Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Basic Google-Fu - learning how to best ask a question to elicit the most information.

This right here... is extremely important.

We have massive amount of access to information at our finger tips... it's all for naught if you don't know how to ask the appropriate question to zero in on the desired information.

There's a vast difference between ability, and opportunity.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There's a vast difference between ability, and opportunity.

I dunno man. Again, I offered my brother FREE COLLEGE. That's sort of a big deal in the US, particularly when you have middle class parents who don't make enough to pay for you but at the same time don't make so little that you can just go for freesies.. Zero interest. And I wouldn't normally have described him as stupid either outside of the context of this conversation..

Even with opportunity, and a particular amount of ability, people still don't achieve. I think there's something else missing there that makes the difference.

I will sum up where this thread is going....

Poster 1: Things are tough

Poster 2: Bootstrap!

Poster 1: But....

Poster 2: I said BOOTSTRAP!

The fact that you are making twice the median salary seems to indicate that a very large number of people don't have better jobs because for whatever reason they are just not looking for them, or that these better jobs are not actually out there and you are very fortunate.

Either way there is a reason why your salary is not the median.

 d-usa wrote:
The fact that you are making twice the median salary seems to indicate that a very large number of people don't have better jobs because for whatever reason they are just not looking for them, or that these better jobs are not actually out there and you are very fortunate.

Either way there is a reason why your salary is not the median.

I'm probably quite fortunate. I'm just confused with why I'm not seeing the people close to me striving for that same fortune.

As I've sat here thinking about it, it occurs to me that since I'm referring to specific people, and not just "those kids these days", perhaps the only reasonable thing to do is actually ask them and see what they say. I suppose I shall withdraw my point until I can do that.

 daedalus wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There's a vast difference between ability, and opportunity.

I dunno man. Again, I offered my brother FREE COLLEGE. That's sort of a big deal in the US, particularly when you have middle class parents who don't make enough to pay for you but at the same time don't make so little that you can just go for freesies.. Zero interest. And I wouldn't normally have described him as stupid either outside of the context of this conversation..

Even with opportunity, and a particular amount of ability, people still don't achieve. I think there's something else missing there that makes the difference.

And that's on him.

But, one shouldn't, and prior to neo-liberal nonsense, didn't, need a College Education just to be able to afford to own a house, or have kids.

The situation in the U.K. is even more ludicrous. Have you heard of Income Support and Tax Credits? They're state benefits which top up low wages. That's right. As a tax payer, my taxes (which I gladly pay) are used to effectively subsidise employers paying the absolute least they can possibly get away with.

Is that not sick? Is that not twisted? Is that not so utterly arse-about-face as to make you question why such things are necessary? Does it not suggest that the well paying jobs are few and far between?

Now, I do a very particular job. And that job requires an innate level of judgement and sense of fairness. You can either do it, or you can't. I'm lucky that I can do it with aplomb. As a result. I consider myself well paid.

But the shelf stacker in Sainsbury's....sure, any ablebodied individual could do that. But can you explain to me why that job shouldn't pay a decent, living wage? The street sweeper, who's efforts we all benefit from. Why should he or she live on a pittance, just because it's not a job I or most much fancy doing?

Time was even those doing such jobs could still afford a place to live and some little luxuries. Not anymor though.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There's a vast difference between ability, and opportunity.

Yup... hence why I'm pounding on this skill.

I learned it from my job... ie (Google: how the fark does PERL chomp work with white spaces?):

 daedalus wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
The fact that you are making twice the median salary seems to indicate that a very large number of people don't have better jobs because for whatever reason they are just not looking for them, or that these better jobs are not actually out there and you are very fortunate.

Either way there is a reason why your salary is not the median.

I'm probably quite fortunate. I'm just confused with why I'm not seeing the people close to me striving for that same fortune.

I was reading your replies more from a "why isn't everyone just trying harder, bootstrap people" standpoint, so I think I was addressing a generalization you didn't actually make.

As I've sat here thinking about it, it occurs to me that since I'm referring to specific people, and not just "those kids these days", perhaps the only reasonable thing to do is actually ask them and see what they say. I suppose I shall withdraw my point until I can do that.

I have the same situation with my younger brother. I'm first generation college, and after ups and downs I have an advanced degree, a nice government job, a good pension in my future, a family income in the to 25% of earners, and a nice 3 bedroom house for us and our kids.

My younger brother...really doesn't have anything close to that. He never had a real plan or ambition for anything else after high school. His plan was to just work at the warehouse where my dad worked, and that was pretty much it. No desire of any kind to head to college, and while we were a small town we also had the regional vocational technology school in our town where he could have gotten cheap/free training to pick up a trade (I'm a big proponent of "everyone should get an education, college or vocational training" vs just "everyone should get a college degree"). At one point he was going to join the army, but backed out before heading to basic. He did the oilfield thing, but was laid off when the oil economy tanked over the past few years. He finally got a CDL, which was a big step up in job opportunities for him. We had many talks about why he doesn't pursue even simple opportunities for improvement, but I haven't gained much insight there.

So while I appreciate my station in life and understand that I've had a good combination of luck and opportunities with the right skills at the right time, I also understand that it's not just for a lack of boot-strapping that most people find themselves in less fortunate situations. But man, could my brother benefit from finding his bootstraps and giving them just a little tuck.

 daedalus wrote:
And that's the thing that falls apart for me. Why does one keep working a gak job like that? Even when they have other opportunities? I mean, even if you're not getting jobs thrown at you, you can still keep LOOKING, at least.

I keep working a gak job, because the alternative is no job which looks even worse when you show up at an interview site. I've been looking for a job better than minimum wage for nearly 7 years. Now this isn't an attempt to bash at you, so much as offer an insider perspective cause I feel like an expert on this topic at this point XD

I've gone to maybe 1-2 interviews a month over the last 7 years, with a month or two a year that I ended up not having any. These jobs range from minimum wage to salaried positions in a wealth of areas like marketing, publishing, sales, stocking shelves, loading trucks, and paper pushing for federal regulations. Basically anything I'm even remotely qualified for on paper I take a stab at. Questions I've been asked by interviewers/potential employers;

-"I see you went to school, but how much work experience do you have?" Did you look at my resume? There's like four jobs listed there. Oh, you mean "real work" and not minimum wage? None I've done at least 50 interviews where you've all asked this question and then didn't hire me. If I were a legislator I'd push for a law banning any job from labeling itself "entry level" while simultaneously asking for "X years of relevant experience." if you're gonna gak on me at least gak on me honestly and don't pretend this job is for people who've never had the job before. My experience is that like most Americans, employers consider minimum wage jobs worthless. It's better than having no job, but no one really cares that you flipped burgers for X years when looking to hire a typist.

-"Can you fly down to Cleveland for an Interview?" Yeah if I had a couple hundred bucks to spend on last minute airfare to compete with who knows how many other saps. I no longer waste money or time this way and wish I hadn't the first three times I was asked. If you are in charge of hiring, don't ask people to do this. It costs me my free cash just to get a suit dry cleaned. I can't afford to meet you face to face half the country away. Especially after the last time when it turns out there wasn't even a position available. Why the feth did you even bring me down here? You couldn't have wasted my time over Skype or FaceTime?

-"You lived at Fort Bragg for seven years? Were you in the military?" This question was just dumb. They asked for my last three addresses, so I gave them my last three addresses. My mental thought was "Bitch is military service listed on my "previous jobs" section?! "

And of course the most patronizing, head up the ass, go suck a dick question anyone has ever asked me (three months ago);

-"Why did you wait so long to start looking for a career?" I swear I nearly punched that overweight guy in the tit, right on his donut stain (i assume it was a donut stain).

And that's the worst part. The longer you go without having whatever jobs are considered good jobs, the more people assume there must be something wrong with you. People think it all the time, and I encounter it every time I bring up how long I've been looking for better than minimum wage work. I'll put good money someone is thinking it right now, not even realizing that bias only perpetuates an inability to find work because job interviewers think the same thing and are somehow so pretentious they think I've been sitting idle this whole time on my computer not even trying. It's an employers market, and it turns out employers can be dicks sometimes. People too. The most successful guy I know got a job at his dad's business and loves to preach to the rest of us how easy it is to get work. feth off Todd, my dad doesn't own a electrician company I can get a free job at (love you Todd his real name isn't Todd).

I just don't get this relaxed mentality about that kind of stuff.

My relatively calm bordering on emotionless demeanor (IRL, I doubt I come off that way in text XD) isn't relaxed. Its basically the only way to avoid looking like a psycho with all the seething rage. There's been a slew of articles of the years about how Millennials are less concerned with marriage, kids, owning property, etc etc and its all bull. I'd love to do all that gak my parents got to start doing 3 years younger than I am now but I don't have the money or the opportunity. Just making opportunities costs more money now than my very well off father makes in 6 month period. If I got married I'd need to find a rich girl with a plush salary, cause I sure as hell can't support anyone right now. I'd love to have my own place, but I can't afford it. I can barely afford insurance, food, and maybe a new game/book with the left over money (sun praise the discount section at Barnes and Noble. Got the entire collected works of H.P Lovecraft for $15.). I indulged a few months back "maybe I can play 40k again, cause my current job pays better than the last one." Yeah that didn't happen.

So yeah. Still working a gakky job. I think a better question than "why do people work gakky jobs" is "why are there gakky jobs?" give me a three dollar raise and my job wouldn't be gakky at all. I'd go from making ~ $476 a week to $596- oh wait the job would still be crappy. Damn. Guess I'll just have to keep looking for something better but jesus at least that extra hundred bucks would make it possible to move out of my parents house and pick up a more than likely gakky roommate to rent some place with.

 gorgon wrote:
Not sure what that really has to do with the attitudes of Baby Boomers toward Millennials, however...

Essentially, all the people who are the absolute least qualified to comment on how society works, due to being completely disconnected from it, happen to also be in charge of everything.

"dude if you don't like your job just go out and get another one haha"

"dude when I was your age I had a house a dog and three kids why can't you do the same haha"

nfe wrote:

Unfortunately, the ability to access information does not confer the ability to process it. Honestly, undergraduate essays can be staggeringly bad. Hell, plenty postgraduates are barely capable of constructing an argument or drawing independent conclusions. If the marking scheme was up to me, about 1 in 5 first year essays I mark would pass. Maybe 2 and 5 second years. Alas, with marking schemes as they are, I think I've failed two essays ever.

Obviously I can't go back in time and see pre-internet university essays, but I don't see them being worse...

You can actually, Ethos is grand for that. They're postgrad for the vast majority of them, but it lets you see what standards used to be like. Generally speaking, in my field at least, you get some atrocious history theses written up until about the 1980's. Seriously. I've read ones that would embarass an undergrad passed by supposedly respectable institutions. I think it used to be a case of 'Get on with your supervisor and the two mates he invited over for your viva' as often as it was academically rigorous.

 LordofHats wrote:

-"Why did you wait so long to start looking for a career?" I swear I nearly punched that overweight guy in the tit, right on his donut stain (i assume it was a donut stain).

I've read about the subconscious psychological profiling most employers do. Something along the lines of 'If nobody else hired this guy for so long, there must be something wrong with him. Why take a chance?'

This thread is like all of my anxieties over the last few years rolled into one giant sob story.

 LordofHats wrote:
There's been a slew of articles of the years about how Millennials are less concerned with marriage, kids, owning property, etc etc and its all bull. I'd love to do all that gak my parents got to start doing 3 years younger than I am now but I don't have the money or the opportunity. Just making opportunities costs more money now than my very well off father makes in 6 month period. If I got married I'd need to find a rich girl with a plush salary, cause I sure as hell can't support anyone right now. I'd love to have my own place, but I can't afford it. I can barely afford insurance, food, and maybe a new game/book with the left over money.

A lot of what you are experiencing rings true for me.

I am about to turn 35 in a few weeks, so I fall in that nebulous grey area between Gen X and Millennials. Only recently got married, and put that off for a few years because of financial reasons, and when my wife and I were finally married it was at a courthouse.To save on costs (my wife wasn't thrilled but she is pragmatic).

We rent, and really aren't even considering home ownership (Los Angeles housing market... go feth yourself!) and kids are a non-starter. There is no way in hell we could afford a child. It works out in our particular situation that we do not want to have kids, but we've had the children discussion, did the napkin math, and it became clear that we just couldn't in our current situation even if we wanted to. The kicker is we both have "good" jobs, jobs that are considered career track, but they pay gak and it's so difficult to find anything with health benefits (we both have pre-existing conditions and need insurance) that we are sticking with our "barely getting by" jobs to keep us visiting the doctor. Until recently I was working two jobs (full-time gig, plus teaching at night) in order to try and bring in more income to better things. Hasn't paid off. I had to quit the teaching job recently because it was actually costing more in terms of time and disruption of my home life and bringing in less than minimum wage when actual hours vs compensation were calculated.

No one wants to pay. No one seems to care if you have a degree, even an advanced degree. Every job is entry level, or if you are lucky, something in the $12-15 range, which is starvation level in my area.


I've been job hunting for the better part of two years and have a hell of a time getting a call back. The feeling of being stuck is unbearable, and the future is nothing but an ax hanging over my head. I dread aging. I dread a major illness that will knock me or my wife out of the workforce. How can you save when all of your disposable income goes towards bills, insurance, rent and mother fething student loans? Just sucks.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Now, depending on who you ask, I either fall into the late Gen X period, or I'm one of the very first Milennials. Others yet call it Xillenial

None of those work for me I'm just going to call you Fred.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Now, depending on who you ask, I either fall into the late Gen X period, or I'm one of the very first Milennials. Others yet call it Xillenial

None of those work for me I'm just going to call you Fred.

Dr. Fred, surely.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
This thread is like all of my anxieties over the last few years rolled into one giant sob story.

I just want to point out that it is hilarious that sob story on forum ends up being Sisters of Battle Story, cause who the endures more indignity, relentless exploitation, and sheer abandonment in the game and lore of 40k than the Sisters of Battle

Do they have plastic models yet?

nou wrote:


One simple statistics shows this "generation uncertainty" rather nicely - women from my generation (born '77-82) have their first child not only when they're significantly older than neighbouring generations, they have their first child AFTER next generation have theirs.

Pretty much. In my circle of friends (I'm from a small town, so you hang out with the people you went to school with for the whole of your life for the most part) a good half of the guys do not have kids. It's true some of those will be by choice, but for many others it's just a combination of job insecurity leading to inability to form a home.... and then you find yourself in your late 30s (I was born on 78), still nowhere close to your "dream job" and already looking too old for some promotions.

I can't complain at all since at age 26 I was already making more than both my parents combined, by age 32 I had already burned all my savings on a failed business and took a step back to just working for someone else. On my second marriage I finally bought a nice home which takes just 15% of our monthly income and we have a lovely kid together.

However some of my friends. Bright, hard-working individuals will probably never have that, and as mad doc says will be the first generation that's objectively worse than their parents. A friend of mine, after getting a Doctorate in History hasn't really been able to find any job other than part-time tour guide. Bad hours and bad pay. He eventuallyl gave up and now works in a plumbing company. The hours are equally bad, but at least the pay is decent.

Another friend of mine is a great construction project accountant, which basically sank with the crisis. For years he could only find part-time jobs, all while his architect girlfriend barely held onto her job (taking a pay cut) while everyone else in the firm was made redundant. Oh, and their jobs are 100km apart, which means they can only see each other on the weekends, and because her parents passed away and she has very little family means having kids is just not posssible.

Just another friend of mine is a Solar Energy engineer. Local pay is so bad he takes project work abroad, and has been spending 8-9 months away from home every year for the last 5 (in places like Chile, UAE, Bolivia, etc), while the wife works just part-time administrative work because they have 3 kids (a record in our group).

Basically if were lucky enough that your parents could let you a place to live, then you can get by with a badly paid work. If you need to stand on your own, then you're screwed.

Millinial Here
as a 20-30 year old, im often told that im horrible with money and that i spend all my savings on too many trips(I do, but lets see why)
Sociology tought me that quite a bit of your formative years are your 14-21 when it comes to alot of stuff. What happened when I was 16?
The market crashed. So I saw alot of people lose their home, lose their car and lose alot of stuff
Why should I spend so much money for something that will just up an disppear. Why should I save when the savings might just disappear because the previous generation gakked up. Maybe I want to spend it on a nice sandwich now, then nothing later on?
Im honestly so scared for the future now that it fills me with dread. Because I know its gonna get worse. Especially here in the bay when it comes to housing. It used to be my 18.50$ n hour job would help me get an apartment with a friend. now im lucky if I can give my mom rent.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


But the shelf stacker in Sainsbury's....sure, any ablebodied individual could do that. But can you explain to me why that job shouldn't pay a decent, living wage? The street sweeper, who's efforts we all benefit from. Why should he or she live on a pittance, just because it's not a job I or most much fancy doing?

Time was even those doing such jobs could still afford a place to live and some little luxuries. Not anymor though.

Well that is the big conundrum in society. Ultimately it comes down to the question of "Why has the cost of living soared?"

I don't think that question can be settled till we get past a few things as a society.

First off. Entitlement has become a major issue. People nowdays feel that they are entitled to a lot more beyond what the basic necessities are(food, clothing, shelter). A lot of things that were rightfully considered luxuries up to 100 years ago are now viewed upon as being basic necessities. Things like personal transportation, instant gratification of almost any desire, on-demand entertainment, stuff like cell phones and computers, etc...

Basically, the "basic necessities" list for a person to function in society has become way way longer than it used to be. Nowadays, there are many jobs that you literally couldn't even apply for if you didn't have internet access, email, or a phone. Most people couldn't get to a job if they didn't have transportation of some kind. People today eat way "better" food than we used to(in the sense that we today eat foods everyday that in the past would have been stuff only the wealthiest would have had access to). Then we also have healthcare. People routinely get things done that didn't even exist as little as 20 years ago.

This means that our basic standard of living has gotten massively more expensive to maintain. And this is true for everybody. Thus, we have costs of everything spiralling out of control to simply maintain this society which is adding more and more expensive stuff to the baseline.

However, the individual jobs which are available do not see their value go up just because everybody is living to a higher standard. Pay should not be based upon the $$$ the employee needs to maintain the lifestyle he has chosen/has foisted upon him. That's not fair to the employer OR to other employees who would be competing for the same job. Otherwise you end up with an odd situation where you could have 2 workers doing the exact same job being paid radically different wages. If you had a single unmarried no kids man working as a Ditch Digger, he shouldn't be paid less for digging a ditch than the married man with 3 children gets paid for digging an identical ditch.

Ultimately, I think that the progressive adding on of "entitlement" type benefits that are mandated by law are what is actively leading to the cost of living outstripping what people can reasonably earn. Mandated health coverage. Constantly raising the minimum wage. Continually adding "safety nets" and other social services monitored by the government(and paid for by more taxes). Also combined with a society who has become one which expects to automatically have better or equal standards of living to their parents, instant gratification, and general feeling that they deserve nice things. It all contributes to this problem.


On the subject of health insurance. That entire type of system we have is basically one that is doomed to fail. It also sets itself up so that costs go up over time by having the whole healthcare system be based around insurance in the first place.

If you do not require everybody to have health insurance. You end up with the problem of most people who get it being sick people who would be taking money out instead of putting money in. But if you go the opposite way where it's mandated, you trample on a right everybody should have. The right to opt out. If you feel that you don't need it, you should have the option to not get it. At your own risk of course, but in the interest of maintaining personal liberty IMO that option must be there. Its why I think the "Personal Mandate" for Obamacare is morally repugnant.

The other problem with insurance in general is that any type of market that is based around insurance payouts is going to result in price inflation. Even when there is competition. Because insurance companies will rightly try to minimize their payouts to maintain their own profits. Which leads to doctors and other medical professionals being forced to raise their prices through the roof just so that the insurance will, after all the hemming and hawing over the payout, pay them enough to actually cover their costs. This system ultimately results in prices for anything medical related to go up, not down.

So I think that at the end of the day, the healthcare system would ideally completely ditch the idea of insurance alltogether and only work with actual costs, instead of the artificially inflated prices we pay today. Which is what results in something as simple as an ambulance ride costing $600(true story. My grandpa got taken to the hospital by ambulance, a 5 minute ride from where he was living. Got billed for $600 for something that couldn't possibly have actually cost them more than $50).

 whembly wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There's a vast difference between ability, and opportunity.

Yup... hence why I'm pounding on this skill.

I learned it from my job... ie (Google: how the fark does PERL chomp work with white spaces?):

As the manager of an IT service desk I can tell you the fourth picture is wrong. This is what my team do from my point of view:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
...What happened when I was 16?
The market crashed. So I saw alot of people lose their home, lose their car and lose alot of stuff
Why should I spend so much money for something that will just up an disppear. Why should I save when the savings might just disappear because the previous generation gakked up. Maybe I want to spend it on a nice sandwich now, then nothing later on?

It is tempting to wonder if the tales of un-motivated Millennials is grounded in that event. So many people saw the product of so much hard work vanish, thanks to forces that were totally out of their control. It really put the lie to the "Work hard and Save, and you will be Rewarded" mantra that so many were raised on.

 LordofHats wrote:
. . . cause who the endures more indignity, relentless exploitation, and sheer abandonment in the game and lore of 40k than the Sisters of Battle

Sisters of Battle - The Millennials of 40K

 LordofHats wrote:
Do they have plastic models yet?

Actually; yes.

3 of them to be precise (4 to be accurate if you count the old Imolator).

A 3 model special character unit, that is only available in part of a larger (expensive) box set.

 Grey Templar wrote:
However, the individual jobs which are available do not see their value go up just because everybody is living to a higher standard.

But they should, and that's the point of minimum wage laws, progressive taxes, etc. When the standard of living for society as a whole improves the benefits should be available to everyone. Otherwise you have a situation where vast numbers of people are stuck in a hell of barely making enough to survive and having no reason to continue living. Aside from any fairness issues, this is the sort of thing that tends to get the elite of society lined up against a wall and shot when the masses finally decide they've got nothing to lose.

Also combined with a society who has become one which expects to automatically have better or equal standards of living to their parents, instant gratification, and general feeling that they deserve nice things.

Healthcare I can't really comment on. I'm lucky enough to have the full benefit of the NHS, and top notch private care through work.

If I go much further, this'll become a UK vs US political thing, which is for another thread.

Fair pay? I see no reason why anyone in full time work shouldn't be paid enough to comfortably cover their rent, and maybe afford a cheap holiday once a year (not 'let's all go to the Bahamas' holidays. But surely someone working full time deserves at least a caravan or camping break somewhere?). After all, when someone is economically active, the local economy and then the national economy benefits.

It doesn't really matter what the job is. Shelf Stackers are necessary for a supermarket to function. Refuse Workers are necessary to keep our environment pleasant. Street Sweepers are necessary because frankly people are awful and prone to leaving a mess.

You only have to look at the state we get in when bin workers go on strike, and won't do their rounds. Rubbish piles up, starts to stink, attracts Rats and other hazardous vermin. So why aren't they decently paid? Does it matter what percentage of the population could do that job? Or does it matter most that it gets done, and the employee is paid a wage they can actually live on?

But that word - entitlement.

Does it mean different things to different people?

As you might've picked up from the thread, I consider entitlement to be the sole preserve of the Baby Boomers. They benefitted from all the perks, but didn't want to pay it backward via higher taxes. So they voted, repeatedly, to slash Nice Things to get lower taxes.

Then they got all Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) about house building. If anything, anything looks like it might stop rampant housing inflation, it seems that generation freaks right out. Never mind the majority of them are now mortgage free and their property may be worth 10 or more times what they paid for it in the 70's. No. THE VALUE IS ALL. My house price must go up. And if that means doing whatever it takes to keep supply restricted, so be it. The Youngsters Will Just Have To Work Harder. New development? NIMBY! Talk of an extension to the town, including homes and infrastructure? NIMBY! Older estates being redeveloped or regenerated? NIMBY! NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY HOW DARE YOU THINK OF MY HOUSE PRICE, WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF MY HOUSE PRICE.

That to me is entitlement. A feeling that the world must bend and acquiesce to your every whim - whilst propping up your position by dismantling the very social structures that got you where you are today.

Yep, still angry about all this!

 Pendix wrote:
A 3 model special character unit, that is only available in part of a larger (expensive) box set.

Hah! 3 steps forward 65 European steps back!

I'll stop laughing at their expense now XD

That to me is entitlement. A feeling that the world must bend and acquiesce to your every whim - whilst propping up your position by dismantling the very social structures that got you where you are today.

I don't consider simply wanting work, a living wage, and the same opportunities as before to be particularly entitled. But hey keep telling me how much I want it all now. Seriously 7 years and I'm still being lectured to about patience as if I'm somehow not and frustration at all the wasted effort is meaningless.. That said I think there's something to be said about government Entitlements. Stuff like Social Security, Medicare, etc. With how vindictive US politics are becoming I won't be remotely surprised if my generation shuts that stuff down simply out of spite once we're the ones making political decisions. We're never going to benefit much from those programs at this rate, if at all, and neither will our children or theirs. but our parents and grandparents will still expect us to finance their retirement while putting ours off even more than they have.

But please older Americans, keep informing me how I'm the entitled one in this economy.

Yep, still angry about all this!

Peace is a lie. There is only Passion.
Through Passion I gain Strength.
Through Strength I gain Power.
Through Power I gain Victory.
Through Victory my chains are Broken.
The Force shall free me.

I'm in a similar boat - 33 now, didn't have to pay for uni (Scotland) but did have to pay to graduate (I graduated in a ~2 year window when it was a thing), got a decent job out of uni (which I probably couldn't have afforded to do if I had to pay £9k/year for it!). Bought a house aged 23, with a deposit provided by a relatives estate, on a 95% mortgage, in July 2007 (the month the market collapsed). Paid about twice what the previous owners did for it, and in the 10 years since, despite poring most of my money into it, it's now worth about 80% of what it was when I bought it. So much for house price inflation, but then, it's still cheaper than renting and I can do what I want.

I earn really well for my area, and even with my wife working (she's not now due to childcare costs), I'll be paying off the mortgage on my tiny house just in time to retire, when my parents (who I now out-earn) had their paid off by 40 in a house I couldn't dream to buy myself.

I'll admit I got a few good breaks, and I'm still not far off the "just about coping" category. I can't imagine how badly shafted everyone else is at the moment.
I hope that in 17-20 years when my kids hit unniversity and are starting in the real world, that things have improved again and I'm just a generation that was missed, because I don't think there's any way I can hold them up like my parents did for me.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Stop claiming the exams are getting easier just because results improve.

This one in particular bugs me. Results improve partially because people who were likely to fail were encouraged not to sit the exam, or encouraged to sit lower level exams (because of the league tables), not because the tests are getting easier. They are certainly different - calculators now exist when my parents sat exams using slide-rules or log tables or something.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:

And that's the thing that falls apart for me. Why does one keep working a gak job like that? Even when they have other opportunities? I mean, even if you're not getting jobs thrown at you, you can still keep LOOKING, at least.

Because statistically, not that many jobs pay double the median salary, and demand is fierce as well as there being high entry requirements. I earn about double median for the country but I needed a 4-year degree under my belt first, and there's very few openings.

It's also hard to get out of the grind - if you don't have time for open learning, or to pay for/attend training, go to interviews, etc.

"just work harder or get a better job" only really applies in fluid markets or with connections.

 Grey Templar wrote:

The other problem with insurance in general is that any type of market that is based around insurance payouts is going to result in price inflation. Even when there is competition. Because insurance companies will rightly try to minimize their payouts to maintain their own profits. Which leads to doctors and other medical professionals being forced to raise their prices through the roof just so that the insurance will, after all the hemming and hawing over the payout, pay them enough to actually cover their costs. This system ultimately results in prices for anything medical related to go up, not down.

Why is why in the real world single payer works so much better than just throwing money at it.

But that's a completely separate discussion.

Plus I spend ~1/hour each way on a train to work, at a cost of about £3k/year, because the only way to afford a place to live near my work was to have bought something 30 years ago. It's cheaper to commute half way across the country + my mortgage for a decent but small place, than to buy a single room bedsit near my work. All the work in my field is concentrated so finding another job doesn't solve the problem.

It's not bad, in that I can read/work on the train, but it means my leisure time is curtailed (if I cut my commute in half I'd have an extra hour a day for housework, DIY, and might even get some relaxation/hobby time in too).

jouso wrote:


Why is why in the real world single payer works so much better than just throwing money at it.

But that's a completely separate discussion.

I'd seen someone make the valid point that Americans are terrified of the cost of single-payer because they think what they pay for medical treatment is what it actually costs, i.e. if it's paid for in tax, everyone would be stumping the full bill for treatment, not realizing that once you take the profiteering out of it you can probably drop the cost down to about 10% of what it is.

I mean, in the UK we pay ~11% national insurance, some of which goes to healthcare, but I've heard of people paying more than that for insurance alone, and they still have co-pay amounts in excess of what the treatment actually costs.

While I agree there's a lot of unfair dumping on younger generations, I also don't buy in to the complete victim narrative either. I look at my parents experience as an example. Sure, my Dad's uni education was free. And sure they paid a lot less for their house than my wife and I.

But they also lived in a time when food, electricity, transport and all the rest chewed up a much bigger share of their income. Sure, my parents are very comfortable now, but as a kid we hardly ever went out for a meal. The only trip my family took in a plane was when I was I 8, and they saved for a couple of years for that. And my parents weren't battlers, Dad was a fairly high ranking civil servant. But lots of things we enjoy regularly now used to be prohibitively expensive.

It's just, things are different for each generation. The pressures are different, and the pressures are greatest for people in their 30s, when people have realised they need to start getting ahead and are taking their first steps to doing it.

This doesn't mean people now should just suck it up, that they shouldn't push for ways to ease those pressures. But it shouldn't be done in the mistaken belief that other generations sailed through. No generation ever had it easy.

Herzlos wrote:


I mean, in the UK we pay ~11% national insurance, some of which goes to healthcare, but I've heard of people paying more than that for insurance alone, and they still have co-pay amounts in excess of what the treatment actually costs.

For a good while I spent about 2/3 months a year in the US.

My health plan there cost more than my SS deductions + my private plan in Spain. And that was for a single, healthy person in his late 20s with no preconditions, basically your insurance dream client (indeed my only interaction with the US health care system were regular payments).

I spent a couple of weeks in a US hospital, and the bill was utterly horrendous ($26k IIRC), with individual billing for bandages, accomodation, every diagnostic.
At least I was on travel insurance, but it's easy to see how for the uninsured any illness can be devastating.

I've heard of people needing to sell houses to afford care, which for the supposed leader of the civilized word is pretty disgusting.