again "Has it even really been determined whether corruption is or isn't a benefit to Canadians"?  Has it? Proof? Or another rectal pluck?

Using World GDP is as nonsensical as your assumption every nation on earth is 5% corrupt (without you even defining national corruption).

As it is, you only whine on this forum. You are trying to be a sensationalist without any backing. You make unvalidated and unsupported accusations, especially and particularly about Canada.

Edited April 9, 2023 by ExFlyer

[eyeball]

Just now, ExFlyer said:

Right back at you "I don't believe that and you have no way of really knowing what the extent of the cost of corruption or how it contributes to things like inflation. " because if you did, and had proof,you would splash it over every news organization and website you could.

Which is why I say we need more robust institutions of accountability. Given the ridiculous levels of public mistrust in the government these days I think knowing one way or another would benefit everyone. It would certainly make life easier for the government don't you think if they didn't have to contend with so much distrust?

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

As it is, you only whine on this forum. You are trying to be a sensationalist without any backing.

Right back at you...

All you can do is lick Galen's spittle and gasp in horror at the thought our government might have tilted a field or two in his fortune's favour.

[ExFlyer]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Which is why I say we need more robust institutions of accountability. Given the ridiculous levels of public mistrust in the government these days I think knowing one way or another would benefit everyone. It would certainly make life easier for the government don't you think if they didn't have to contend with so much distrust?

Seriously? Again making accusation n=based on your paranoia??

[ExFlyer]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Right back at you...

All you can do is lick Galen's spittle and gasp in horror at the thought our government might have tilted a field or two in his fortune's favour.

I could care less about Weston, or any other CEO's in Canada or the US or the rest of the world. Someone believes they are worht what they are paid. I am pretty sure they do not confer with you nor do they need to. Their value is important to the companies and corporations that hire them.

Governments, all over the world are also aware how important corporations and large companies are to the economic benefit of the country.

You use GDP as if you actually know what it is LOL.

GDP or Gross domestic product is a monetary measure of the market value of all the final goods and services produced and sold in a specific time period by a country or countries. It is what companies and corporations make and produce and provide within a country. What is good for National GDP is how good the companies and corporations are for the country.

 

[eyeball]

34 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Seriously? Again making accusation n=based on your paranoia??

What accusation, again?  If you think we have all the oversight required of why don't you just say so?

[ExFlyer]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What accusation, again?  If you think we have all the oversight required of why don't you just say so?

Your constant accusation of corruption, lobbying etc.

Good greif man, if you know anything about economics and GDP you should be fully aware governments need corporations to keep the wheels of government rolling. LOL

Careful when climbing down off your pedestal.

[eyeball]

31 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

I could care less about Weston, or any other CEO's in Canada or the US or the rest of the world. Someone believes they are worht what they are paid. I am pretty sure they do not confer with you nor do they need to. Their value is important to the companies and corporations that hire them.

Governments, all over the world are also aware how important corporations and large companies are to the economic benefit of the country.

I could care less about what people think a CEO's income should be, I do however care about the fortune he's already sitting on and how it got bigger decades ago through this family's lobbying efforts at DFO to tilt the fishing table towards their corporation, BC Packers Ltd. The history of commercial fishing in Canada is rife with corruption and as we can see with Dominic LeBlanc's 'ethics breach' when he was Fisheries Minister is or should still be of concern.  The fact he's still in Parliament at all is, frankly, a little astounding.

This is the playing field millennials have to deal with.

Quote

 

You use GDP as if you actually know what it is LOL.

GDP or Gross domestic product is a monetary measure of the market value of all the final goods and services produced and sold in a specific time period by a country or countries. It is what companies and corporations make and produce and provide within a country.

 

Oh thanks so much for the economics primer there perfessor.  Now how about addressing the fact that experts that do their best to study corruption tell us at least 5% of our global GDP is lost every year to corruption?  How does that compound over time I wonder?  

Quote

What is good for National GDP is how good the companies and corporations are for the country.

And what's good for them is always good for us? Prove it.

[eyeball]

7 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Your constant accusation of corruption, lobbying etc.

Good greif man, if you know anything about economics and GDP you should be fully aware governments need corporations to keep the wheels of government rolling. LOL

So how much grease does it take to keep the corporate wheels turning and how do you know when it's too much or too little?

You act like you know something about this but what exactly is hard to say.

If you truly think corruption is necessary then fine just say so and stop acting Iike it doesn't even exist.  You can't even account for your own feelings on the topic but feel free to mock anyone else's...**** you too if that's the case.

Edited April 9, 2023 by eyeball

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

1. There were and are parts of society that could or would never be able to buy a home and struggle with rent and cost of living, when economy was/is good or was/is bad.

2. I know many that could not buy in Toronto (or Vancouver or Victoria). They had to move way outside the city. Remember the urban sprawl up to Barrie or out east to Oshawa and farther. The Go Train was built for Toronto commuters and look at the range it is.

3. You focus too much on the now generation, the me generation, the millennial. It is actually our fault for bearing those kids and giving them so much that they have such high expectations without knowing the price to pay for or effort required those expectations.

4. It has been a pleasure discussing this with you but, you cannot convince me that times now are harder than the times were for me back in the 70's and 80's. Expectations are certainly different but the struggle was/is the same.

1. Ok, that doesn't speak to the fact that things are much worse.    I took your advice to speak to the Canadian example not just Toronto.  In 1970, a house cost about 4 years' wages in Canada.  In 2023 the average house price in Canada is $660K and the average wage is $60K  meaning it now costs 11 years' wages.

That's your proof that things are worse.

2. Ok, good point.  

3. I only do so because they're the ones starting out, and they're the ones struggling.  It's our fault in giving them so much, and them having high expectations but... we also set up the game so they don't have a chance which is my point.

4. Well look at the numbers I got in #1, in response to your very valid complaint that I was focusing on Toronto.  I think that making things so much worse for people starting out is going to cause a price to be paid.  And it won't be paid by people who don't have any money today - it'll be paid by the rest of them.  There are segments of the population doing much much better than in 1970 and the under-40s know that quite well.

[ExFlyer]

38 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I could care less about what people think a CEO's income should be, I do however care about the fortune he's already sitting on and how it got bigger decades ago through this family's lobbying efforts at DFO to tilt the fishing table towards their corporation, BC Packers Ltd. The history of commercial fishing in Canada is rife with corruption and as we can see with Dominic LeBlanc's 'ethics breach' when he was Fisheries Minister is or should still be of concern.  The fact he's still in Parliament at all is, frankly, a little astounding.

This is the playing field millennials have to deal with.

Oh thanks so much for the economics primer there perfessor.  Now how about addressing the fact that experts that do their best to study corruption tell us at least 5% of our global GDP is lost every year to corruption?  How does that compound over time I wonder?  

And what's good for them is always good for us? Prove it.

Firstly, "people" do not determine CEO salary. The corporate board does and they certainly do not care what you think LOL

The entire population, not just millennials, are playing on the same field. Get you head out of the sand on the field LOL

Glad you learned something. Always happy to help the uneducated.

As I have already said, the world GDP is of no consequence here. If you have some sort of expert evidence that says 5% of Canada's GDP is lost to corruption, prove it. As I also said 5% of the worlds countries are communist, dictatorships or kingdoms and corruption does thrive there. Canada is not either of those.

You have no point, only your one track accustory thoughts.

 

 

Edited April 9, 2023 by ExFlyer

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, Aristides said:

1. Growth in what? It can make our lives better but it the earth has finite resources.

1. GDP.  That's what "growth" is - growth in productivity.  A machine that can do what 100 people do that costs less than a person represents a huge amount of economic growth for example.  

[ExFlyer]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok, that doesn't speak to the fact that things are much worse.    I took your advice to speak to the Canadian example not just Toronto.  In 1970, a house cost about 4 years' wages in Canada.  In 2023 the average house price in Canada is $660K and the average wage is $60K  meaning it now costs 11 years' wages.

That's your proof that things are worse.

2. Ok, good point.  

3. I only do so because they're the ones starting out, and they're the ones struggling.  It's our fault in giving them so much, and them having high expectations but... we also set up the game so they don't have a chance which is my point.

4. Well look at the numbers I got in #1, in response to your very valid complaint that I was focusing on Toronto.  I think that making things so much worse for people starting out is going to cause a price to be paid.  And it won't be paid by people who don't have any money today - it'll be paid by the rest of them.  There are segments of the population doing much much better than in 1970 and the under-40s know that quite well.

I am sorry Michael. I do like discussing things with you but in my opinion, lately you are becoming more and more NDP or even communistic.

You are seemingly leaning to everyone deserves the same. Regardless of why some folks are workings hard and thriving and other are not., It is responsibility for themselves, not for the state.

Again, I will say to you that owning a house is by no means a right. If you cannot afford one, then do whatever it takes to buy one, if it does not work out, so be it. No one owes you anything.

Times were tough in the 70 and 80's as well like it or not. Good thing today inflation is less than 9% and mortgages are less than 18%. You would have a lot to whine about then. (you forgot to mention that in your comparison.

BTW, I was making $38K in 1980, single income and about a house that was $110K. My payments were about 65% of my take home. It was tough.

Edited April 9, 2023 by ExFlyer

[Michael Hardner]

36 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. I am sorry Michael. I do like discussing things with you but in my opinion, lately you are becoming more and more NDP or even communistic.

2. You are seemingly leaning to everyone deserves the same. Regardless of why some folks are workings hard and thriving and other are not., It is responsibility for themselves, not for the state.

3. Again, I will say to you that owning a house is by no means a right.  

4. BTW, I was making $38K in 1980, single income and about a house that was $110K. My payments were about 65% of my take home. It was tough.

1. How so ?  I'm just repeating what Poilievre has been saying: times are bad.
2. Sorry - do you have anything to say for the fact that housing is about 2.75X harder to pay for than 50 years ago ?
3. If the costs of buying increase by that amount, it would explain why rents are also onerous.
4. Ok, you were making about $140K in today's dollars.  You wouldn't have been able to afford a house at all today even making that.

[myata]

11 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

So, you do not like democracy.

We don't have a democracy. The system was designed to sail blissfully with tied eyes forever, the sails allowing exactly positions North or South but it was two centuries back.