3 ms·
> I'm 59. I don't remember doing that. (And are we actually broke?) I do remember voting. Everyone I voted for said one thing to me, and did what they were told
by fweespeech 10y ago
> I'm 59. I don't remember doing that. (And are we actually broke?) I do remember voting. Everyone I voted for said one thing to me, and did what they were told by their donors and the MIC.
You specifically, unlikely.
Your generation brought in Reagan. Your generation (along with Gen X) pretty much has run the government since 2000. The great shift to the right was largely your doing and would never have been sustained if your generation wasn't what it was. :/
http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/30/a-different-look-at-generations-and-partisanship/ http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/30/a-different-look-at-g...
You brought the country so far to the right your generation actually flipped from R to D. It was truly quite the amazing transformation from relative sanity to batshit crazy. It completely obliterated balance in this country.
http://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12256510/republican-party-trump-avik-roy http://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12256510/republican-party-trump...
> “Goldwater’s nomination in 1964 was a historical disaster for the conservative movement,” Roy tells me, “because for the ensuing decades, it identified Democrats as the party of civil rights and Republicans as the party opposed to civil rights.”
For better or worse, your generation and Gen X has to own the shift to the right in this country because you are largely the generations responsible for it. That rightward shift has gutted everything the Millenials depended on to climb economically from schools to infrastructure to rational tax policies.
- 300bps 10y agoHowever, your generation (along with Gen X) brought in Reagan Generation X was under 18 when Reagan was elected.
- fweespeech 10y agoYeah I could have written that clearer.
- Roboprog 10y agoI was 15. Eventually I realized wen I grew up what a disaster it was for (most of) the country to to reject a former naval officer, engineer, and family business operator in favor of an actor from monkey-movies. As well as allowing Reagan's cohort of clowns to reject Keynesian economics in favor of all this supply side fiction. Great for concentrating wealth, not so great for growing a bigger pie.
- infinite8s 10y agoPeople fall for bread and circuses.
- a3n 10y agoNo generation is a monolith. I and lots of us were and are opposed to the rightward shift, although I'm not opposed to people having right/conservative viewpoints and acting on them. People have a right to speak, and to vote for their direction. Sometimes people win, sometimes people lose. Sometimes things go really badly, but we can't all be President or members of Congress. You speak to your friends, you do what you can within your life, you support justice and oppose actual evil (not sloganed evil). You respect respectful people of all politics. You play with your kids and hope for the best.
- fweespeech 10y ago> No generation is a monolith. You need to realize it isn't personal against you. If a majority of a group vote in favor of X, they bear some responsibility for it. Particularly when they don't rebuke it after the fact. > People have a right to speak, and to vote for their direction. Sometimes people win, sometimes people lose. Sometimes things go really badly, but we can't all be President or members of Congress. Obama and HRC were (economic policy wise) 60s Republicans. Modern Republicans are basically Reagan-derivatives. https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/05/baby-boomers-are-whats-wrong-with-americas-economy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/05/... > One moment in the third Republican presidential debate encapsulates everything terrible about baby boomers and the way they’ve pillaged the U.S. economy. It came from Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a Generation Xer, who offered the standard line — you can hear it from the mouth of almost any American politician today — on how to keep Medicare and Social Security solvent. Rubio defended the idea that future workers will need to retire later or receive fewer benefits from those safety-net programs than current retirees. “Everyone up here tonight that’s talking about reforms,” he stipulated, was “talking about reforms for future generations. Nothing has to change for current beneficiaries.” I don't feel the need to be polite about it when elected politicians are comfortable stating their plan to "reform" the system is to screw me and people my age in favor of another group of people.