10 ms·

The dominance of baby boomers is becoming total

147 points by randomname2 11y ago

ajeet_dhaliwal 11y ago
Everything besides the new laws about bars applies to London and the southeast of England, UK. Remarkable how similar the situation is in these two countries. Could culture have something to do with this if they can avoid this cost of living crisis in continental Europe and most of the US? Or may be they're suffering there too. Only way to solve a lot of these issues is to be able to work remotely and not have to live or buy in commuter areas.
- mahranch 11y ago
  I think many of these problems could be minimized, mitigated or some completely eliminated if millennials would actually vote. But they don't. And I don't foresee that ever changing. It was the same problem with my generation, gen-x (born in 1980 so I'm not quite a gen-x, not quite a millennial). We just didn't vote. I don't believe the <30 crowd has ever been a big voting bloc, at any point in U.S history. Though, I noticed many of my facebook friends started voting once they hit their early 30s. I think that's when people start to settle down in life and either have the time to study/figure out politics, or get more interested in it. It might be the time where their youthful naive idealism vanishes and they realize that true change is a slow process. They become more pragmatic and more realistic. Much of their concerns tend to be more local/regional where their votes actually hold some power. It's less about voting in a president who can wave a magic wand and create their ideal utopia overnight and more about voting in a local city councilman or state senator who will best represent their interests. People they have actually met in real life and shook their hands.
  - makomk 11y ago
    Here in the UK, the parties that millenials did vote for promptly went back on the promises they made to get those votes.
    - msandford 11y ago
      As does every party ever elected, except in rare instances.
    - Symbiote 11y ago
      And that party is now ruined, so perhaps that mistake won't be repeated.
    - Latty 11y ago
      No, what happened was they became the lesser partner in a coalition, and delivered a lot from that position (the policies during that period were much, much better than they would have otherwise been). The idea that somehow they should have delivered on all of their policies from that position is laughable. Would they have been better served not being able to influence government at all? (This all goes to show how broken FPTP is, of course.) Then, because of thinking like that in your post, people gave up on voting for them, despite being the best possible representation.
  - eli_gottlieb 11y ago
    I vote in every election I'm around for, including the municipal ones and the Super Tuesday primary tomorrow. That doesn't mean those elections are actually contested, or actually involve anyone I really want to vote for. As in, my last municipal election involved five candidates running for four city council seats. I had to pick which one not to vote for! I'm entitled to be a little resentful when the term "Massachusetts liberal" exists as an insult, a perennial way of kicking my state in the shins and telling us our voice will always be overridden.
  - Torgo 11y ago
    I think it is that when you get older you start noticing all the things the system is providing, and realizing how you're tied to it and how it is tied to that process.
  - jdub 11y ago
    Turning up to vote is compulsory in Australia (for which I am incredibly thankful). That said, voting gives you a democratic voice, but it doesn't give you power.
- vacri 11y ago
  'Work remotely' really only works for some professional services. Most work doesn't have that opportunity - whether it's construction, hospitality, healthcare, retail, manufacturing, transport, emergency services, sanitation, mining, childcare... the list goes on and on.
- poooogles 11y ago
  The law around bar's isn't that far off. Few examples from recent memory... - http://www.dazeddigital.com/music/article/23050/1/plastic-people-is-closing-down http://www.dazeddigital.com/music/article/23050/1/plastic-pe... - https://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/were-closing-the-vibe-bar https://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/were-closing-the-vibe-bar - http://www.cable-london.com/broadcast/single/we-have-closed-with-immediate-effect-official-statement http://www.cable-london.com/broadcast/single/we-have-closed-...
- alistairSH 11y ago
  We have the same problems in the US. Real estate prices in major urban/semi-urban areas are insane. Among my peers (mostly Gen-X, born late-70s), there is a general consensus that the Boomers have ruined the country for future generations - they borrowed and consumed and never invested in infrastructure. We are saddled with massive student loan debt that the Boomers never needed because colleges were once largely affordable.
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    Every generation thinks the generation before broke everything and the generation after is callow morons. This whole article is the most boring call-to-complain in HN history.
    - bryondowd 11y ago
      Is that true? I've never heard anyone complain about the Veteran generation.
- tunichtgut 11y ago
  The young people on the continent are drowning in cost, too. Just saying. The bigger the city, the worse it gets.
wheaties 11y ago
I see lots of baby boomers trying to unload the business they've worked hard at the past 30yrs, hoping someone can pay cash at 3x what they make from it. Who can buy something that costs 250K if they've never had steady work let alone the burden of student debt? Eventually even that market will "correct" down to 2x or less.
- pc86 11y ago
  I don't think this is unique to boomers. They've spent decades building something - they're probably the people least capable of objectively valuing the business. There's too much emotion tied into it, especially if they're at a point where they could sell but are just as happy to keep working, meaning the price needed to get them to leave goes up. It's not unique to business owners, either. One of the real estate websites have a "Make Me Move" option, which is basically the homeowner saying what number they'd need to pack up their shit and leave. It is consistently 180-200% the actual market value. To the point where you want to ask the homeowners what exactly they're smoking that they think their house is worth even close to that much money.
  - shadowfiend 11y ago
    But that's not how much their house is worth to the market—it's how much their house is worth to them. “Make Me Move” doesn't reflect the cost of the property when you're ready to move, it reflects the value of the home to you when you're not really ready to move. It seems completely reasonable that that value would be significantly higher than the value of a piece of land that you need to or are looking to get out of anyway. Same is true of a person who owns their own business but isn't ready to stop running it. You're not reflecting the market value of your business, you're reflecting the market plus emotional/‘satisfactional’ value of it.
  - Spooky23 11y ago
    "Make me move" is basically saying "This is the price for which I will uproot my life!" I actually know someone who was in this situation. A company wanted a sliver of the guy's land for an access road. Eminent domain wasn't an option for the company. The company offered $100k for the 10x30 piece of land. Sensing blood in the water and figuring that redoing all of the project would cost at least $2M + lots of time, he demanded $750k for his property and got $700k. It was worth about $250k total.
walterbell 11y ago
No mention of foreign investment driving up housing prices?
- alistairSH 11y ago
  Is that really a problem outside of London, SF, and one or two other super-appealing cities? Honest question, I have no idea.
  - justin_hancock 11y ago
    It is a real issue, I was amazed to find places such as Milton Keynes were seeing foreign investment on new build - friend is renting there and his new build place is owned by a family based in the UAE
  - blablablame 11y ago
    Lisbon, Porto and south of Portugal has seen a boom on foreign investment on properties. There are locations that if you email the agency, the first thing they mention is all the tax advantages of buying here for non foreigners. There is a whole upscale market for non-residents to park their money in real estate here.
    - expertentipp 11y ago
      When in Portugal I was really surprised to see most of the billboards in the Lisbon airport to be in... Chinese, advertising properties and apartments for sale. After some looking up I discovered that in Portugal one can acquire residency only by buying a property expensive enough.
      - blablablame 11y ago
        Yep, they are called Golden Visas. If you buy a property more expensive than 500.000 Euros you may apply for it. There were a few nags and some corruption charges a while ago so not sure what the current status is. There is also some tax break that if you had no income in Portugal in the last 10 years, you are eligible for a very reduced personal tax rate if you move to Portugal for X years so that also brings up rental and property prices.
wilwade 11y ago
I wonder if the idea of those in power (in this case a large voting block and those directly in power) having more to loose plays out in changes in the traditional balance between privacy vs safety/security?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
gradstudent 11y ago
King's Cross is super dodgy, especially at night. It attracted drunks, deros, druggies, prostitutes and other unsavory types. It was not a nice place to visit and it had a reputation for violence. The lockout laws have stopped the violence. They have also caused collateral damage in the form of these closures. So there you have it. Would you rather be safe out or cry over the closure of a few late night businesses? Having experienced all sides of King's Cross, I know which I'd choose.
- pc86 11y ago
  It states in the article that violence had decreased 40% prior to these laws. Is that just a coincidence?
  - gradstudent 11y ago
    There was a general decline across the greater metropolitan area but, iirc, King's Cross was a notable hotspot. The figures for violent non-domestic assaults before and after the laws show a very sharp decline. Here is one police comparison (there might be more recent data but it's hard to search on a tablet): http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Pages/bocsar_news/Mapping-the-impact-of-the-Sydney-lockout-laws-on-assault.aspx http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Pages/bocsar_news/Mapping-the-i...
- stupidcar 11y ago
  Since I actually read the article, rather than parroting preconceived cowardice about "unsavoury types", I don't have to make this false choice: > Bravely, his government had first tried to tamp down the issue with cold facts: statistics showed drunken violence was actually decreasing, by almost 40% according to some estimates, and the culture of small bars was starting to sap violent drinking away from the city.
  - gradstudent 11y ago
    I read the article. I also read the police statistics. Have you? But anyway, two specific points: 1. Small bars are exempt from the laws: http://www.nsw.gov.au/newlaws http://www.nsw.gov.au/newlaws 2. In the 10+ years I've known Sydney I did not notice much change in the late night character of King's Cross; certainly not enough to make believe the culture of drugs, drunks, prostitution and violence is going away all by itself. The fact that the laws were introduced in the first place is testament to that.
Nullabillity 11y ago
I'm not going to cry over a couple of drunks who can't get their drugs quite when it pleases them. Initially the article seemed promising, but then it just devolved into the usual lockout law garbage.
- orf 11y ago
  You should be concerned about the total evaporation of nightlife in your countries largest city. Your condescending comment and not understanding why this is an issue shows your huge bias and highlights the points made in the article even more.
  - eclipxe 11y ago
    Having grown up and currently living in a city with zero nightlife, what's the big deal?
    - castis 11y ago
      It's not necessarily about nightlife, it's about being told whats best for you and having it enforced.
- venomsnake 11y ago
  There is easy way - not go in party districts at night. Generally speaking - it is not hard to manage to do it once you are after your mid 20s
  - matthewmacleod 11y ago
    I don't agree with the parent, but I also don't think you're being entirely fair here. It's hard to avoid 'party districts' if you live or work there, or have to travel through them.
    - mason240 11y ago
      Or if you have pay for the costs through social safety nets.
alistairSH 11y ago
Is a 3am last-call a mostly American (USA) thing? I've never lived anywhere that allowed purchasing alcohol all night long. I read the article and thought to myself "Who the heck drinks after 3am anyways?" Even through my teens and twenties, an all-night party was the exception.
- marcioaguiar 11y ago
  Here in Brazil we have no such laws. You can drink anywhere and anytime. I remember drinking till 5am when I was a teenager and bars would stay open until the last customer was out. Today there is still no restriction, but mostly because of labour laws and the costs of maintaining service it's very hard to find open bars after 3am. * edit: of course I'm talking about my experience living on a medium-sized city (Maceió). I guess bigger cities like São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro you can find a good number of late open venues.
  - pc86 11y ago
    I spent about three weeks in Brazil (Salvador and then São Paulo), and in SP in particular we regularly found bars open around 5 or 5:30 am, but this was circa 2004/2005 so it may have changed since then.
- ant6n 11y ago
  In Berlin you can party at a club from Friday afternoon to Monday morning. Young people fly in from other European cities to 'experience' this.
- reverend_gonzo 11y ago
  There are many places around the world that are open late. In many places (I speak from experience in Spain, Peru, and El Salvador) , the night doesn't really get started until after midnight anyways. The article also mentioned other things, like all liquor must be served with a mixer after midnight. That means drinking a whisky neat is now illegal, which is quite ridiculous, and will definitely drive people away from going to bars.
- pc86 11y ago
martythemaniak 11y ago
I wonder if what we're seeing is a quantitative change leading to a qualitative change. It's undeniable that old people have always held power in society, from hunting-gathering societies (various elders/shamans/wisepeople) through early civilization (Senator comes from the Latin "senex" for "old". Senatus = "chamber of old men"), though to today. At the same time, their numbers (and effectiveness) were probably limited, either by a more pyramidal population distribution and/or by lower life expectancy (including duller minds in older age). I think what we're seeing for the first time in history is a huge swath of healthy, long-lived older people, throwing the relative balance way off and leading to various situations we see across many different societies. I like to sum it up as Boomers eating the young and I don't think things will change until the numbers/demographics do, ie, Millenials will experience a lost generation and things won't start to look good until we're well into middle-age.
- s_kilk 11y ago
  > we're seeing for the first time in history is a huge swath of healthy, long-lived older people... Exactly, and they cast a disproportionately long shadow over society and politics. EDIT: just look at the recent Irish referendum on same-sex marriage. A vast majority of the "no" votes came from the >60 cohort. I'll wager the age breakdown of last weeks election would reveal a similar dynamic: the young want change and meaningful progress while the old continue to vote for the past, keeping our culture and politics firmly rooted in the early/mid 20th century.
  - cunac 11y ago
    how is disproportional in a voting system where each adult has a vote? I would say it is proportional it is just that you don't like a proportion right now because people live longer so there is more older adults voting
    - tomp 11y ago
      It's disproportional in the sense of who's contributing to society (working) versus who's deciding what to do (voting).
tunichtgut 11y ago
This is such a good article. Its exactly the same in Germany. Boomers are running the business. Young pp are worthless garbage. I heard about some middle school teachers saying "young germans should be expelled from all social security...". Like weow...wait until these pp are old. Then its time for retaliations on the great nazis-kid bastard generation.
- tomp 11y ago
  No need for retaliation. The "old" are digging their own graves (no pun intended), by not allowing the "young" to flourish - the younger generations either migrate to countries offering better oportunities, or not work at all because of excessive taxes. Eventually, who's going to take care of the old, of their property, and pay their pensions?
  - venomsnake 11y ago
    > Eventually, who's going to take care of the old, of their property, and pay their pensions? Robots.
    - tomp 11y ago
      That's a bet I would be willing to take. I consider it very unlikely that it's going to happen in 30 years or less.
      - ccozan 11y ago
        Have you seen the latest robot from Boston Dynamics? Here is Atlas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY I don't think we need 30y for a real robot application for old people. This could be in less than 10 years.
        tomp 11y ago
        It's amazing. However, I don't think the problem is Robotics, I think the problem is AI. Will robots be helping us in 20 years? Possibly. Will they still need people directing them, supervising them, and doing the more complicated tasks? I'm inclined to answer "definitely". But I'd love to be proven wrong! :)
bikamonki 11y ago
And then there is the environment issue. Who invented the nature-destroying economic system we now live in?
TheAceOfHearts 11y ago
I really cannot fathom why we have these ridiculous last call laws. I'm living in California, where it's illegal to sell drinks after 2AM. It's incredibly frustrating. More than once I've been up late at night, and felt like cooking something with wine, only to quickly realize: Oh, right, I can't go buy a bottle of wine until 6AM... Because think of the children, or something like that.
- Kenji 11y ago
  I don't want to patronize you but is it really that hard to plan ahead enough to be able to survive 4 hours of not being able to buy stuff?
  - wiredfool 11y ago
    The worst part is that you can't buy alcohol on Christmas day or St Patrick's day till 12:30pm. (prominently posted by all the tills) Ireland is a different world some times.
  - brianwawok 11y ago
    Hey in Indiana I can't buy any booze on Sunday... if my weekly costco trip is on Sunday and I am getting low on beer? NOPE NO BEER ON SUNDAYS MIGHT NOT GO TO CHURCH
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      I understand its more about keeping others (i.e. the booze store employees) from being able to take Sunday off. Its a Labor party thing.
      - brianwawok 11y ago
        if that were true: 1) Why just close booze stores? Why not close restaurants or grocery stores or any of the non-essential businesses on sunday? 2) What about a grocery store that is already open and staffed and has piles of beer. What does not selling it do for the already working employees?
oliwarner 11y ago
The strange thing is in other [especially European] countries, these post-war "baby boomers" are falling apart at the seams and it's largely their parents' fault. All because of food. Parents of baby-boomers lived through war. Food was rationed. Luxury food was seriously rationed. Many grew up without processed fats like butter, or even sugar. The end rationing was a celebration and these parents wanted their children to have everything they couldn't. Sugar. Fats. The new-fangled convenience foods that came over with Americans post-WWII (operating bases, etc). As time went on this junk food just became even more affordable. The result is a demographic that has just awesome levels of T2 diabetes, obesity and coronary issues, as well as all the problems that have been associated with these conditions (a fair amount of dementia). In many cases, the parents who lived through the war are now caring for and outliving their children.
- saiya-jin 11y ago
  Same result can be found all over the world, albeit the path to it might be different (or not). I don't think we are in worse state than many other westernized places. At the end, we do our own choices where to spend money - is it cheap and somewhat tasty junk food, or something better (which might not be more expensive, or even cheaper if prepared ourselves). Blaming others for issues that people cause themselves when they have other options is cheap...
- mcv 11y ago
  That's not what I'm seeing. My impression is rather that the war generation taught their values of not wasting food to their children, and every generation, the lesson gets dilluted because the war is increasingly distant. My baby-boomer taught me to not waste food, and I try to teach my kids, but I also notice that my wife does not share this value. Maybe because her parents grew up on a farm where food was less scarce? Or maybe it's simply different families, different cultures. In any case, I don't see high levels of obesity and diabetes in baby-boomers. And I think it's more my generation and possibly later generations that eat too much junk food.
  - oliwarner 11y ago
    Boomers' children are slightly better. They haven't really known rationing so aren't in the position where they really want to push "luxury" crap on their kids. It's been a slow realisation but I think we're only just getting to a point where as a population we understand that feeding children crap means we get fat children. Food waste is something slightly different but I agree, there's a very consumerist approach to food these days. Most are disconnected from production so don't care where it comes from, how much effort goes into it, how many welfare sacrifices are make to get its cost down. Fixing both of these issues is done by getting people making and eating real food. Re my original comments, OT is a geriatrician in England. She's seeing people in their 60s and 70s who have had to move back in with their parents to be cared for. You shouldn't be having geriatric issues until you hit your 80s. She obviously doesn't have the direct experience of other generations but her colleagues tell me this is a relatively recent thing, with this generation. It'd be interesting to munge through a ton of medical data on this.
adrianlmm 11y ago
This article could also be called: "Millenials can't have fun w/o alcohol".
cryptica 11y ago
I'm a Gen Y living in Sydney - I've been planning to leave for a while because of the adverse conditions for young people here. Rent is very high, everything is expensive, you get fines all the time for silly stuff like parking your car facing the 'wrong' way, staying in a parking spot for 10 minutes too long or not waiting for a full '3 seconds' at a stop sign, etc... Also, in some parks, you can get fined for having a picnic without a permit. I had to pay a $300 traffic fine for driving in a 'bus-only lane' once. It's a police state. Also, the tax system is complicated and favours people who own houses (In Australia, you get tax deductions if you lose money on a rental property which you own). There are actually a lot of (older) people in Australia who own like 10+ houses (with 10 mortgages) and rent them out to young people and get huge tax deductions (and capital growth). Older people own everything. To make it worse, the older generation in Australia doesn't really want to invest in technology - They prefer just investing their money into real estate (which has been growing an an impressive rate year-over-year for the past 20 years or so). The idea of 'investing in yourself' is mostly a foreign concept in Australia - The only thing worthwhile investing in is a block of land with bricks and concrete on top. There are many people who dropped out of school, became construction workers and bought a house on a mortgage and are now wealthier than most university-educated students thanks to the insane real-estate growth and labour shortage (due in part to tough immigration laws). Some recent changes in laws suggest that conditions might be improving but it's too late for me. I'm looking forward to living in San Francisco - Yes the rent will also be high; but at least it seems that everything else is cheaper, taxes are lower and it's generally a good place to build a career in technology.
- tunichtgut 11y ago
  My advise is dont leave for germany. Here you will be sucked dry by the social security payments and taxes for old pp, too. Im planning long term to move into the US with mountain states and midwest as the most favored locations.
  - patrickk 11y ago
    Not sure I agree. Good things about Germany: - Great job opportunities, even if you only speak English (less jobs than if you speak German, but with EU orgs, international companies, etc its possible) - Rent is not cheap in the more attractive cities with good jobs (Hamburg, Frankfurt and Munich), but it's not that expensive either compared to say Paris or London - No out-of-control housing market, as Germans don't have the same lust for owning property and property speculation that you see in much of the English speaking world - Cost of living (food, drink) compared to wages is really good, compared to much of Europe - Amazing cheap beer, great festival culture. The food here is seriously underrated, Schweinbraten, etc is amazing. Yes it's not pretentious like e.g. some French food, but it's no-nonsense and delicious, especially in Bavaria. Even the weather compared to the British Isles is decent. - Low cost university - A culture of paying for things upfront (e.g. Energiewiende and pensions for old population), hence high taxes but not kicking the can down the road is obviously the best thing in the long run (although it's not much comfort to young workers) - Soaks up talent from the rest of Europe, you can move with no visa from other EU countries Regarding taxes, t's possible to get a contracting job, where you are paid as a freelancer and certain social contributions are waived for a period of time. I also know that's it's possible to earn as a contractor, trading as a company from another EU country (earn German wages, pay Greek/Maltese/Irish corp taxes). You need a good tax advisor, but I've seen first hand that it's possible. Source: expat working in Germany.
CM30 11y ago
And it's because of an unhealthy collision between two major trends in society. Namely: 1. Most more developed countries have an aging population, so the percentage of baby boomers is much higher than it probably should be. This is due to better conditions, better healthcare, etc, which leads to people living longer and the population demographics skewing older. Either way, politicians tend to support them, because they make up more of the population. 2. Older people vote more (perhaps due to younger generations seemingly losing all interest in politics or trying to change their situation in any reasonable way), so politicians target them more. Combine with the aging population mentioned above... It's a pretty bad problem to have, and a perfect illustration of why a population shouldn't be skewed too much towards any one demographic. And even more problems are going to arise when more of this demographic start retiring and the numbers of people working isn't enough to support it... I have no idea how to solve this issue. Maybe mandatory voting would be a good start, to try and encourage people to vote rather than mere discuss politics/sign internet petitions? But it's still problematic, since you need both political parties that fight for younger people's political views and enough people to support said parties that the issues can't simply be ignored.
sbierwagen 11y ago
It praised the state’s “lockout” laws, which Baird’s predecessor, Barry O’Farrell, had introduced in early 2014 in the wake of high-profile “one-punch” deaths. Huh? Googling around, a "one-punch" assault seems to be some Britishism for an assault on an unsuspecting person, where they're knocked out after a single hit, and occasionally die. Most the results are for the new mandatory minimum sentencing laws, but I can't seem to actually find the text of the law anywhere. EDIT: The result feels like a final victory in the battle between Australia’s version of the cavaliers and the roundheads, the larrikins and the wowsers. Do we even speak the same language?
pinaceae 11y ago
So? All the comments here read like those aren't humans, allowed to participate in society just like anyone else. And if they have more voting discipline and get what they care about, well, whose fault is that? Everyone will be old one day, then those bad, bad things will suddenly be awesome again. Guess you need to move into middle age to understand both side better.

147 points by randomname2 11y ago

Everything besides the new laws about bars applies to London and the southeast of England, UK. Remarkable how similar the situation is in these two countries. Could culture have something to do with this if they can avoid this cost of living crisis in continental Europe and most of the US? Or may be they're suffering there too. Only way to solve a lot of these issues is to be able to work remotely and not have to live or buy in commuter areas.

mahranch 11y ago
I think many of these problems could be minimized, mitigated or some completely eliminated if millennials would actually vote. But they don't. And I don't foresee that ever changing. It was the same problem with my generation, gen-x (born in 1980 so I'm not quite a gen-x, not quite a millennial). We just didn't vote. I don't believe the <30 crowd has ever been a big voting bloc, at any point in U.S history. Though, I noticed many of my facebook friends started voting once they hit their early 30s. I think that's when people start to settle down in life and either have the time to study/figure out politics, or get more interested in it. It might be the time where their youthful naive idealism vanishes and they realize that true change is a slow process. They become more pragmatic and more realistic. Much of their concerns tend to be more local/regional where their votes actually hold some power. It's less about voting in a president who can wave a magic wand and create their ideal utopia overnight and more about voting in a local city councilman or state senator who will best represent their interests. People they have actually met in real life and shook their hands.
- makomk 11y ago
  Here in the UK, the parties that millenials did vote for promptly went back on the promises they made to get those votes.
  - msandford 11y ago
    As does every party ever elected, except in rare instances.
  - Symbiote 11y ago
    And that party is now ruined, so perhaps that mistake won't be repeated.
  - Latty 11y ago
    No, what happened was they became the lesser partner in a coalition, and delivered a lot from that position (the policies during that period were much, much better than they would have otherwise been). The idea that somehow they should have delivered on all of their policies from that position is laughable. Would they have been better served not being able to influence government at all? (This all goes to show how broken FPTP is, of course.) Then, because of thinking like that in your post, people gave up on voting for them, despite being the best possible representation.
- eli_gottlieb 11y ago
  I vote in every election I'm around for, including the municipal ones and the Super Tuesday primary tomorrow. That doesn't mean those elections are actually contested, or actually involve anyone I really want to vote for. As in, my last municipal election involved five candidates running for four city council seats. I had to pick which one not to vote for! I'm entitled to be a little resentful when the term "Massachusetts liberal" exists as an insult, a perennial way of kicking my state in the shins and telling us our voice will always be overridden.
- Torgo 11y ago
  I think it is that when you get older you start noticing all the things the system is providing, and realizing how you're tied to it and how it is tied to that process.
- jdub 11y ago
  Turning up to vote is compulsory in Australia (for which I am incredibly thankful). That said, voting gives you a democratic voice, but it doesn't give you power.
vacri 11y ago
'Work remotely' really only works for some professional services. Most work doesn't have that opportunity - whether it's construction, hospitality, healthcare, retail, manufacturing, transport, emergency services, sanitation, mining, childcare... the list goes on and on.
poooogles 11y ago
The law around bar's isn't that far off. Few examples from recent memory... - http://www.dazeddigital.com/music/article/23050/1/plastic-people-is-closing-down http://www.dazeddigital.com/music/article/23050/1/plastic-pe... - https://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/were-closing-the-vibe-bar https://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/were-closing-the-vibe-bar - http://www.cable-london.com/broadcast/single/we-have-closed-with-immediate-effect-official-statement http://www.cable-london.com/broadcast/single/we-have-closed-...
alistairSH 11y ago
We have the same problems in the US. Real estate prices in major urban/semi-urban areas are insane. Among my peers (mostly Gen-X, born late-70s), there is a general consensus that the Boomers have ruined the country for future generations - they borrowed and consumed and never invested in infrastructure. We are saddled with massive student loan debt that the Boomers never needed because colleges were once largely affordable.
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  Every generation thinks the generation before broke everything and the generation after is callow morons. This whole article is the most boring call-to-complain in HN history.
  - bryondowd 11y ago
    Is that true? I've never heard anyone complain about the Veteran generation.
tunichtgut 11y ago
The young people on the continent are drowning in cost, too. Just saying. The bigger the city, the worse it gets.

wheaties 11y ago

I see lots of baby boomers trying to unload the business they've worked hard at the past 30yrs, hoping someone can pay cash at 3x what they make from it. Who can buy something that costs 250K if they've never had steady work let alone the burden of student debt? Eventually even that market will "correct" down to 2x or less.

pc86 11y ago
I don't think this is unique to boomers. They've spent decades building something - they're probably the people least capable of objectively valuing the business. There's too much emotion tied into it, especially if they're at a point where they could sell but are just as happy to keep working, meaning the price needed to get them to leave goes up. It's not unique to business owners, either. One of the real estate websites have a "Make Me Move" option, which is basically the homeowner saying what number they'd need to pack up their shit and leave. It is consistently 180-200% the actual market value. To the point where you want to ask the homeowners what exactly they're smoking that they think their house is worth even close to that much money.
- shadowfiend 11y ago
  But that's not how much their house is worth to the market—it's how much their house is worth to them. “Make Me Move” doesn't reflect the cost of the property when you're ready to move, it reflects the value of the home to you when you're not really ready to move. It seems completely reasonable that that value would be significantly higher than the value of a piece of land that you need to or are looking to get out of anyway. Same is true of a person who owns their own business but isn't ready to stop running it. You're not reflecting the market value of your business, you're reflecting the market plus emotional/‘satisfactional’ value of it.
- Spooky23 11y ago
  "Make me move" is basically saying "This is the price for which I will uproot my life!" I actually know someone who was in this situation. A company wanted a sliver of the guy's land for an access road. Eminent domain wasn't an option for the company. The company offered $100k for the 10x30 piece of land. Sensing blood in the water and figuring that redoing all of the project would cost at least $2M + lots of time, he demanded $750k for his property and got $700k. It was worth about $250k total.

walterbell 11y ago

No mention of foreign investment driving up housing prices?

alistairSH 11y ago
Is that really a problem outside of London, SF, and one or two other super-appealing cities? Honest question, I have no idea.
- justin_hancock 11y ago
  It is a real issue, I was amazed to find places such as Milton Keynes were seeing foreign investment on new build - friend is renting there and his new build place is owned by a family based in the UAE
- blablablame 11y ago
  Lisbon, Porto and south of Portugal has seen a boom on foreign investment on properties. There are locations that if you email the agency, the first thing they mention is all the tax advantages of buying here for non foreigners. There is a whole upscale market for non-residents to park their money in real estate here.
  - expertentipp 11y ago
    When in Portugal I was really surprised to see most of the billboards in the Lisbon airport to be in... Chinese, advertising properties and apartments for sale. After some looking up I discovered that in Portugal one can acquire residency only by buying a property expensive enough.
    - blablablame 11y ago
      Yep, they are called Golden Visas. If you buy a property more expensive than 500.000 Euros you may apply for it. There were a few nags and some corruption charges a while ago so not sure what the current status is. There is also some tax break that if you had no income in Portugal in the last 10 years, you are eligible for a very reduced personal tax rate if you move to Portugal for X years so that also brings up rental and property prices.

wilwade 11y ago

I wonder if the idea of those in power (in this case a large voting block and those directly in power) having more to loose plays out in changes in the traditional balance between privacy vs safety/security?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

gradstudent 11y ago

King's Cross is super dodgy, especially at night. It attracted drunks, deros, druggies, prostitutes and other unsavory types. It was not a nice place to visit and it had a reputation for violence. The lockout laws have stopped the violence. They have also caused collateral damage in the form of these closures. So there you have it. Would you rather be safe out or cry over the closure of a few late night businesses? Having experienced all sides of King's Cross, I know which I'd choose.

pc86 11y ago
It states in the article that violence had decreased 40% prior to these laws. Is that just a coincidence?
- gradstudent 11y ago
  There was a general decline across the greater metropolitan area but, iirc, King's Cross was a notable hotspot. The figures for violent non-domestic assaults before and after the laws show a very sharp decline. Here is one police comparison (there might be more recent data but it's hard to search on a tablet): http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Pages/bocsar_news/Mapping-the-impact-of-the-Sydney-lockout-laws-on-assault.aspx http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Pages/bocsar_news/Mapping-the-i...
stupidcar 11y ago
Since I actually read the article, rather than parroting preconceived cowardice about "unsavoury types", I don't have to make this false choice: > Bravely, his government had first tried to tamp down the issue with cold facts: statistics showed drunken violence was actually decreasing, by almost 40% according to some estimates, and the culture of small bars was starting to sap violent drinking away from the city.
- gradstudent 11y ago
  I read the article. I also read the police statistics. Have you? But anyway, two specific points: 1. Small bars are exempt from the laws: http://www.nsw.gov.au/newlaws http://www.nsw.gov.au/newlaws 2. In the 10+ years I've known Sydney I did not notice much change in the late night character of King's Cross; certainly not enough to make believe the culture of drugs, drunks, prostitution and violence is going away all by itself. The fact that the laws were introduced in the first place is testament to that.

Nullabillity 11y ago

I'm not going to cry over a couple of drunks who can't get their drugs quite when it pleases them. Initially the article seemed promising, but then it just devolved into the usual lockout law garbage.

orf 11y ago
You should be concerned about the total evaporation of nightlife in your countries largest city. Your condescending comment and not understanding why this is an issue shows your huge bias and highlights the points made in the article even more.
- eclipxe 11y ago
  Having grown up and currently living in a city with zero nightlife, what's the big deal?
  - castis 11y ago
    It's not necessarily about nightlife, it's about being told whats best for you and having it enforced.
venomsnake 11y ago
There is easy way - not go in party districts at night. Generally speaking - it is not hard to manage to do it once you are after your mid 20s
- matthewmacleod 11y ago
  I don't agree with the parent, but I also don't think you're being entirely fair here. It's hard to avoid 'party districts' if you live or work there, or have to travel through them.
  - mason240 11y ago
    Or if you have pay for the costs through social safety nets.

alistairSH 11y ago

Is a 3am last-call a mostly American (USA) thing? I've never lived anywhere that allowed purchasing alcohol all night long. I read the article and thought to myself "Who the heck drinks after 3am anyways?" Even through my teens and twenties, an all-night party was the exception.

marcioaguiar 11y ago
Here in Brazil we have no such laws. You can drink anywhere and anytime. I remember drinking till 5am when I was a teenager and bars would stay open until the last customer was out. Today there is still no restriction, but mostly because of labour laws and the costs of maintaining service it's very hard to find open bars after 3am. * edit: of course I'm talking about my experience living on a medium-sized city (Maceió). I guess bigger cities like São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro you can find a good number of late open venues.
- pc86 11y ago
  I spent about three weeks in Brazil (Salvador and then São Paulo), and in SP in particular we regularly found bars open around 5 or 5:30 am, but this was circa 2004/2005 so it may have changed since then.
ant6n 11y ago
In Berlin you can party at a club from Friday afternoon to Monday morning. Young people fly in from other European cities to 'experience' this.
reverend_gonzo 11y ago
There are many places around the world that are open late. In many places (I speak from experience in Spain, Peru, and El Salvador) , the night doesn't really get started until after midnight anyways. The article also mentioned other things, like all liquor must be served with a mixer after midnight. That means drinking a whisky neat is now illegal, which is quite ridiculous, and will definitely drive people away from going to bars.
pc86 11y ago

martythemaniak 11y ago

I wonder if what we're seeing is a quantitative change leading to a qualitative change. It's undeniable that old people have always held power in society, from hunting-gathering societies (various elders/shamans/wisepeople) through early civilization (Senator comes from the Latin "senex" for "old". Senatus = "chamber of old men"), though to today. At the same time, their numbers (and effectiveness) were probably limited, either by a more pyramidal population distribution and/or by lower life expectancy (including duller minds in older age). I think what we're seeing for the first time in history is a huge swath of healthy, long-lived older people, throwing the relative balance way off and leading to various situations we see across many different societies. I like to sum it up as Boomers eating the young and I don't think things will change until the numbers/demographics do, ie, Millenials will experience a lost generation and things won't start to look good until we're well into middle-age.

s_kilk 11y ago
> we're seeing for the first time in history is a huge swath of healthy, long-lived older people... Exactly, and they cast a disproportionately long shadow over society and politics. EDIT: just look at the recent Irish referendum on same-sex marriage. A vast majority of the "no" votes came from the >60 cohort. I'll wager the age breakdown of last weeks election would reveal a similar dynamic: the young want change and meaningful progress while the old continue to vote for the past, keeping our culture and politics firmly rooted in the early/mid 20th century.
- cunac 11y ago
  how is disproportional in a voting system where each adult has a vote? I would say it is proportional it is just that you don't like a proportion right now because people live longer so there is more older adults voting
  - tomp 11y ago
    It's disproportional in the sense of who's contributing to society (working) versus who's deciding what to do (voting).

tunichtgut 11y ago

This is such a good article. Its exactly the same in Germany. Boomers are running the business. Young pp are worthless garbage. I heard about some middle school teachers saying "young germans should be expelled from all social security...". Like weow...wait until these pp are old. Then its time for retaliations on the great nazis-kid bastard generation.

tomp 11y ago
No need for retaliation. The "old" are digging their own graves (no pun intended), by not allowing the "young" to flourish - the younger generations either migrate to countries offering better oportunities, or not work at all because of excessive taxes. Eventually, who's going to take care of the old, of their property, and pay their pensions?
- venomsnake 11y ago
  > Eventually, who's going to take care of the old, of their property, and pay their pensions? Robots.
  - tomp 11y ago
    That's a bet I would be willing to take. I consider it very unlikely that it's going to happen in 30 years or less.
    - ccozan 11y ago
      Have you seen the latest robot from Boston Dynamics? Here is Atlas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY I don't think we need 30y for a real robot application for old people. This could be in less than 10 years.
      - tomp 11y ago
        It's amazing. However, I don't think the problem is Robotics, I think the problem is AI. Will robots be helping us in 20 years? Possibly. Will they still need people directing them, supervising them, and doing the more complicated tasks? I'm inclined to answer "definitely". But I'd love to be proven wrong! :)

bikamonki 11y ago

And then there is the environment issue. Who invented the nature-destroying economic system we now live in?

TheAceOfHearts 11y ago

I really cannot fathom why we have these ridiculous last call laws. I'm living in California, where it's illegal to sell drinks after 2AM. It's incredibly frustrating. More than once I've been up late at night, and felt like cooking something with wine, only to quickly realize: Oh, right, I can't go buy a bottle of wine until 6AM... Because think of the children, or something like that.

Kenji 11y ago
I don't want to patronize you but is it really that hard to plan ahead enough to be able to survive 4 hours of not being able to buy stuff?
- wiredfool 11y ago
  The worst part is that you can't buy alcohol on Christmas day or St Patrick's day till 12:30pm. (prominently posted by all the tills) Ireland is a different world some times.
- brianwawok 11y ago
  Hey in Indiana I can't buy any booze on Sunday... if my weekly costco trip is on Sunday and I am getting low on beer? NOPE NO BEER ON SUNDAYS MIGHT NOT GO TO CHURCH
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    I understand its more about keeping others (i.e. the booze store employees) from being able to take Sunday off. Its a Labor party thing.
    - brianwawok 11y ago
      if that were true: 1) Why just close booze stores? Why not close restaurants or grocery stores or any of the non-essential businesses on sunday? 2) What about a grocery store that is already open and staffed and has piles of beer. What does not selling it do for the already working employees?

oliwarner 11y ago

The strange thing is in other [especially European] countries, these post-war "baby boomers" are falling apart at the seams and it's largely their parents' fault. All because of food. Parents of baby-boomers lived through war. Food was rationed. Luxury food was seriously rationed. Many grew up without processed fats like butter, or even sugar. The end rationing was a celebration and these parents wanted their children to have everything they couldn't. Sugar. Fats. The new-fangled convenience foods that came over with Americans post-WWII (operating bases, etc). As time went on this junk food just became even more affordable. The result is a demographic that has just awesome levels of T2 diabetes, obesity and coronary issues, as well as all the problems that have been associated with these conditions (a fair amount of dementia). In many cases, the parents who lived through the war are now caring for and outliving their children.

saiya-jin 11y ago
Same result can be found all over the world, albeit the path to it might be different (or not). I don't think we are in worse state than many other westernized places. At the end, we do our own choices where to spend money - is it cheap and somewhat tasty junk food, or something better (which might not be more expensive, or even cheaper if prepared ourselves). Blaming others for issues that people cause themselves when they have other options is cheap...
mcv 11y ago
That's not what I'm seeing. My impression is rather that the war generation taught their values of not wasting food to their children, and every generation, the lesson gets dilluted because the war is increasingly distant. My baby-boomer taught me to not waste food, and I try to teach my kids, but I also notice that my wife does not share this value. Maybe because her parents grew up on a farm where food was less scarce? Or maybe it's simply different families, different cultures. In any case, I don't see high levels of obesity and diabetes in baby-boomers. And I think it's more my generation and possibly later generations that eat too much junk food.
- oliwarner 11y ago
  Boomers' children are slightly better. They haven't really known rationing so aren't in the position where they really want to push "luxury" crap on their kids. It's been a slow realisation but I think we're only just getting to a point where as a population we understand that feeding children crap means we get fat children. Food waste is something slightly different but I agree, there's a very consumerist approach to food these days. Most are disconnected from production so don't care where it comes from, how much effort goes into it, how many welfare sacrifices are make to get its cost down. Fixing both of these issues is done by getting people making and eating real food. Re my original comments, OT is a geriatrician in England. She's seeing people in their 60s and 70s who have had to move back in with their parents to be cared for. You shouldn't be having geriatric issues until you hit your 80s. She obviously doesn't have the direct experience of other generations but her colleagues tell me this is a relatively recent thing, with this generation. It'd be interesting to munge through a ton of medical data on this.

adrianlmm 11y ago

This article could also be called: "Millenials can't have fun w/o alcohol".

cryptica 11y ago

I'm a Gen Y living in Sydney - I've been planning to leave for a while because of the adverse conditions for young people here. Rent is very high, everything is expensive, you get fines all the time for silly stuff like parking your car facing the 'wrong' way, staying in a parking spot for 10 minutes too long or not waiting for a full '3 seconds' at a stop sign, etc... Also, in some parks, you can get fined for having a picnic without a permit. I had to pay a $300 traffic fine for driving in a 'bus-only lane' once. It's a police state. Also, the tax system is complicated and favours people who own houses (In Australia, you get tax deductions if you lose money on a rental property which you own). There are actually a lot of (older) people in Australia who own like 10+ houses (with 10 mortgages) and rent them out to young people and get huge tax deductions (and capital growth). Older people own everything. To make it worse, the older generation in Australia doesn't really want to invest in technology - They prefer just investing their money into real estate (which has been growing an an impressive rate year-over-year for the past 20 years or so). The idea of 'investing in yourself' is mostly a foreign concept in Australia - The only thing worthwhile investing in is a block of land with bricks and concrete on top. There are many people who dropped out of school, became construction workers and bought a house on a mortgage and are now wealthier than most university-educated students thanks to the insane real-estate growth and labour shortage (due in part to tough immigration laws). Some recent changes in laws suggest that conditions might be improving but it's too late for me. I'm looking forward to living in San Francisco - Yes the rent will also be high; but at least it seems that everything else is cheaper, taxes are lower and it's generally a good place to build a career in technology.

tunichtgut 11y ago
My advise is dont leave for germany. Here you will be sucked dry by the social security payments and taxes for old pp, too. Im planning long term to move into the US with mountain states and midwest as the most favored locations.
- patrickk 11y ago
  Not sure I agree. Good things about Germany: - Great job opportunities, even if you only speak English (less jobs than if you speak German, but with EU orgs, international companies, etc its possible) - Rent is not cheap in the more attractive cities with good jobs (Hamburg, Frankfurt and Munich), but it's not that expensive either compared to say Paris or London - No out-of-control housing market, as Germans don't have the same lust for owning property and property speculation that you see in much of the English speaking world - Cost of living (food, drink) compared to wages is really good, compared to much of Europe - Amazing cheap beer, great festival culture. The food here is seriously underrated, Schweinbraten, etc is amazing. Yes it's not pretentious like e.g. some French food, but it's no-nonsense and delicious, especially in Bavaria. Even the weather compared to the British Isles is decent. - Low cost university - A culture of paying for things upfront (e.g. Energiewiende and pensions for old population), hence high taxes but not kicking the can down the road is obviously the best thing in the long run (although it's not much comfort to young workers) - Soaks up talent from the rest of Europe, you can move with no visa from other EU countries Regarding taxes, t's possible to get a contracting job, where you are paid as a freelancer and certain social contributions are waived for a period of time. I also know that's it's possible to earn as a contractor, trading as a company from another EU country (earn German wages, pay Greek/Maltese/Irish corp taxes). You need a good tax advisor, but I've seen first hand that it's possible. Source: expat working in Germany.

CM30 11y ago

And it's because of an unhealthy collision between two major trends in society. Namely: 1. Most more developed countries have an aging population, so the percentage of baby boomers is much higher than it probably should be. This is due to better conditions, better healthcare, etc, which leads to people living longer and the population demographics skewing older. Either way, politicians tend to support them, because they make up more of the population. 2. Older people vote more (perhaps due to younger generations seemingly losing all interest in politics or trying to change their situation in any reasonable way), so politicians target them more. Combine with the aging population mentioned above... It's a pretty bad problem to have, and a perfect illustration of why a population shouldn't be skewed too much towards any one demographic. And even more problems are going to arise when more of this demographic start retiring and the numbers of people working isn't enough to support it... I have no idea how to solve this issue. Maybe mandatory voting would be a good start, to try and encourage people to vote rather than mere discuss politics/sign internet petitions? But it's still problematic, since you need both political parties that fight for younger people's political views and enough people to support said parties that the issues can't simply be ignored.

sbierwagen 11y ago

It praised the state’s “lockout” laws, which Baird’s predecessor, Barry O’Farrell, had introduced in early 2014 in the wake of high-profile “one-punch” deaths. Huh? Googling around, a "one-punch" assault seems to be some Britishism for an assault on an unsuspecting person, where they're knocked out after a single hit, and occasionally die. Most the results are for the new mandatory minimum sentencing laws, but I can't seem to actually find the text of the law anywhere. EDIT: The result feels like a final victory in the battle between Australia’s version of the cavaliers and the roundheads, the larrikins and the wowsers. Do we even speak the same language?

pinaceae 11y ago

So? All the comments here read like those aren't humans, allowed to participate in society just like anyone else. And if they have more voting discipline and get what they care about, well, whose fault is that? Everyone will be old one day, then those bad, bad things will suddenly be awesome again. Guess you need to move into middle age to understand both side better.