6 Y.O. “Realizes Something Isn’t Adding Up” With Great-Grandparents Living Wealthy On Ordinary Jobs
And so we come back to the famed why don’t you stop buying avocados and Starbucks? argument again. Nobody said it yet, but this particular topic does bring out that highly ignorant statement more often than it should.
The problem is still the same—the US housing market is so overrun by corporations and money-grabbing investors that it just keeps inflating the prices beyond what regular Joe-Shmoes can afford. And it is so problematic that even kids are now starting to catch on. And if it’s that obvious, even to a 6-year-old, you know it’s huge.
More Info: Reddit
Imagine having a 4-bedroom lake-side house, a boat, a jet-ski, and two cars. In this economy
Image credits: eberhard grossgasteiger (not the actual photo)
Well, it’s possible if you can manipulate time. But you can also understand why it’s a problem. It’s even obvious to a child
Image credits: PrimaryAd9159
A Redditor shared how her 6 y.o. wondered what her great-grandparents did to earn all they earned
Image credits: Andrea Piacquadio (not the actual photo)
This one Redditor recently approached the antiwork community with a message that is considered old news at this point, but one that should be as alarming as ever.
OP’s 6-year-old approached her asking what her great-grandparents did for a living. She responded that great-granddad worked for the state and great-grandma was a secretary. This particular question arose within the context of her great-grands owning a 4-bedroom lakeside house in Minnesota, a boat, a jet-ski, as well as a truck and a car, both under 10 years in use.
The kid’s next question was “so, you can get rich doing those jobs?” Immediately, the mother noticed how she, despite being quite young at this point, is starting to realize that something isn’t adding up.
“If my husband had the same exact job that he has now, but set in the 1970s, we would be absolutely rolling in money. Instead, we both have to work full-time to afford a 3 bedroom tract house, and we’ve never had a real vacation,” elaborated OP.
Heck, OP doesn’t even know anyone who could afford more than two kids, let alone proper housing. But when even a 6-year-old’s gears are starting to turn the right direction, you know the system is beyond broken.
The answer isn’t realistically easy to explain to someone her age, but even she understood that something’s not right
Image credits: cottonbro studio (not the actual photo)
Immediately, a discussion was a-brewin’ in the comment section. The economic imbalance in the US has been so huge that virtually everyone has at least one story to tell about how problematic it has become.
This commenter’s mother went through law school for $1,500 a year. This prompted the commenter to ask her mom to never slap her with reality like that ever again.
Another Redditor shared their suspicion their dad thinks they’re lying about the sheer amount of raw work they do. Because they barely have anything to show for it. That’s the same 40-hour work week, mind you.
Others were of the opinion that what used to work back then doesn’t any more. And it escapes the boomer mind that maybe their decades of systematic repression of sensible living clauses and conditions in consideration of future generations might have had an impact on it all. But living in denial is easier.
The discussion continued in length, reaching 3,000 comments, all of which can be seen here. The post itself got over 37,500 upvotes with an 87% positivity rating and a single Reddit award.
For more context on the matter, you’re more than welcome to check out a recent Bored Panda article on the topic. What should, however, be mentioned is when will this chaos and madness subside?
And that only emphasizes the point of how broken the current US housing market is at this point
Image credits: Pixabay (not the actual photo)
The short answer is not this year, and probably not any time soon. According to a number of experts and sources gathered in this article, signs are showing that the US market won’t crash as much as it will correct itself. “Today’s homeowners stand on much more secure footing than those coming out of the 2008 financial crisis, with many borrowers having positive equity in their homes.”
For context, a market correction is a steady and temporary drop in market value over a longer period of time, like a week, for instance. A crash is much more brutal as it can happen at a much bigger rate and in just a day. With corrections, it stabilizes within a few months, whereas crashes can have devastating effects for a year or two.
So, what can you do as a real estate buyer? TL;DR: if you really need a house, plan and buy one now according to your budget. It’s hard to foresee when and where is the right time and location to buy real estate. But if you buy according to your budget and make it fit your current situation, it will quite likely be the right fit for you.
Besides, if you already have something and another opportunity arises, you can take it from there, instead of lingering on could’ves, should’ves and would’ves.
Folks immediately sparked a discussion, sharing stories and ideas on what’s what
Anyone can write on Bored Panda. Start writing!
Follow Bored Panda on Google News!
Follow us on Flipboard.com/@boredpanda!
Some time ago, Robertas used to spend his days watching how deep the imprint in his chair will become as he wrote for Bored Panda. Wrote about pretty much everything under and beyond the sun. Not anymore, though. He's now probably playing Gwent or hosting Dungeons and Dragons adventures for those with an inclination for chaos.
Read more »
Saulė is a photo editor at Bored Panda with bachelor's degree in Multimedia and Computer Design. The thing that relaxes her the best is going into YouTube rabbit hole. In her free time she loves painting, embroidering and taking walks in nature.
Read more »
Some of us boomers get it. We know it all went to sh*t with Reagan and DID NOT vote for any of this. Just to be clear some of us saw this coming.
100 % correct. Many of us "boomers" are also paying the price of the terible decisions made back then.
Load More Replies...
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
You’re showing your ignorance. Reagan brought us out of 18%+ interest rates and into a booming economy which gave everyone a chance to succeed and own a home. If you didn’t take advantage of that then that was on you.
Way, way back there were no “extras”. Television was free but there were only 3-4 channels. There was only the cost of your phone bill that until congress broke up the Bell System was mostly supported by long distance costs so it was super cheap. You never made long distance calls. Only businesses made them. Both my parents worked but they were unusual. We finally got a second car in the mid 50’s. We drove on our vacations to a family YMCA camp. Everyone that did go on vacation just drove to visit relatives or had similar housekeeping rental cabins. No one took a plane. We shopped for clothes at big box stores, read cheap. For entertainment, besides TV, we had the public library and the public parks. All still free. There were 5 of us and my parents could not buy a lakeside 4 bedroom house with a boat. They did buy a rowboat after they retired. Not exactly luxury. People just didn’t spend a lot. My mom made my graduation dress. My grandmother made our doll clothes.
A lot of current expenses are now baked in to our society. There used to be more walkable neighborhoods, schools weren't so centralized, there were sidewalks and payphones. Now you can barely survive without a car except in major cities, jobs expect you to have a smartphone and PC with internet, and two incomes are barely enough especially if you need childcare. Workers are supporting kids and parents as they are outliving both health and their savings. Add that wages stagnant in the face of inflation for the last two generations, and that housing stocks were at historic lows before air BNB and investment groups gobbled them up and you get the great repression.
Load More Replies... Too true, Bex. Not right with these investors owning hundreds of homes they are just using to make money. People used to invest in companies, not homes. Also way back childcare was taken care of by grandparents. Mine lived with us. That was normal. I was 3 when my parents bought a house but that was after they had 2 kids. Before, they lived with my mom's mom. The folks next door lived in their parents house along with their son. My friends down the block lived in their grandmother's house along with 2 uncles and an aunt. Totally normal and that was how people lived. Every nuclear family having an individual house is a fairly recent concept. I guess when people moved from rural areas to big cities and had to rent, they all wanted their own dwelling. Can't blame them. It is just different.
This used to be an acceptable practice. Now, if you have more than two ppl stacked in a room, so more than 4 total ppl for a two bed house, it's a fire hazard and you can be evicted. Also, DHS can get involved if you have 2 or more children of differing sex sharing a room, or a child sharing a room with an adult, parent or not, it's a problem, and Child protection services can charge you with neglect.
What problem do they have with two children of different sexes sharing a room? What do they expect the children to do? Where is this a thing?
I love how my colleague told me that public transport wouldn't work in LA, basically because population density it too low. I want to see how he will react to Lahti (LA has ~8.500 people per sq mile, Lahti has ~350)
You can tell your colleague LA's population density is 3.849M, compare that to Toronto, which as ample selection of public transit (subways, Go Train, Trolley Trains, buses) with 2.93M pop., Calgary that also has good public transit with a 1.336M pop, and Winnipeg that has What is the population of 841,000 with a decent transit system that actually should have more buses on the busiest routes.
Absolutely not true. Most people did not live in the cities. They were very rural and transportation was necessary yet most families still made it fine with 1 car. People that has TVs had 1 and it was probably black and white. Cable didn’t exist until late 60s early 70s and it was nothing like it is now. If you’re finances weren’t great, you didn’t get it. Most people didn’t get color tv until the 70s because it was expensive. Why spend the money for that.
Not sure if this is right, but wasn't there some consideration for employees with families, and accommodated raises and extra hours? Now a days, if you state you have kids you're considered a liability and you're ability to afford to take care of your kids is deemed the employee's problem. Not the business's. I was actually told that by HR when I was asking to go full time from part time but denied.
Easy way to fix all this nearly overnight - legislate the tax advantages of REITs away. Watch capital for real estate investment evaporate. Also, grandpa’s fixed income.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Question, how much does child care cost? Would it be cheaper for one person to quit and come home instead of spending that money on it? Would it be better to change jobs so one person is on 1st shift, the other is on 2nd or 3rd? Its called making hard decisions to support your family. Smart phones? Do you need the smart part or can you use wifi and cell ph? Quit being Eeyore and being defeated before you start.
Childcare can be really expensive in the US (not to mention the quality if you want to give your child a better start in life). It‘s still often better for a mother to work. People keep forgetting that a mother will only need to stay home until the kid starts school. That‘s around 6 years? And what then? If she has not worked in her field for 6 years, then she might not get in anymore or at a way lower level. Or she will have to get some low pay job. So, in the long run, it benefits the womans career and therefor the household income, if the mother stays in her job and profession. As a houswife by the time the kid goes to school she will be likely forced to do a minimum wage job. As a working Mom she might get promoted multiple times during that time. And THAT is the hard decision they DO MAKE, because no Mom WANTS to be away from her little child!
my sister was on gov assistance while her husband worked, so she could look after the kids. when she graduated college, she started working at a hospital as a nurse, but that put her over the govt assistance and she had to pay for child care. she ended up LOSING money in this situation, so she quit her job and went back on assistance. when jobs are paying you so little, and childcare costs so much, that staying home and getting assistance is a better deal, there is something seriously wrong with the job and childcare system.
Most moms actually want to be away from their little child's, just like how dad's do and no one bats an eye That you have a baby doesn't make a woman suddenly not want to do anything else and have zero other interests of aspirations . Again, just like, you guess it, men Like seriously how many moms do you know that would say no if you offered em a day where you'd take care of their child? Very few
I guess it would depend on the parent. Many mothers, though, feel guilty being at work and missing milestones. Offers of a few hours for a break now and then are great to recharge and feel like a human. That's perfectly normal. It would still be on how maternal the mother is and how paternal the father is. Some fathers also feel a sense of regret working when they could be playing with their kids, while some mother disdain the idea of being with their kids all the time. I was scared I was going to be an alien to my daughter or that I wasn't doing enough to help her with her development. I still feel that way, even though I know she was with an early childhood educator and speech therapist. But still, whenever I was at work and saw parents taking their dressed up daughters to events, I felt that I should be doing that as well. Not at work in a stuffy office.
Well the system should not force those people to make those hard decisions, the system should work to help satisfy everyone.
You also don’t need Netflix, YouTube tv, hulu and all the other paid programming, don’t need doordash and other he food delivery services, don’t need “smart” phones, don’t need the latest car, 10-15 yr old used car is just fine, cook at home and not expensive steaks either. Yes I get tightening your belt isn’t fun but if you want money for the future, you have to learn how to save it. Look at those people who are doing the “early retirement” programs, they’ve cut all all the fluff and have saved buckets, living in today’s world in today’s economy. There is no excuse for most, especially if you’ve been educated.
My husband and I have one 12 y/o car I bought used 3 years ago, we don't go to restaurants or get food delivery, we get basic cable/wifi free from our apartment building. We are very careful with money. After working 60hr weeks at multiple part-time, entry-level jobs for several years to "save buckets" I became disabled following a traumatic event less than a week after our wedding, and all those savings went to medical expenses. So now I'm taking college classes online to hopefully get a job someday I can actually do with my disabilities. My amazing husband works 50+ hour weeks in retail management, a job he was only able to get because he has "been educated" and has a degree: aka thousands of dollars in debt from 5 years commuting to a state college despite also working the whole time. He makes about 1 income bracket over the poverty line after bonuses. The bills get paid. And no, tightening belts isn't fun. But MANY do. Stop blaming us for being born into a broken world.
So in order to buy a house we should remove every bit of happiness from our lives?
I think the key is balance... and living within your means. Prioritising is NOT a dirty word.
Why do you assume that people aren't doing these things? Why is it easier for you to assume that people are stupid or lazy or entitled than it is to believe that the system is messed up? And, have you questioned whether those early retirees are exceptions or rules? What does the data say?
"why don't you just drive instead of using airplanes and make your own clothes" because it's cheaper actually. the cost of gasoline is so much more expensive than the cost of an airline ticket. the cost of fabric is significantly higher than a mass-produced garment. it's not about people spending more today, it's about things *costing* more today while workers aren't being paid enough to survive. you really should try living off $800 a month. that's how much income I'll take in *if* I get on disability. it's not a guarantee, you never know. the government might deem me able bodied even though 1 day of work costs me 3 in such agonizing pain I can't get out of bed. I will never be able to afford to live. I will have to leech off my partner so we can afford to live. do you understand how bad that makes me feel?
just to add on to my "try to live on $800 a month" no, you cannot couch surf. if you do, too bad, your only income is now 500 a month. that $800 had to stretch far enough to cover rent, food, and medical emergencies. I've never even seen an apartment in my area that costs less than $1000 a month
The cheap, run down apartments on the bad side of town around where I am average out to about $1200/month. The new, safer ones can go anywhere from $2k to $7k, depending.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
So rent the old ones, you don’t need new. Stop allowing government to kowtow to criminals. You can’t have a society where you say drug use is ok and then complain about the crime as most crime is tied to drugs. In places where some of it has been legalized the homeless population and crime is skyrocketing thus making cheaper housing all that more unsafe. Life requires hard decisions. Doing without to save and enforcing the laws for the safety of the citizens.
Your correlations are backwards. Crime is tied to poverty, because it's a quick way to make money. Drug use is also tied to poverty, but as a form of escapism. Drug use exists in all tiers of society but it's used as scape goat with poverty. The reason crime is increasing is not because drug use is increasing but because poverty is increasing. The poverty situation is worsening because the government panders to criminals - white collar criminals who have manufactured inflation for their personal profit. I'm guessing based on your various rants on this page you part of the problem and impede those who try to fix anything in your community.
That what I get a month for SSDI. Wife gets SSI and they lowered hers because she living with me. Can't make more than 1391 a month.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
BS. Explain how the people doing the “early retirement” programs are able to “make it” in today’s economy. I’ll explain it to you, they don’t spend frivolously.
No, they're a product of their generational wealth. The vast majority of those were put through schooling on their parent's dime (including college), didn't want for consistent housing/food, don't have health issues. + The statistics on the "get rich quick" scheme is that it's random and rare. There are people who have been living their whole lives as spendthrift and miserly as possible and have nothing to show for it. Where's the "work for it and don't spend frivolously and you'll be fine" for them?
“On our parents’ dime” my college was $120 a quarter for 21 hours. A meal ticket cost more. Dorms were $120 a quarter. Add a refrigerator, tiny, was $25 a quarter. Books were close to $400. And I was on work study so that helped. I didn’t vote in student loans so colleges and universities could then up their fees to such exorbitant amounts. Homes were MUCH smaller. My family of 7 lived in a 1000 sf 3 br home. 3 boys in one room, my sister and I in another. We didn’t eat out. We rarely went to movies and then it was to the drive in. We drove EVERYWHERE. Vacation? My dad was military and we went “home” every year to East Tennessee, 2 weeks at one grandparents and 2 weeks at the other. First time I flew for something other than moving was when I went home from college. After my first year I was given a car. Sad paid $600 for it and fixed it up. Mom made all my clothes except my underwear. My 2 formals in college and my wedding dress. My wedding was under $1000.
I don't know the date so I guessed-- $120/quarter would've been about $460 in current dollars. The current average cost of tuition for a semester is over $10,000. That would be over $5,000/quarter. If you convert that back to 1980 dollars, that would be over $1,300. Do you believe that you would've been able to afford college if it cost you more than 10x what you actually paid? I didn't even factor in the dorm, meal plan, books-- those have also increased and would be many times what you paid, even when adjusted for inflation. And, they also now often require those smart phones and computers that you get to be "done with" as you ebb into your golden years. I could also go into the rising costs of food (even groceries), cars (even used ones), gas (even for trips to Granny's), housing (even small homes)-- all of which even when adjusted for inflation are multiple times higher than what you would've paid in 1980. Not to mention that wages are stagnant. Maybe you're just wrong...
Part 2. We didn’t have a honeymoon because he was an E-3 in the AF. We didn’t have credit cards. We went to the library. We shopped at the thrift store and yard sales. Even now, the only furniture we have that was bought brand new is our bed and our living room furniture. Everything else was bought at yard sales. I cook at home. I can and freeze for the weeks/months ahead. We’re so done with cell phones and the way they trap people into more debt. The only reason we keep them is to FaceTime our grandchildren. I tried Door Dash once to send food to a friend’s family. 2 pizzas from Papa Murphey’s ended up costing over $50. I don’t do nails, eyelashes, tans, Botox, eyebrows, etc. I quit wearing makeup but do skincare. There are hundreds of ways to cut costs, but you have to be willing.
Ma'am, I work 60 hr weeks. I don't have cable, nor do I pay for any streaming services. No kids. I have an old car I managed to buy outright a few years back. When I someolhow have to chance to read, I either read free books online or I go to the library. Vacation? HA! I don't do long distance calls, I have a basic phone plan. I am lucky enough not to have changed much over the years, so I rarely get new clothes, it's a huge treat when I do. Even then, you wouldn't catch me ever shopping for something that was on clearance or on some huge sale. I can barely afford the home I managed to get a mortgage on, which is cheaper than most apartments around here, and it's only possible because my mother cosigned for the loan (we both make approximately $50k/yr) and my sister pays rent. So, no, the "extras" society pays or doesn't always explain the cost of living discrepancies.
I’d suggest talking with a financial manager, you can find them free with some research, heck, you can call Dave Ramsay. If what you are saying is true, you should be able to make it just fine. Sounds like your only bills are your mortgage and basic living expenses. I’m assuming you’re sister is paying you rent? Something doesn’t add up here….
Maybe it doesn't add up because your understanding about the world is wrong.
50k should be more than enough to live on by yourself. What else are you doing?
Should be, sure. Isn't, though. Not by far, especially since the vast majority of those jobs that have that pay also require degrees and college is not free or cheap. Housing is not free or cheap. Healthcare is not free or cheap.
I mean sure, but the dollar went a lot further than it does today and minimum wage even just adjusting for inflation is lower at the federal level than it was in 1970. Basically to match old minimum wage we'd have to have the federal minimum set to about 11.35 or something else to it. Having less buying power per dollar, higher cost of living in all aspects, higher rent/mortgage/car payments and basically being expected to be on the clock even when not at work because companies often don't understand having any kind of work life balance leads to all sorts of issues. Minimum wage if kept to its original ideals would be massively higher than it is today and even if it wasn't and just kept adjusting for inflation it should be 4+ dollars more at the federal level. The fact we earn less but have to be more productive in that one hour of time if we work a minimum wage job (or any job below like 11.35) vs our 1970 counterparts should infuriate everyone
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
BS. People had NO Money in those days. They didn’t but on credit, only bought what the actually had money for. The really poor would have large pits of beans and rice and feed the family that for days. Many families would have meat 1 day a week if that. people SAVED for their wants. There is a reason the Sears and Roebuck catalog was called the “Wish Book”.
There are literally millions of families who still do that and barely can afford rent. Your argument doesn't hold water.
Yeah, there weren’t a lot of extras that people now consider necessary. For the first three years on my own in the early 80s I didn’t have a phone (landline). That would have been a luxury for me.
Growing up in the UK in the 1970s and 1980s we didn't have a colour TV untill 1982, a video recorder in 1990. We had old cars that broke down and dad lay under to fix every weekend so he could get to work on Monday. We walked to school, to the shops, we dragged food shopping 2 miles home from the supermarket in a pram. Clothes and toys came from jumble sales. We simply didn't spend money, because we didn't have any. My husband's experience was much the same, he was driving a tractor in the fields for the harvest when he was 7 years old, so his family could eat. Today we brought a new to us leather sofa for £100 from a charity shop, our mortgage on our tiny house is paid off, we drive 20 year old cars. We have some savings so technically have the money to go and buy new sofas or newer cars or big TVs. But we've lived through times of no food in the cupboards, so we dont.
So very like my own upbringing, Fenchurch. We had to rent a TV from ColourVision until early nineties. Didn't go on holidays. Sharing bathwater with the whole family and the like. My parents are retired now, no car, no holidays and still scrimping and saving. I think most of these "boomer" stereotypes come from US as they in no way resemble the lives of my parents or myself (Gen X) in Northern England. My parents dont lecture me on saving money as they damn well know how hard it is themselves.
When *I* were a lad, all this were fields. :) But yeah, I remember fondly moving to a house that had central heating and hot water, so I didn't have to make the fire before my paper route. It was only 40 years ago, but it feels like it was the stone age
Frost on the inside of the bedroom windows, no central heating/couldn't afford the coal. We still had to keep the boiler "in" if we wanted the central heating to work! So yeah memories of raking out the clinker and trying to get the boiler to light and draw on a still day.
My husband remembers when they got indoor plumbing, semi-rural South, and he just turned 60. They lived in a 4 ROOM rented house (6people) Yet, he paid his way through college (worked the whole time but still found time for fun) worked his rearend off after graduation, we got married in our mid twenties, both worked, saved, waited to have children,I gave up my career and stayed home with the children as daycare was too expensive, juggled money while they were young and finally came out on the other side with money for retirement and fun. Husband won’t retire as he loves being busy, owns his own business and can work from anywhere most days. Only needs to be in the office a few days every 2 weeks. Life is a series of compromises, very few can “have it all”.
They don’t resemble the lives of Americans either. Yes some live very well but it is because they were extremely successful in their working years as you have in the UK as well. Those that lived through the Great Depression and war years have always lived differently, have always saved because they still don’t believe that they can be without at any given time. I would tell you that most of these whiners on social media would never have survived 80-100 years ago.
Before she went back to school, my wife thought she'd try supplementing our income by working at Starbucks. That lasted all of two months when we realized the childcare for one child cost more than she was earning.
Eating out was a rare treat. There were no McD's or Starbucks. Breakfast was usually oatmeal or corn flakes, along with 4 oz. reconstituted frozen OJ. Bacon was a rarity and rationed to 2 rashers per person. Dad took the train to work, and Mom stayed home until the kids were old enough for school. As we got older the moms started getting jobs and we became latch key kids. Medical care was affordable, even when the family GP made house calls. The only air conditioning was at the movies. Kids wore mended hand-me-downs and everyone's shoes were resoled. "Make do, use it up, wear it out" was standard operating procedure. It's amazing what you can happily do without when not bombarded by incessant advertisng set on redefining lifestyles and what constitutes a necessity.
No one’s mentioning how pensions evaporated in exchange for the lie that 401ks were better. Also, whether death of a partner, disease, divorce or disability, no matter what you have achieved, it can all be lost in one go. I had what I thought was going to be my forever house with my forever partner but the partners childhood abuse trauma (think of the worst 3 and yup) by boomer parents kinda exploded all over my life after almost 20 years. I was lucky to move in w my mom because she got the house in HER divorce from my cheating dad. Face it, the folks who came back from the war stopped asking questions of the government and their employers because they were so happy to be alive. The govt and companies quickly did away with all safety nets and polluted everything, killed farms, built cheap houses and crammed us all in tight. Then factories closed and went to cheaper states then overseas. A lot changed and y’all want to blame GenX and younger for problems y’all’s parents created.
THERE WERE NO SAFETY NETS. You didn’t earn, you didn’t eat unless by the kindness of strangers. GOVERNMENT did not bail you out. You were on your own and had to live by the consequences of your own actions.
Yeah, the consequences were that lots of people died. Look up survivor bias.
I assure you, daily expenses don't make a difference for the numbers in these cases Plus we're talking about the 60s and the 70s, the age of blatant consumerism, TV diners, as seen on TV, the boom of consumer appliances etc. people spend a lot a lot at the time. Plus many of the things you Frame as extravagant like flying have gotten cheaper to the point they're not You're basically doing the if you didn't buy avocado toast maybe you'd have a house
Only businesses made long distance calls? That's simply not true. My family made long distance calls because we had friends in Europe, my grandparents lived in a different city and it was long distance to call them. "No one took a plane?" How on earth were the airlines in business then if no one was taking planes? I took my first flight at the age of 6 and flew multiple times after that with my family to many places. There may not have been any "extras" in your family but that doesn't mean they didn't exsist for other families. My family was not filthy rich by any means but they chose to have only one child in order to have and experience things that other families with multiple children couldn't afford to do. My parents both worked as well. My mother was working full-time in the days when women didn't work as a rule unless they were teachers, secretaries or nurses. My mother was a business woman. In our neighborhood, only two women worked outside of home.
Just a small comment. I do sewing as a hobby. Nowadays, fabric can cost more than a store bought clothes.
And I bet you actually talked to each other. Young people asked old people questions that they were delighted to answer. Now they get a sponsored response from Google driving them to the newest morality decimating website with a million ads reminding them of what they don't have and how content they will be if only they could acquire said items at exorbitant interest on their credit cards. People's addiction to their phones now is almost psychotic. I see young people that can't be more than a minute from checking their phone. Their dependency is beyond belief. They rarely talk to each other and when they do their vocabulary is one of a child. Their attention spans are lightning short and their respect for authority is almost non-existent. These are the values the online world has given youth today. Gaming's influence on males is especially problematic. Most adults have no clue as to the violence, lack of respect of human life, endless profanity and sexuality so many games impart.
In essence, you lived within your means as no-one was going to bail you out if you made bad financial decisions. And we wete happy without all the “junk” that is considered a need now.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Thank you from a Boomer who raised 4 kids who are all doing way better than we are
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Television is still free. People choose to pay for cable/satellite service. You don't have to have an unlimited plan on your cell phone. You could actually get a minimum plan and stop calling long distance for hours at a time. Back in the 80s, you either bought the phone on your landline or leased it from the phone company. In the 70s and before, you could only lease. We still paid for these items but we used discretion on what we were buying. Not disagreeing with you about how we did things back then just that the new generation still has those options but they're not using them. If you suggest to a millennial, or gen z or whatever they're called that they should take the bus, train, or drive somewhere, they look at you as if you just insulted them. They want to use the most expensive mode of travel, buy the most expensive cars, buy the biggest house, own the most expensive cell phone, buy the most expensive clothes. They simply need to learn how to budget & save.
'Them v us' story. Plenty of older people who are struggling to survive too.
Nope. It's a story about how little wages have increased. I mean, you should read it, it's pretty clear.
Load More Replies... you hit the nail right on the head! it's not that we hate older people, it's that we don't like older people that are willfully ignorant about how hard life has become with minimum wage not increasing as quickly as inflation or the cost of housing.
That and we don't like it when they call us lazy when many of us work 60hours a week, don't eat out, don't go on vactions, don't drink or smoke and we didn't get things like free education as they did in AU. Then they say things like you're just lazy which is why you don't want kids, no, I can't afford them and don't have the time to give to a child. There's no living off 1 persons income anymore. My friend's dad bought 2houses as a trolley boy, he had 4 kids, smoked, drank, gambled and went out to gigs. If you were a trolley boy now, you couldn't earn enough to pay rent. People that choose to be this ignorant are just in denial. I don't blame all boomers, I just can't stand the lazy rude self entitled ones that refuse to see logic or common sense.
Sadly willful ignorance isn't limited to older generations. A lot of younger people vote against their own interests also
But do they make what the minimum wage would be if it had kept up with inflation? If you make a buck fifty over the federal minimum, are you making a living wage?
K Cor said "Wage increases declined when women insisted on entering the workforce." Let me make this very clear: WOMEN HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IN THE WORKFORCE! Thanks for proving your ignorance K Cor.
Once upon a time, people grew their own food, and had their own businesses. Even if someone in the family went ri work, it was not uncommon to have backyard gardens/farms. But people wanted ease and comfort — people in or near retirement age today. Now we’re at the mercy of sociopaths — corporations. Souls were sold and the piper plays.
The problem is that while wages have increased quite a bit, costs have increased exponentially and disproportionately so as to negate the benefit of the wage increase in the first place.
Nowhere in the article is mentioned the grandparents' perspective on the current job/wages. For the people commenting as if they're ignorant of today's situation, that's absolutely speculation. MANY older people are aware and hate that the system makes life hard for their children and grandchildren.
at 70 I am working a minimum wage job, once again, so I can survive on my SS income. The world is not fair but you cannot blame it all on the Boomers.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Wage increases declined when women insisted on entering the workforce. Flood the market with labor and expect the price of labor to decline or stagnate
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
That's a fallacy, my job paid an average of $11000 a year in 1970. Today the base minimum is $70,000. The problem is people not wanting to work anymore and the government printing money to give away free stuff for votes. So many kids are tricked into going to college and end up with a useless liberal arts or sociology degree. They end up with massive debt and working in retail and then blame everyone else. My advice is if your parents couldn't pay for college go to work for literally any company that remotely does what you want to go to college for and they will have a program that will pay your tuition. Even Starbucks and McDonald's have some sort of tuition program. Common sense would dictate that's it's a terrible idea to borrow a bunch of money without a guaranteed way to pay it back. My buddy spent 80k on his daughters communications degree... She never got a job in her field, she manages an apple store...
I just plugged $11,000 in 1970 into an inflation adjustment calculator and that would be $86,500 today. So your example proves the poster's point - someone in that job has backtracked $15,500. And this doesn't account for huge increases in the cost of tuition and housing. BTW, many businesses won't hire anyone without a college degree anymore (doesn't matter what it's in, no degree is worthless.)
I disagree many degrees are worthless because the job that will take any degree won't increase your pay enough to pay off the degree.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
The job isn’t as important today as it was in 1970, thus the disparity. Look at IT. You couldn’t really make a living in IT in the 70s but you can be well off in that field now.
A lot of jobs are outsourced and automated today and that trend is going to increase... Unskilled/unspecialised labour has lost its capital worth.
He wasn't trying to disprove it, he was trying to disprove the comment he replied to that took away the wrong message.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I mean, basically, you know that, um that inflation rate, unemployment, like you know, sky, you know what I mean? LOL. You know that, basically, inflation rate, unemployment rate in the. like, you know, that um, was worse than now. Did I type, like you would understand???? I mean, did you, like, understand?
'them vs us' is the correct framing - but it's not a generational thing, it's a CEOs vs normal people thing. Older folks are less affected by virtue of having bought houses decades ago when the wealth disparity wasn't so extreme.
I just laugh when I read "You boomers got to work for the same company for life" comments online. They're thinking of the depression generation that came before. Every "boomer" that I know, including myself, has been through so many recessions and been laid off two or more times.
Right, and 60% of you aren't making s**t up about 20 year old millennials that never want to work and constantly misuse the word "woke" at every chance you get because Fox News told you to. By the way. None of us are 20 anymore. You're blaming us for everything you're making up about gen Z. I feel sorry for them too. We are not the problem. You, while a pack of misinformed people, aren't the problem. The massive wage gap and lack of increase in decades is the problem. The super rich are the problem. Lobbiests are the problem. People, young and old, being the braindeads they are and think a living wage will somehow set Murikuh on fire, are the problem. Easily manipulated people, are the problem.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I'm surprised you have downvotes. I guess the truth hurts. It's better to be lied too. I think your assessment is accurate. There is a lot of blaming of the younger generations. Whether they want to admit it or not it's the older generations that got the country in this state. They were the ones in charged. Yes, there is a lot of brain dead people walking around.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
He's getting downvotes because he wouldn't know the truth if it flew up his árse and laid eggs. Nor, it would seem, would you. Your last sentence was the only true thing you wrote, and you're a prime example.
Actually not true. I know several boomers including myself, who've never been laid off. There are so those that stayed at one place for their whole career, mostly in the government. It's still a place where you can stay for life.
Her comment is true for her experience she clearly said every Boomer she knew just because you know others doesn't make her statement untrue. I really don't know a single Boomer that has worked for the same job their whole life either unless you count people that worked at the post office or similar jobs where they got pensions.
Depends where you live. In my country it's more about contract work vs full time. Boomers rarely had to deal with contract or part time jobs, then they voted for us to have more jobs by allowing more companies to have contract work without sickleave etc, so stable fulltime jobs are rarer than what they had in the 70s-80s. Many are seeing that it might have been good for those that had small businesses but Goodluck getting a mortgage when you have no guarantee of work now. That's my country anyway and it sucks. My boomers friends are seeing it now that they too can't get stable work some want a few more yrs of ft work before they retire and its just not here. It's a nightmare. :(
Depends on the sector you're in. My father, a machinist, changed companies a number of times, and not by choice. He was a sober and skilled hard worker... the companies had 0% loyalty but expected 100% from their employees (this was the 80/90s).
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Grow up man. I can tell you had a retort ready before you got through the first sentence. Ten bucks you're the talk but never listen type.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Lots of "good ol' daysisms" in the comments too. No matter what it feels like, the past was the worst. Yeah things could be better now, but the past was always worse.
I think he's right. The Internet is a wonderful thing. Cars are safer. Technology more advanced. Life expectancy higher. The future is pretty much always better than the past.
Some of us boomers get it. We know it all went to sh*t with Reagan and DID NOT vote for any of this. Just to be clear some of us saw this coming.
100 % correct. Many of us "boomers" are also paying the price of the terible decisions made back then.
Load More Replies... This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
You’re showing your ignorance. Reagan brought us out of 18%+ interest rates and into a booming economy which gave everyone a chance to succeed and own a home. If you didn’t take advantage of that then that was on you.
Way, way back there were no “extras”. Television was free but there were only 3-4 channels. There was only the cost of your phone bill that until congress broke up the Bell System was mostly supported by long distance costs so it was super cheap. You never made long distance calls. Only businesses made them. Both my parents worked but they were unusual. We finally got a second car in the mid 50’s. We drove on our vacations to a family YMCA camp. Everyone that did go on vacation just drove to visit relatives or had similar housekeeping rental cabins. No one took a plane. We shopped for clothes at big box stores, read cheap. For entertainment, besides TV, we had the public library and the public parks. All still free. There were 5 of us and my parents could not buy a lakeside 4 bedroom house with a boat. They did buy a rowboat after they retired. Not exactly luxury. People just didn’t spend a lot. My mom made my graduation dress. My grandmother made our doll clothes.
A lot of current expenses are now baked in to our society. There used to be more walkable neighborhoods, schools weren't so centralized, there were sidewalks and payphones. Now you can barely survive without a car except in major cities, jobs expect you to have a smartphone and PC with internet, and two incomes are barely enough especially if you need childcare. Workers are supporting kids and parents as they are outliving both health and their savings. Add that wages stagnant in the face of inflation for the last two generations, and that housing stocks were at historic lows before air BNB and investment groups gobbled them up and you get the great repression.
Load More Replies... Too true, Bex. Not right with these investors owning hundreds of homes they are just using to make money. People used to invest in companies, not homes. Also way back childcare was taken care of by grandparents. Mine lived with us. That was normal. I was 3 when my parents bought a house but that was after they had 2 kids. Before, they lived with my mom's mom. The folks next door lived in their parents house along with their son. My friends down the block lived in their grandmother's house along with 2 uncles and an aunt. Totally normal and that was how people lived. Every nuclear family having an individual house is a fairly recent concept. I guess when people moved from rural areas to big cities and had to rent, they all wanted their own dwelling. Can't blame them. It is just different.
This used to be an acceptable practice. Now, if you have more than two ppl stacked in a room, so more than 4 total ppl for a two bed house, it's a fire hazard and you can be evicted. Also, DHS can get involved if you have 2 or more children of differing sex sharing a room, or a child sharing a room with an adult, parent or not, it's a problem, and Child protection services can charge you with neglect.
What problem do they have with two children of different sexes sharing a room? What do they expect the children to do? Where is this a thing?
I love how my colleague told me that public transport wouldn't work in LA, basically because population density it too low. I want to see how he will react to Lahti (LA has ~8.500 people per sq mile, Lahti has ~350)
You can tell your colleague LA's population density is 3.849M, compare that to Toronto, which as ample selection of public transit (subways, Go Train, Trolley Trains, buses) with 2.93M pop., Calgary that also has good public transit with a 1.336M pop, and Winnipeg that has What is the population of 841,000 with a decent transit system that actually should have more buses on the busiest routes.
Absolutely not true. Most people did not live in the cities. They were very rural and transportation was necessary yet most families still made it fine with 1 car. People that has TVs had 1 and it was probably black and white. Cable didn’t exist until late 60s early 70s and it was nothing like it is now. If you’re finances weren’t great, you didn’t get it. Most people didn’t get color tv until the 70s because it was expensive. Why spend the money for that.
Not sure if this is right, but wasn't there some consideration for employees with families, and accommodated raises and extra hours? Now a days, if you state you have kids you're considered a liability and you're ability to afford to take care of your kids is deemed the employee's problem. Not the business's. I was actually told that by HR when I was asking to go full time from part time but denied.
Easy way to fix all this nearly overnight - legislate the tax advantages of REITs away. Watch capital for real estate investment evaporate. Also, grandpa’s fixed income.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Question, how much does child care cost? Would it be cheaper for one person to quit and come home instead of spending that money on it? Would it be better to change jobs so one person is on 1st shift, the other is on 2nd or 3rd? Its called making hard decisions to support your family. Smart phones? Do you need the smart part or can you use wifi and cell ph? Quit being Eeyore and being defeated before you start.
Childcare can be really expensive in the US (not to mention the quality if you want to give your child a better start in life). It‘s still often better for a mother to work. People keep forgetting that a mother will only need to stay home until the kid starts school. That‘s around 6 years? And what then? If she has not worked in her field for 6 years, then she might not get in anymore or at a way lower level. Or she will have to get some low pay job. So, in the long run, it benefits the womans career and therefor the household income, if the mother stays in her job and profession. As a houswife by the time the kid goes to school she will be likely forced to do a minimum wage job. As a working Mom she might get promoted multiple times during that time. And THAT is the hard decision they DO MAKE, because no Mom WANTS to be away from her little child!
my sister was on gov assistance while her husband worked, so she could look after the kids. when she graduated college, she started working at a hospital as a nurse, but that put her over the govt assistance and she had to pay for child care. she ended up LOSING money in this situation, so she quit her job and went back on assistance. when jobs are paying you so little, and childcare costs so much, that staying home and getting assistance is a better deal, there is something seriously wrong with the job and childcare system.
Most moms actually want to be away from their little child's, just like how dad's do and no one bats an eye That you have a baby doesn't make a woman suddenly not want to do anything else and have zero other interests of aspirations . Again, just like, you guess it, men Like seriously how many moms do you know that would say no if you offered em a day where you'd take care of their child? Very few
I guess it would depend on the parent. Many mothers, though, feel guilty being at work and missing milestones. Offers of a few hours for a break now and then are great to recharge and feel like a human. That's perfectly normal. It would still be on how maternal the mother is and how paternal the father is. Some fathers also feel a sense of regret working when they could be playing with their kids, while some mother disdain the idea of being with their kids all the time. I was scared I was going to be an alien to my daughter or that I wasn't doing enough to help her with her development. I still feel that way, even though I know she was with an early childhood educator and speech therapist. But still, whenever I was at work and saw parents taking their dressed up daughters to events, I felt that I should be doing that as well. Not at work in a stuffy office.
Well the system should not force those people to make those hard decisions, the system should work to help satisfy everyone.
You also don’t need Netflix, YouTube tv, hulu and all the other paid programming, don’t need doordash and other he food delivery services, don’t need “smart” phones, don’t need the latest car, 10-15 yr old used car is just fine, cook at home and not expensive steaks either. Yes I get tightening your belt isn’t fun but if you want money for the future, you have to learn how to save it. Look at those people who are doing the “early retirement” programs, they’ve cut all all the fluff and have saved buckets, living in today’s world in today’s economy. There is no excuse for most, especially if you’ve been educated.
My husband and I have one 12 y/o car I bought used 3 years ago, we don't go to restaurants or get food delivery, we get basic cable/wifi free from our apartment building. We are very careful with money. After working 60hr weeks at multiple part-time, entry-level jobs for several years to "save buckets" I became disabled following a traumatic event less than a week after our wedding, and all those savings went to medical expenses. So now I'm taking college classes online to hopefully get a job someday I can actually do with my disabilities. My amazing husband works 50+ hour weeks in retail management, a job he was only able to get because he has "been educated" and has a degree: aka thousands of dollars in debt from 5 years commuting to a state college despite also working the whole time. He makes about 1 income bracket over the poverty line after bonuses. The bills get paid. And no, tightening belts isn't fun. But MANY do. Stop blaming us for being born into a broken world.
So in order to buy a house we should remove every bit of happiness from our lives?
I think the key is balance... and living within your means. Prioritising is NOT a dirty word.
Why do you assume that people aren't doing these things? Why is it easier for you to assume that people are stupid or lazy or entitled than it is to believe that the system is messed up? And, have you questioned whether those early retirees are exceptions or rules? What does the data say?
"why don't you just drive instead of using airplanes and make your own clothes" because it's cheaper actually. the cost of gasoline is so much more expensive than the cost of an airline ticket. the cost of fabric is significantly higher than a mass-produced garment. it's not about people spending more today, it's about things *costing* more today while workers aren't being paid enough to survive. you really should try living off $800 a month. that's how much income I'll take in *if* I get on disability. it's not a guarantee, you never know. the government might deem me able bodied even though 1 day of work costs me 3 in such agonizing pain I can't get out of bed. I will never be able to afford to live. I will have to leech off my partner so we can afford to live. do you understand how bad that makes me feel?
just to add on to my "try to live on $800 a month" no, you cannot couch surf. if you do, too bad, your only income is now 500 a month. that $800 had to stretch far enough to cover rent, food, and medical emergencies. I've never even seen an apartment in my area that costs less than $1000 a month
The cheap, run down apartments on the bad side of town around where I am average out to about $1200/month. The new, safer ones can go anywhere from $2k to $7k, depending.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
So rent the old ones, you don’t need new. Stop allowing government to kowtow to criminals. You can’t have a society where you say drug use is ok and then complain about the crime as most crime is tied to drugs. In places where some of it has been legalized the homeless population and crime is skyrocketing thus making cheaper housing all that more unsafe. Life requires hard decisions. Doing without to save and enforcing the laws for the safety of the citizens.
Your correlations are backwards. Crime is tied to poverty, because it's a quick way to make money. Drug use is also tied to poverty, but as a form of escapism. Drug use exists in all tiers of society but it's used as scape goat with poverty. The reason crime is increasing is not because drug use is increasing but because poverty is increasing. The poverty situation is worsening because the government panders to criminals - white collar criminals who have manufactured inflation for their personal profit. I'm guessing based on your various rants on this page you part of the problem and impede those who try to fix anything in your community.
That what I get a month for SSDI. Wife gets SSI and they lowered hers because she living with me. Can't make more than 1391 a month.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
BS. Explain how the people doing the “early retirement” programs are able to “make it” in today’s economy. I’ll explain it to you, they don’t spend frivolously.
No, they're a product of their generational wealth. The vast majority of those were put through schooling on their parent's dime (including college), didn't want for consistent housing/food, don't have health issues. + The statistics on the "get rich quick" scheme is that it's random and rare. There are people who have been living their whole lives as spendthrift and miserly as possible and have nothing to show for it. Where's the "work for it and don't spend frivolously and you'll be fine" for them?
“On our parents’ dime” my college was $120 a quarter for 21 hours. A meal ticket cost more. Dorms were $120 a quarter. Add a refrigerator, tiny, was $25 a quarter. Books were close to $400. And I was on work study so that helped. I didn’t vote in student loans so colleges and universities could then up their fees to such exorbitant amounts. Homes were MUCH smaller. My family of 7 lived in a 1000 sf 3 br home. 3 boys in one room, my sister and I in another. We didn’t eat out. We rarely went to movies and then it was to the drive in. We drove EVERYWHERE. Vacation? My dad was military and we went “home” every year to East Tennessee, 2 weeks at one grandparents and 2 weeks at the other. First time I flew for something other than moving was when I went home from college. After my first year I was given a car. Sad paid $600 for it and fixed it up. Mom made all my clothes except my underwear. My 2 formals in college and my wedding dress. My wedding was under $1000.
I don't know the date so I guessed-- $120/quarter would've been about $460 in current dollars. The current average cost of tuition for a semester is over $10,000. That would be over $5,000/quarter. If you convert that back to 1980 dollars, that would be over $1,300. Do you believe that you would've been able to afford college if it cost you more than 10x what you actually paid? I didn't even factor in the dorm, meal plan, books-- those have also increased and would be many times what you paid, even when adjusted for inflation. And, they also now often require those smart phones and computers that you get to be "done with" as you ebb into your golden years. I could also go into the rising costs of food (even groceries), cars (even used ones), gas (even for trips to Granny's), housing (even small homes)-- all of which even when adjusted for inflation are multiple times higher than what you would've paid in 1980. Not to mention that wages are stagnant. Maybe you're just wrong...
Part 2. We didn’t have a honeymoon because he was an E-3 in the AF. We didn’t have credit cards. We went to the library. We shopped at the thrift store and yard sales. Even now, the only furniture we have that was bought brand new is our bed and our living room furniture. Everything else was bought at yard sales. I cook at home. I can and freeze for the weeks/months ahead. We’re so done with cell phones and the way they trap people into more debt. The only reason we keep them is to FaceTime our grandchildren. I tried Door Dash once to send food to a friend’s family. 2 pizzas from Papa Murphey’s ended up costing over $50. I don’t do nails, eyelashes, tans, Botox, eyebrows, etc. I quit wearing makeup but do skincare. There are hundreds of ways to cut costs, but you have to be willing.
Ma'am, I work 60 hr weeks. I don't have cable, nor do I pay for any streaming services. No kids. I have an old car I managed to buy outright a few years back. When I someolhow have to chance to read, I either read free books online or I go to the library. Vacation? HA! I don't do long distance calls, I have a basic phone plan. I am lucky enough not to have changed much over the years, so I rarely get new clothes, it's a huge treat when I do. Even then, you wouldn't catch me ever shopping for something that was on clearance or on some huge sale. I can barely afford the home I managed to get a mortgage on, which is cheaper than most apartments around here, and it's only possible because my mother cosigned for the loan (we both make approximately $50k/yr) and my sister pays rent. So, no, the "extras" society pays or doesn't always explain the cost of living discrepancies.
I’d suggest talking with a financial manager, you can find them free with some research, heck, you can call Dave Ramsay. If what you are saying is true, you should be able to make it just fine. Sounds like your only bills are your mortgage and basic living expenses. I’m assuming you’re sister is paying you rent? Something doesn’t add up here….
Maybe it doesn't add up because your understanding about the world is wrong.
50k should be more than enough to live on by yourself. What else are you doing?
Should be, sure. Isn't, though. Not by far, especially since the vast majority of those jobs that have that pay also require degrees and college is not free or cheap. Housing is not free or cheap. Healthcare is not free or cheap.
I mean sure, but the dollar went a lot further than it does today and minimum wage even just adjusting for inflation is lower at the federal level than it was in 1970. Basically to match old minimum wage we'd have to have the federal minimum set to about 11.35 or something else to it. Having less buying power per dollar, higher cost of living in all aspects, higher rent/mortgage/car payments and basically being expected to be on the clock even when not at work because companies often don't understand having any kind of work life balance leads to all sorts of issues. Minimum wage if kept to its original ideals would be massively higher than it is today and even if it wasn't and just kept adjusting for inflation it should be 4+ dollars more at the federal level. The fact we earn less but have to be more productive in that one hour of time if we work a minimum wage job (or any job below like 11.35) vs our 1970 counterparts should infuriate everyone
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
BS. People had NO Money in those days. They didn’t but on credit, only bought what the actually had money for. The really poor would have large pits of beans and rice and feed the family that for days. Many families would have meat 1 day a week if that. people SAVED for their wants. There is a reason the Sears and Roebuck catalog was called the “Wish Book”.
There are literally millions of families who still do that and barely can afford rent. Your argument doesn't hold water.
Yeah, there weren’t a lot of extras that people now consider necessary. For the first three years on my own in the early 80s I didn’t have a phone (landline). That would have been a luxury for me.
Growing up in the UK in the 1970s and 1980s we didn't have a colour TV untill 1982, a video recorder in 1990. We had old cars that broke down and dad lay under to fix every weekend so he could get to work on Monday. We walked to school, to the shops, we dragged food shopping 2 miles home from the supermarket in a pram. Clothes and toys came from jumble sales. We simply didn't spend money, because we didn't have any. My husband's experience was much the same, he was driving a tractor in the fields for the harvest when he was 7 years old, so his family could eat. Today we brought a new to us leather sofa for £100 from a charity shop, our mortgage on our tiny house is paid off, we drive 20 year old cars. We have some savings so technically have the money to go and buy new sofas or newer cars or big TVs. But we've lived through times of no food in the cupboards, so we dont.
So very like my own upbringing, Fenchurch. We had to rent a TV from ColourVision until early nineties. Didn't go on holidays. Sharing bathwater with the whole family and the like. My parents are retired now, no car, no holidays and still scrimping and saving. I think most of these "boomer" stereotypes come from US as they in no way resemble the lives of my parents or myself (Gen X) in Northern England. My parents dont lecture me on saving money as they damn well know how hard it is themselves.
When *I* were a lad, all this were fields. :) But yeah, I remember fondly moving to a house that had central heating and hot water, so I didn't have to make the fire before my paper route. It was only 40 years ago, but it feels like it was the stone age
Frost on the inside of the bedroom windows, no central heating/couldn't afford the coal. We still had to keep the boiler "in" if we wanted the central heating to work! So yeah memories of raking out the clinker and trying to get the boiler to light and draw on a still day.
My husband remembers when they got indoor plumbing, semi-rural South, and he just turned 60. They lived in a 4 ROOM rented house (6people) Yet, he paid his way through college (worked the whole time but still found time for fun) worked his rearend off after graduation, we got married in our mid twenties, both worked, saved, waited to have children,I gave up my career and stayed home with the children as daycare was too expensive, juggled money while they were young and finally came out on the other side with money for retirement and fun. Husband won’t retire as he loves being busy, owns his own business and can work from anywhere most days. Only needs to be in the office a few days every 2 weeks. Life is a series of compromises, very few can “have it all”.
They don’t resemble the lives of Americans either. Yes some live very well but it is because they were extremely successful in their working years as you have in the UK as well. Those that lived through the Great Depression and war years have always lived differently, have always saved because they still don’t believe that they can be without at any given time. I would tell you that most of these whiners on social media would never have survived 80-100 years ago.
Before she went back to school, my wife thought she'd try supplementing our income by working at Starbucks. That lasted all of two months when we realized the childcare for one child cost more than she was earning.
Eating out was a rare treat. There were no McD's or Starbucks. Breakfast was usually oatmeal or corn flakes, along with 4 oz. reconstituted frozen OJ. Bacon was a rarity and rationed to 2 rashers per person. Dad took the train to work, and Mom stayed home until the kids were old enough for school. As we got older the moms started getting jobs and we became latch key kids. Medical care was affordable, even when the family GP made house calls. The only air conditioning was at the movies. Kids wore mended hand-me-downs and everyone's shoes were resoled. "Make do, use it up, wear it out" was standard operating procedure. It's amazing what you can happily do without when not bombarded by incessant advertisng set on redefining lifestyles and what constitutes a necessity.
No one’s mentioning how pensions evaporated in exchange for the lie that 401ks were better. Also, whether death of a partner, disease, divorce or disability, no matter what you have achieved, it can all be lost in one go. I had what I thought was going to be my forever house with my forever partner but the partners childhood abuse trauma (think of the worst 3 and yup) by boomer parents kinda exploded all over my life after almost 20 years. I was lucky to move in w my mom because she got the house in HER divorce from my cheating dad. Face it, the folks who came back from the war stopped asking questions of the government and their employers because they were so happy to be alive. The govt and companies quickly did away with all safety nets and polluted everything, killed farms, built cheap houses and crammed us all in tight. Then factories closed and went to cheaper states then overseas. A lot changed and y’all want to blame GenX and younger for problems y’all’s parents created.
THERE WERE NO SAFETY NETS. You didn’t earn, you didn’t eat unless by the kindness of strangers. GOVERNMENT did not bail you out. You were on your own and had to live by the consequences of your own actions.
Yeah, the consequences were that lots of people died. Look up survivor bias.
I assure you, daily expenses don't make a difference for the numbers in these cases Plus we're talking about the 60s and the 70s, the age of blatant consumerism, TV diners, as seen on TV, the boom of consumer appliances etc. people spend a lot a lot at the time. Plus many of the things you Frame as extravagant like flying have gotten cheaper to the point they're not You're basically doing the if you didn't buy avocado toast maybe you'd have a house
Only businesses made long distance calls? That's simply not true. My family made long distance calls because we had friends in Europe, my grandparents lived in a different city and it was long distance to call them. "No one took a plane?" How on earth were the airlines in business then if no one was taking planes? I took my first flight at the age of 6 and flew multiple times after that with my family to many places. There may not have been any "extras" in your family but that doesn't mean they didn't exsist for other families. My family was not filthy rich by any means but they chose to have only one child in order to have and experience things that other families with multiple children couldn't afford to do. My parents both worked as well. My mother was working full-time in the days when women didn't work as a rule unless they were teachers, secretaries or nurses. My mother was a business woman. In our neighborhood, only two women worked outside of home.
Just a small comment. I do sewing as a hobby. Nowadays, fabric can cost more than a store bought clothes.
And I bet you actually talked to each other. Young people asked old people questions that they were delighted to answer. Now they get a sponsored response from Google driving them to the newest morality decimating website with a million ads reminding them of what they don't have and how content they will be if only they could acquire said items at exorbitant interest on their credit cards. People's addiction to their phones now is almost psychotic. I see young people that can't be more than a minute from checking their phone. Their dependency is beyond belief. They rarely talk to each other and when they do their vocabulary is one of a child. Their attention spans are lightning short and their respect for authority is almost non-existent. These are the values the online world has given youth today. Gaming's influence on males is especially problematic. Most adults have no clue as to the violence, lack of respect of human life, endless profanity and sexuality so many games impart.
In essence, you lived within your means as no-one was going to bail you out if you made bad financial decisions. And we wete happy without all the “junk” that is considered a need now.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Thank you from a Boomer who raised 4 kids who are all doing way better than we are
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Television is still free. People choose to pay for cable/satellite service. You don't have to have an unlimited plan on your cell phone. You could actually get a minimum plan and stop calling long distance for hours at a time. Back in the 80s, you either bought the phone on your landline or leased it from the phone company. In the 70s and before, you could only lease. We still paid for these items but we used discretion on what we were buying. Not disagreeing with you about how we did things back then just that the new generation still has those options but they're not using them. If you suggest to a millennial, or gen z or whatever they're called that they should take the bus, train, or drive somewhere, they look at you as if you just insulted them. They want to use the most expensive mode of travel, buy the most expensive cars, buy the biggest house, own the most expensive cell phone, buy the most expensive clothes. They simply need to learn how to budget & save.
'Them v us' story. Plenty of older people who are struggling to survive too.
Nope. It's a story about how little wages have increased. I mean, you should read it, it's pretty clear.
Load More Replies... you hit the nail right on the head! it's not that we hate older people, it's that we don't like older people that are willfully ignorant about how hard life has become with minimum wage not increasing as quickly as inflation or the cost of housing.
That and we don't like it when they call us lazy when many of us work 60hours a week, don't eat out, don't go on vactions, don't drink or smoke and we didn't get things like free education as they did in AU. Then they say things like you're just lazy which is why you don't want kids, no, I can't afford them and don't have the time to give to a child. There's no living off 1 persons income anymore. My friend's dad bought 2houses as a trolley boy, he had 4 kids, smoked, drank, gambled and went out to gigs. If you were a trolley boy now, you couldn't earn enough to pay rent. People that choose to be this ignorant are just in denial. I don't blame all boomers, I just can't stand the lazy rude self entitled ones that refuse to see logic or common sense.
Sadly willful ignorance isn't limited to older generations. A lot of younger people vote against their own interests also
But do they make what the minimum wage would be if it had kept up with inflation? If you make a buck fifty over the federal minimum, are you making a living wage?
K Cor said "Wage increases declined when women insisted on entering the workforce." Let me make this very clear: WOMEN HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IN THE WORKFORCE! Thanks for proving your ignorance K Cor.
Once upon a time, people grew their own food, and had their own businesses. Even if someone in the family went ri work, it was not uncommon to have backyard gardens/farms. But people wanted ease and comfort — people in or near retirement age today. Now we’re at the mercy of sociopaths — corporations. Souls were sold and the piper plays.
The problem is that while wages have increased quite a bit, costs have increased exponentially and disproportionately so as to negate the benefit of the wage increase in the first place.
Nowhere in the article is mentioned the grandparents' perspective on the current job/wages. For the people commenting as if they're ignorant of today's situation, that's absolutely speculation. MANY older people are aware and hate that the system makes life hard for their children and grandchildren.
at 70 I am working a minimum wage job, once again, so I can survive on my SS income. The world is not fair but you cannot blame it all on the Boomers.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Wage increases declined when women insisted on entering the workforce. Flood the market with labor and expect the price of labor to decline or stagnate
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
That's a fallacy, my job paid an average of $11000 a year in 1970. Today the base minimum is $70,000. The problem is people not wanting to work anymore and the government printing money to give away free stuff for votes. So many kids are tricked into going to college and end up with a useless liberal arts or sociology degree. They end up with massive debt and working in retail and then blame everyone else. My advice is if your parents couldn't pay for college go to work for literally any company that remotely does what you want to go to college for and they will have a program that will pay your tuition. Even Starbucks and McDonald's have some sort of tuition program. Common sense would dictate that's it's a terrible idea to borrow a bunch of money without a guaranteed way to pay it back. My buddy spent 80k on his daughters communications degree... She never got a job in her field, she manages an apple store...
I just plugged $11,000 in 1970 into an inflation adjustment calculator and that would be $86,500 today. So your example proves the poster's point - someone in that job has backtracked $15,500. And this doesn't account for huge increases in the cost of tuition and housing. BTW, many businesses won't hire anyone without a college degree anymore (doesn't matter what it's in, no degree is worthless.)
I disagree many degrees are worthless because the job that will take any degree won't increase your pay enough to pay off the degree.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
The job isn’t as important today as it was in 1970, thus the disparity. Look at IT. You couldn’t really make a living in IT in the 70s but you can be well off in that field now.
A lot of jobs are outsourced and automated today and that trend is going to increase... Unskilled/unspecialised labour has lost its capital worth.
He wasn't trying to disprove it, he was trying to disprove the comment he replied to that took away the wrong message.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I mean, basically, you know that, um that inflation rate, unemployment, like you know, sky, you know what I mean? LOL. You know that, basically, inflation rate, unemployment rate in the. like, you know, that um, was worse than now. Did I type, like you would understand???? I mean, did you, like, understand?
'them vs us' is the correct framing - but it's not a generational thing, it's a CEOs vs normal people thing. Older folks are less affected by virtue of having bought houses decades ago when the wealth disparity wasn't so extreme.
I just laugh when I read "You boomers got to work for the same company for life" comments online. They're thinking of the depression generation that came before. Every "boomer" that I know, including myself, has been through so many recessions and been laid off two or more times.
Right, and 60% of you aren't making s**t up about 20 year old millennials that never want to work and constantly misuse the word "woke" at every chance you get because Fox News told you to. By the way. None of us are 20 anymore. You're blaming us for everything you're making up about gen Z. I feel sorry for them too. We are not the problem. You, while a pack of misinformed people, aren't the problem. The massive wage gap and lack of increase in decades is the problem. The super rich are the problem. Lobbiests are the problem. People, young and old, being the braindeads they are and think a living wage will somehow set Murikuh on fire, are the problem. Easily manipulated people, are the problem.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I'm surprised you have downvotes. I guess the truth hurts. It's better to be lied too. I think your assessment is accurate. There is a lot of blaming of the younger generations. Whether they want to admit it or not it's the older generations that got the country in this state. They were the ones in charged. Yes, there is a lot of brain dead people walking around.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
He's getting downvotes because he wouldn't know the truth if it flew up his árse and laid eggs. Nor, it would seem, would you. Your last sentence was the only true thing you wrote, and you're a prime example.
Actually not true. I know several boomers including myself, who've never been laid off. There are so those that stayed at one place for their whole career, mostly in the government. It's still a place where you can stay for life.
Her comment is true for her experience she clearly said every Boomer she knew just because you know others doesn't make her statement untrue. I really don't know a single Boomer that has worked for the same job their whole life either unless you count people that worked at the post office or similar jobs where they got pensions.
Depends where you live. In my country it's more about contract work vs full time. Boomers rarely had to deal with contract or part time jobs, then they voted for us to have more jobs by allowing more companies to have contract work without sickleave etc, so stable fulltime jobs are rarer than what they had in the 70s-80s. Many are seeing that it might have been good for those that had small businesses but Goodluck getting a mortgage when you have no guarantee of work now. That's my country anyway and it sucks. My boomers friends are seeing it now that they too can't get stable work some want a few more yrs of ft work before they retire and its just not here. It's a nightmare. :(
Depends on the sector you're in. My father, a machinist, changed companies a number of times, and not by choice. He was a sober and skilled hard worker... the companies had 0% loyalty but expected 100% from their employees (this was the 80/90s).
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Grow up man. I can tell you had a retort ready before you got through the first sentence. Ten bucks you're the talk but never listen type.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Lots of "good ol' daysisms" in the comments too. No matter what it feels like, the past was the worst. Yeah things could be better now, but the past was always worse.
I think he's right. The Internet is a wonderful thing. Cars are safer. Technology more advanced. Life expectancy higher. The future is pretty much always better than the past.
161
448