6 ms·

I see these sort of parents mostly as scumbags that accomplish little on their own and pass the burden of their own failings to their kids. Parents should expec

by x5n1 11y ago

I see these sort of parents mostly as scumbags that accomplish little on their own and pass the burden of their own failings to their kids. Parents should expect at most their kids to achieve their level of success and no more. That's reasonable expectation. Anything more than that is a lottery and a fluke.

notmonsters 11y ago
It's actually unreasonable for parents these days to expect that kids will achieve their own level of success, because the distribution of rewards in society now fall so much more disproportionally to the handful at the very top of any field than they did in their parent's generation, and the generation before that. "Nobel prize or the gutter" is merely a logical conclusion in a world where only the very best at anything are valued.
- phkahler 11y ago
  >> It's actually unreasonable for parents these days to expect that kids will achieve their own level of success, because the distribution of rewards in society now fall so much more disproportionally to the handful at the very top of any field than they did in their parent's generation, and the generation before that. That's meritocracy.
- bobby_9x 11y ago
  I disagree. It's the same. Its just that too many people expect more of the reward, for less of the work and never realized just how much work it actually took to achieve these rewards in the first place. I see it all the time with people trying to start businesses. They see the success stories and want a rich and profitable company in less than a year. I believe it's the result of perceived instant gratification on the Internet and from the idea that started in the early 90s that 'everyone needs a trophy', which I saw first-hand. I’ve met so many college graduates that either want a six-figure income right out of school, a management position within 6 months, or a flex schedule at every job. It's not just a want, they feel entitled to it. It's why Bernie Sanders is so popular among the youth: he's promising many rewards without any of the work.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - Absentinsomniac 11y ago
    That's anecdotal at best. According to a good deal I've read, the "new generation" actually does have quite a few problems previous generations never had to deal with. My father was able to buy his parents house after a few years of work. Anecdotally, I've been working full time and going to school and I can't even put much of a dent in my loans. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/01/09/the_most_entitled_generation_isnt_millennials_its_baby_boomers_125184.html http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/01/09/the_mos... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/19/baby-boomer-social-mobilty-stupid-lucky http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/19/baby-bo...
  - notmonsters 11y ago
    My parents are smart people with degrees from public land-grant universities but they are not world-class at anything. They had stable, good-paying jobs with proper pensions, and could easily afford to buy a home big enough for a family. It cost about twice their annual income. They "won the lottery" with me in that I had an innate interest in technology and got into computers and networks in the mid 1980s. I ended up at a public land-grant college, but even if I hadn't, I happened to have the right skills at the right time to ride the .com boom and acquire experience despite my lack of pedigree (and 20 years on, it no longer matters what school I went to.) I busted ass and continue to do so, but I'm not blind to my fortune. And yet, I do not and have never had a pension, and I have always spent 2-4x the fraction of my income on housing than my parents did, for worse housing. Most of my generation was not so lucky as me, but at least they were about to get jobs and build a resume. My kids are young and if they're just as smart and hard-working as me, they're fucked. The ladder has been pulled up, and pedigree is a lot more important starting out now than it was when I was younger. (I know, I've been a hiring manager for years - and in technology which is a MUCH more egalitarian field than most due to demand.) To give my kids an advantage I've moved to a small country in Western Europe so they can grow up multilingual and have cultural exposure that might make them attractive to elite schools in the event that we've "won the lottery" with their natural abilities. And if they don't, if nothing else, they have access to less expensive housing, education and health care, and live in a society that's much more egalitarian than the US - one that might give them a shot at "just a living" without exposure to the worst predatory aspects of American poverty. All this is to say, no, things aren't the same. Yes, one still has to work very hard to be the best (one also must be very lucky to be the very best.) The difference is, there was once "good enough to make a decent living" and now, not so much. This isn't about meritocracy, this is about the distribution of reward (across the spectrum of "merit" if you like.) I'll be voting for Bernie Sanders, myself.

by x5n1 11y ago

notmonsters 11y ago

It's actually unreasonable for parents these days to expect that kids will achieve their own level of success, because the distribution of rewards in society now fall so much more disproportionally to the handful at the very top of any field than they did in their parent's generation, and the generation before that. "Nobel prize or the gutter" is merely a logical conclusion in a world where only the very best at anything are valued.

phkahler 11y ago
>> It's actually unreasonable for parents these days to expect that kids will achieve their own level of success, because the distribution of rewards in society now fall so much more disproportionally to the handful at the very top of any field than they did in their parent's generation, and the generation before that. That's meritocracy.
bobby_9x 11y ago
I disagree. It's the same. Its just that too many people expect more of the reward, for less of the work and never realized just how much work it actually took to achieve these rewards in the first place. I see it all the time with people trying to start businesses. They see the success stories and want a rich and profitable company in less than a year. I believe it's the result of perceived instant gratification on the Internet and from the idea that started in the early 90s that 'everyone needs a trophy', which I saw first-hand. I’ve met so many college graduates that either want a six-figure income right out of school, a management position within 6 months, or a flex schedule at every job. It's not just a want, they feel entitled to it. It's why Bernie Sanders is so popular among the youth: he's promising many rewards without any of the work.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- Absentinsomniac 11y ago
  That's anecdotal at best. According to a good deal I've read, the "new generation" actually does have quite a few problems previous generations never had to deal with. My father was able to buy his parents house after a few years of work. Anecdotally, I've been working full time and going to school and I can't even put much of a dent in my loans. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/01/09/the_most_entitled_generation_isnt_millennials_its_baby_boomers_125184.html http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/01/09/the_mos... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/19/baby-boomer-social-mobilty-stupid-lucky http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/19/baby-bo...
- notmonsters 11y ago
  My parents are smart people with degrees from public land-grant universities but they are not world-class at anything. They had stable, good-paying jobs with proper pensions, and could easily afford to buy a home big enough for a family. It cost about twice their annual income. They "won the lottery" with me in that I had an innate interest in technology and got into computers and networks in the mid 1980s. I ended up at a public land-grant college, but even if I hadn't, I happened to have the right skills at the right time to ride the .com boom and acquire experience despite my lack of pedigree (and 20 years on, it no longer matters what school I went to.) I busted ass and continue to do so, but I'm not blind to my fortune. And yet, I do not and have never had a pension, and I have always spent 2-4x the fraction of my income on housing than my parents did, for worse housing. Most of my generation was not so lucky as me, but at least they were about to get jobs and build a resume. My kids are young and if they're just as smart and hard-working as me, they're fucked. The ladder has been pulled up, and pedigree is a lot more important starting out now than it was when I was younger. (I know, I've been a hiring manager for years - and in technology which is a MUCH more egalitarian field than most due to demand.) To give my kids an advantage I've moved to a small country in Western Europe so they can grow up multilingual and have cultural exposure that might make them attractive to elite schools in the event that we've "won the lottery" with their natural abilities. And if they don't, if nothing else, they have access to less expensive housing, education and health care, and live in a society that's much more egalitarian than the US - one that might give them a shot at "just a living" without exposure to the worst predatory aspects of American poverty. All this is to say, no, things aren't the same. Yes, one still has to work very hard to be the best (one also must be very lucky to be the very best.) The difference is, there was once "good enough to make a decent living" and now, not so much. This isn't about meritocracy, this is about the distribution of reward (across the spectrum of "merit" if you like.) I'll be voting for Bernie Sanders, myself.