It's very easy for those of us in Gen X that do software development to be smug. After all, I don't know of any 65 year old Java programmers refusing to retire so that we can get a job.
In other industries where ageism is not so rampant, they might have it tougher than we do. Industries like healthcare, finance, etc, there are many positions that they are just not going to give up.
In a way, it makes me very cynical towards the older generation. They had the world given to them on a platter in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. Instead they squandered everything they had. They started "Reaganomics" in the 1980s and since then median household income has decreased as adjusted for inflation. They started unnecessary wars, squandered our nations standing in the world, destroyed the housing market, the stock market, and the global economy. Now, when they finally retire they are going to dump themselves on us, broke, sick, and old, and expect us to take care of them with welfare payments, because they squandered all their money on McMansions and SUVs.
It's hard not to be bitter if you are Gen X and Gen Y. I know we all love our parents, but our parents generation is pretty fucked up.
There's truth in what you say and boomers in general have to take responsibility for having close to zero foresight with respect to how they've squandered their fortunes but let me counter a couple of your points.
1. The vast majority of boomers hit the job market between the middle 70's and middle 80's. This was the worst job market between the Great Depression and the Great Recession. While many things were peachy during boomer's youth, reality bit pretty hard for a really long stretch of time.
2. Reagan was largely voted in by the boomer's parent's generation.
3. And yes, under a boomer government, the housing market, stock market, global economy tanked, but I'm hard pressed to believe that these results didn't hit the boomers as hard or harder than they have hit the following generations.
Ha ha, those darn baby boomers, refusing to give up their jobs like their parents did! The fact that their parents' retirement was in defined-benefit pensions whereas the baby boomers' retirement is in 401ks that dropped hugely in value just as they were planning to retire has nothing to do with this, obviously.
“Don’t be dependent on anything or anyone,” Neu says. “It’s safest to plan as if the government isn’t going to take care of me, companies aren’t going to take care of me.”
Doesn't appear the boomer generation figured this out. As a Gen X, I think and hope I figured this out early enough.
According to my own calculations very few of the baby boomers will retire. Most of us spent our lives fighting a losing war, the inflation of the eighties, the rising housing prices. Schooling for the kids from being a very small amount of a family's life to eating a major portion of one's work efforts. Personally add one wrong move where I lost all my capital and still fighting to recover.
Most of us are still supporting our kids as they are the kids of the recessions or helping them with capital for their start-up and hey we don't want to rust in the port like an old ship. Many other of us have build Companies where these X's are currently employed.
> According to my own calculations very few of the baby boomers will retire.
It is sometimes difficult to understand that infirmities of aging are not controllable. Or put another way: Many folks are forced into retirement by someone other than their company.
I don't know the details about the US but for Spain and most European countries the baby boomers are going to create dysfunctional states as they will be the majority of voters for the next couple of years and have the highest benefits accrued in history. Basically gen X/Y will be relegated to paying their pensions with higher taxes and cuts in benefits as the boomers protect their benefits.
I think we are looking at a generational war or a complete revamp of the welfare systems across the entire west.
On reflection, there is a difference between the Lump of Labor fallacy and a particular job opening up. If your only way to advance (say within a company) is to wait for someone above you to advance/leave/retire, then you personally will be affected by later retirement ages. It's not always easy to see alternatives to waiting, and they might come with risks you'd rather not accept.
Exactly. If the the powers that control the shape of policy in this country (mostly wealthy & large corporations that have politicos in their pocket) cared about creating jobs as opposed to pilfering from the poor and middle class, we wouldn't be in this situation.
"Spaulding ... is a typical member of the relatively small group called Generation X,... born between 1965 and 1978: They’re ambitious, squeezed by debt and frustrated by people who aren’t retiring on schedule."
We're ambitious? Wait, all of those other articles say we aren't ambitious, and we like to settle for less. Which is it?
When the media first took note of Gen Xers during the early '90s recession, we were "lazy." Then during the dot-com boom we were ambitious. Funny how easy it is for a generation hitting a workforce when there aren't jobs available to look lazy, or for a generation hitting their late 20s/early 30s during a boom to look like sharp business types.
At the end of humanity, when the Sun finally burns out, and Earth drifts into a slow freeze in the final sunset - mankind will still not have grasped economics.
You got to elaborate on this. I'm going to guess that you're objecting to the way that the article seems to treat the number of jobs as a zero sum game, where boomers have to leave to "open up" one of a finite number of jobs for younger people (or anyone else, for that matter)? This was the first reaction I had to the article as well.
Thing is, it is actually debatable, or at least more nuanced than this. I lean toward the belief that relatively free markets and a robust entrepreneurialism can provide a huge amount of flexibility, to the point where discussing who "gets" a job may miss the point. Certainly young people who prefer to create startups are demonstrating that there's no need to try to climb a ladder, or at least that there are all kinds of options for creating your own job.
That said, I think there's enough friction and inertia in society and markets that a younger generation can be meaningfully stymied by an older one hanging on to the reigns.
Anyway, I'm not sure I've responded to your objection to this article - I'm really just responding to my own.
I'm a boomer, have no debt, own my houses, and have a fair amount of cash. But I have no pension and don't foresee any particular income from my cash while the Fed holds interest rates at near zero. Hard to imagine retiring now.
And no matter how much money I save, it seems kinda crazy to retire before being forced to. You might say: "Things look good, time to quit!", but what'll the world look like in 5 or 10 or 20 or 40 years? I don't know, but a good income will help carry you through a lot of financial craziness.
[+] [-] illumin8|14 years ago|reply
In other industries where ageism is not so rampant, they might have it tougher than we do. Industries like healthcare, finance, etc, there are many positions that they are just not going to give up.
In a way, it makes me very cynical towards the older generation. They had the world given to them on a platter in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. Instead they squandered everything they had. They started "Reaganomics" in the 1980s and since then median household income has decreased as adjusted for inflation. They started unnecessary wars, squandered our nations standing in the world, destroyed the housing market, the stock market, and the global economy. Now, when they finally retire they are going to dump themselves on us, broke, sick, and old, and expect us to take care of them with welfare payments, because they squandered all their money on McMansions and SUVs.
It's hard not to be bitter if you are Gen X and Gen Y. I know we all love our parents, but our parents generation is pretty fucked up.
[+] [-] bwanab|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jfruh|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] timmaah|14 years ago|reply
Doesn't appear the boomer generation figured this out. As a Gen X, I think and hope I figured this out early enough.
[+] [-] yannis|14 years ago|reply
Most of us are still supporting our kids as they are the kids of the recessions or helping them with capital for their start-up and hey we don't want to rust in the port like an old ship. Many other of us have build Companies where these X's are currently employed.
[+] [-] whatusername|14 years ago|reply
// Says a Gen Y from Australia where house prices haven't crashed yet.
[+] [-] jpdoctor|14 years ago|reply
It is sometimes difficult to understand that infirmities of aging are not controllable. Or put another way: Many folks are forced into retirement by someone other than their company.
[+] [-] christkv|14 years ago|reply
I think we are looking at a generational war or a complete revamp of the welfare systems across the entire west.
[+] [-] littlegiantcap|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bmm6o|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bmm6o|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] r00fus|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hernan7|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] duncanj|14 years ago|reply
We're ambitious? Wait, all of those other articles say we aren't ambitious, and we like to settle for less. Which is it?
[+] [-] jfruh|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamesbkel|14 years ago|reply
FTA
>"They long ago shed that image, Hewlett says"
[+] [-] lionhearted|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] geebee|14 years ago|reply
Thing is, it is actually debatable, or at least more nuanced than this. I lean toward the belief that relatively free markets and a robust entrepreneurialism can provide a huge amount of flexibility, to the point where discussing who "gets" a job may miss the point. Certainly young people who prefer to create startups are demonstrating that there's no need to try to climb a ladder, or at least that there are all kinds of options for creating your own job.
That said, I think there's enough friction and inertia in society and markets that a younger generation can be meaningfully stymied by an older one hanging on to the reigns.
Anyway, I'm not sure I've responded to your objection to this article - I'm really just responding to my own.
[+] [-] lootabooga|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aninteger|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] prestonbriggs|14 years ago|reply
And no matter how much money I save, it seems kinda crazy to retire before being forced to. You might say: "Things look good, time to quit!", but what'll the world look like in 5 or 10 or 20 or 40 years? I don't know, but a good income will help carry you through a lot of financial craziness.
[+] [-] pnathan|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] michaelchisari|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sp332|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Bloodwine|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alnayyir|14 years ago|reply
I couldn't write better comedy if I wanted to.
[+] [-] bitwize|14 years ago|reply
I only worry about my mom's retirement because her job sucks.