Forum menu
And in today's paper:
Pigface - Memberand modified each generation since
As I said you are completely correct, slaughter everyone over the age of 35
Or better still nuke the world to leave only 1/4 of world population alive.
Why pussy footing in selecting who to nuke?
😈
No shotgun references, no ZM's oh dear you are slipping
Gen X here and I'm blinkin' marvellous me. I can put food on the table, roof over heads, bikes to ride and the odd snowy holiday.
My parents (war children) had the benefit of that mad economic growth, home ownership and pensions. But my mother can still remember the first time she saw a banana, had school friends asking for the cores of apples because that was the only fruit they could get (she was the greengrocer's daughter). She has a PhD in chemistry but gave up on science after being told that as a woman she could only ever be a lab assistant, never have charge of her own lab.
Life is pretty decent these days. And gen Y people are pretty much the same as baby boomers (human evolution ain't that quick) - but they are responding to a different context (ie life is good and staying that way, rather than life was not so good and it's getting better).
Edit - sadly my point is made.
Because, I like the Tories and the boomers, don't give a **** about anyone except myself
IGM, How can you say life is "good and staing better" for Gen Y if many of them have to live at home with their parents until they are 30's like Southern bloody Italy.
But lifes better cuz they gots ipads and mri scanners, yo? Shiney thing make it all better and those hospitals...they got scanners....just in case I get terminally ill at a young age, no matter how statistically unlikely....my life is so much better.
Because, I like the Tories and the boomers, don't give a **** about anyone except myself
Consider it the logical endpoint of boomer narcissism staring back at them in the mirror.
Re-read what I wrote. I've added some helpful tips.
life is good and staying that way (gen Y) rather than life was not so good and it's getting better (boomer)
I vaguely remember the 70s and clearly remember the 80s. I'd rather live now than then. Respect for folk with different coloured skin or people of a non-White Anglo-Saxon Male persuasion generally has improved greatly.
The ski & snowboard thread on here wouldn't exist, not because of the lack of an internet (though that would have been a problem) but because there wouldn't have been enough folk who could afford to ski (or found was of doing it cheap). I see some students at uni who have cars - no one had a car when I went.
The 90s were OK.
Downsides?
I do worry slightly about racism making a come back
And I agree that material goods (iPads, cars, clothes etc), of which people have vastly more now, do not make for happiness.
And I agree buying houses is more difficult than in the 1970-80s. But in the 1950s people didn't buy houses, and not do they in much of Europe. (OK cast generalisation)
And yes I agree with your point about the mirror. People are no different from their parents in many ways.
life is good and staying that way (gen Y) rather than life was not so good and it's getting better (boomer)
Not really. For a lot of gen Y life is not great and getting worse, and no big hope of it getting better - globalisation and immigration makes it harder for many of them to get real jobs, continued neglect of infrastructure and public services hit their chances of decent housing, education and health care, meanwhile global warming is starting to kick in causing real economic dislocation.
Steve Miller said he was a "Space Cowboy" in about 1970. Mind I think he was a Joker.
I blame the parents.
As an 'Xer' can I recommend getting off your tits and dancing in a field?
Pisses on economics.
Steve Miller said he was a "Space Cowboy" in about 1970. Mind I think he was a Joker.
Wasn't that Maurice?
also in a newspaper today:
But in the 1950s people didn't buy houses, and not do they in much of Europe. (OK cast generalisation)
In 1918 whilst 77 percent of people rented, just 1% of households socially rented and this reached a peak of 31% in 1981. Renting in 2011, was at 46 percent...london is in the 50s.
But yay for going back to the victorian period, the oiks shouldn't complain...they've never had it so good. Yay for Social progress!
Interesting.
Does seem to suggest that those in their twenties got particularly badly hit after Cameron gained power. Though they still do better than average now - whether they will when they retire is another question.
Generally though disposable income is trending towards the mean with a couple of exceptions.
Tom - look around. There's been plenty of social progress and not that much of it is going away soon. Houses ain't everything.
Now stop trying to wind me up - you might manage - and you're probably a very reasonable person that I could happily have this discussion with for hours over a pint or two. But this is my stop on the train.
IGM, in regards to more people renting before the 1950s kicked in....
http://www.victorianlondon.org/finance/money.htm
A sweage flusher could just about afford to rent an entire house in suburban Walthamstow during the victorian period.
How much do sewage flushers make now and could they afford to rent an entire house in Walthamstow on a single imcome?
I suspect that I am less financially well off than a sewage flusher in 19th century victorian England, and I'm working in the capacity of a scientist. Anyone care to explain to me how this is progress? I couldn't do that, even in some shitty part of Slough.
How much do sewage flushers make now
£45k based on a Google.
As an 'Xer' can I recommend getting off your tits and dancing in a field?Pisses on economics.
Like.
Although not sure if I'm gen-x, early/mid 60's arrival here. Anyway, WGAF, where's the field?
How much do sewage flushers make now and could they afford to rent an entire house in Walthamstow on a single imcome?
Having a quick look at rightmove; renting a two bed house in Walthamstow starts from about £1.3k/month, so given the £45k figure above - yes they could probably afford to rent an entire house on a single income.
I'm a thirty something currently studying for a second degree with a bunch of early twenty somethings, and I reckon it's a fairly shit time to be a twenty something. The mountain of student debt awaiting them on graduation has sucked the joy out of being at university, which used to be about having more money and freedom than you could have conceived of even a few short years before. Now, with the exception of the private school / family money lot, they're all earnest and hard-working, hardly any of them take drugs and (judging from facebook) their idea of a night out seems to involve putting on make up and getting shit-faced in a flat, presumably because it's cheaper than going out.
As said in my first post , I'm 34 and feel caught right in the middle of the generation X and Y thing. I went to uny 3 years after the tuition fees came in , although they were much less than they are now. I also missed the boat with housing prices and so on. My old landlady , who was three years older than me , bought a house in hackney for nothing and has now knocked it down to build two houses on the same land and will make a million or so .i paid 800 quid a month to live there and that was 5 years ago.
I did however graduate in 2003 and walked into a job and have been employed ever since .
Thank god I also missed Facebook and Instagram when I was a teenager. looking at some teenagers Facebook pages now (that sounds creepy) it really is endless selfies and pouting . Not group photos, or bands or gigs or whatever . It's rough and probably has been done by all generations in some way or another , but it does strike me as being different to 'when I was a lad'
£45k based on a Google.
You mean a qualified sewage engineer right? As opposed to the victorian sewage flusher. Closest I can find on indeed is a Sewage technician which runs from 18-30k in London.