4 ms·

These feelings are not unique to our generation -- they are part of becoming aware enough of everything around you. I would agree though that most of my friends

by codemac 10y ago

These feelings are not unique to our generation -- they are part of becoming aware enough of everything around you. I would agree though that most of my friends don't believe they're building a future for themselves. Several friends in their mid-thirties don't have retirement accounts because they strongly believe it supports an unethical economy. The idea that the nation seemed more "stable" in the 70's is an insane amount of historical ignorance though. The 70s did teach us that political engagement was essentially a lost cause, and we need another way to make progress. I'm not sure getting Carter makes up for Thatcher and Reagan's follow up destruction.

waterphone 10y ago
Saving money to be able to survive when you can't work anymore is unethical?
- mkaziz 10y ago
  You can save without putting that money in an IRA/401k and the like.
  - eronhp 10y ago
    I am not american, could you explain why putting your money in a IRA/401k would be considered unethical? And what alternatives do you have?
    - s_q_b 10y ago
      Money placed in a 401(k) is generally invested in the market. The hypothesis is that retirement money is a primary source of capital for investment banks. Some young people hold the view that this is akin to financing the banks' unethical activity, and refuse to participate. Of course this is nonsense. One can always keep invest a 401(k) in hard currency or short term treasuries (T-bills.)
      - dragonwriter 10y ago
        > Money placed in a 401(k) is generally invested in the market. So is money put in a bank. Other than stuffing cash in a mattress, there are very few ways you can save money that don't involve either investing in markets or enabling someone else to do so. > One can always keep invest a 401(k) in hard currency or short term treasuries (T-bills.) Using your 401(k) to buy up central-bank issued currency or government securities (both of which financial sector companies also invest in, and increases in other people investing in them increases their returns and gives them more money for their other operations) -- all while still paying a fee to the investment company running the 401(k) -- isn't any less investing in the financial markets and enabling unethical behavior on the part of investment banks than investing your 401(k) in the stock market is .
        s_q_b 10y ago
        I agree, it's a foolish stance. It's primarily an excuse not to save, sort of like a homeless man telling you he doesn't own a BMW because they're bad for the environment. Even stuffing cash into your mattress affects the total amount of dollars in circulation, and thus represents a zero-interest loan to the government.
    - Spooky23 10y ago
      It's just a wacky rationalization for not saving. Similar to people who preach about the evils of fast food hanging out at Chipotle or Starbucks.
- codemac 10y ago
  Oh I don't think it's unethical. I do think our bankers act unethically, but I still have a retirement account. My statement was that people feel so strongly about this that I know multiple people that don't save money in retirement accounts.
  - Erik816 10y ago
    That sounds a lot like people that refused to get married until everyone could get married. That might explain 10% of their situation, but 90% was that they didn't want to get married. Saving is hard, and this is just a nice rationalization for their existing behavior.
  - Alupis 10y ago
    Well, time will eventually turn your friend's thoughts towards retirement - and that's when they'll realize who's foot they were shooting all along.
siculars 10y ago
Stable in the 70s? I keep hearing this but I don't buy it. Rolling off of Vietnam. The oil crisis. Inflation. Decimation of manufacturing. I wasn't around then but we're they actually good?
- protomyth 10y ago
  plus a pretty high crime rate in the early 70's with talk of "super predators"
  - jfaat 10y ago
    I'm pretty sure "super predator" was coined in the Clinton era
    - protomyth 10y ago
      Reused, but the early 70's had its own fun with the term. The 90's were already on the down slope of crime. The funner part of the 70's (and part of the 80's) is people doing analysis of the crimes now and finding a serial killer in the data.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- anexprogrammer 10y ago
  I was fairly young, so didn't have huge awareness of oil crisis, as i didn't drive until the 80s. Slightly tongue in cheek here... The bad: Constant strikes, works to rule, sympathetic strikes (miners going out in sympathy with the rail works and other such silliness), having to be bailed out by the IMF, three day week and doing homework by candle light due to electric strikes. Horrific fashions and decor. So much bad music! Godawful food - this was when the UK earned the reputtion for terrible food, and it was well deserved. thankfully we're well out the other side of that reputation. High inflation if you were a saver. I recall my childhood saving account paying 16% one year! Tech was a calculator, a record player and a speak and spell. The internet was having a penfriend! The good: Simpler expectations, no great media missions to have government "do something" after every minor crime and accident. No 24hr news so little chance of hearing about the 1:1,000,000,000 crime that took place 500 miles away. Terrorism existed, but didn't result in wholesale change of the way we lived. "They won't change our way of life" was the usual refrain rather than "we need a war on terror"[1]. As a householder, high interest rates. Yes really. As a worker it led to regular, large, wage rises - often perceived to be good whatever your stance on the economics. After 3 years at 15%+ the mortgage you made a huge stretch to take has reduced to affordable. After ten or fifteen years its become pocket money. The house was a much lower multiple of wage to start with. After all that you still got tax relief on mortgages (abolished in the 90s). Final pay pensions. Job security, even if you were a manual worker. Your 15yo wasn't demanding an iPhone 6 to replace her iPhone 5 as it's SO much better! (Meanwhile I still used the Nexus 4).

by codemac 10y ago

waterphone 10y ago

Saving money to be able to survive when you can't work anymore is unethical?

mkaziz 10y ago
You can save without putting that money in an IRA/401k and the like.
- eronhp 10y ago
  I am not american, could you explain why putting your money in a IRA/401k would be considered unethical? And what alternatives do you have?
  - s_q_b 10y ago
    Money placed in a 401(k) is generally invested in the market. The hypothesis is that retirement money is a primary source of capital for investment banks. Some young people hold the view that this is akin to financing the banks' unethical activity, and refuse to participate. Of course this is nonsense. One can always keep invest a 401(k) in hard currency or short term treasuries (T-bills.)
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > Money placed in a 401(k) is generally invested in the market. So is money put in a bank. Other than stuffing cash in a mattress, there are very few ways you can save money that don't involve either investing in markets or enabling someone else to do so. > One can always keep invest a 401(k) in hard currency or short term treasuries (T-bills.) Using your 401(k) to buy up central-bank issued currency or government securities (both of which financial sector companies also invest in, and increases in other people investing in them increases their returns and gives them more money for their other operations) -- all while still paying a fee to the investment company running the 401(k) -- isn't any less investing in the financial markets and enabling unethical behavior on the part of investment banks than investing your 401(k) in the stock market is .
      - s_q_b 10y ago
        I agree, it's a foolish stance. It's primarily an excuse not to save, sort of like a homeless man telling you he doesn't own a BMW because they're bad for the environment. Even stuffing cash into your mattress affects the total amount of dollars in circulation, and thus represents a zero-interest loan to the government.
  - Spooky23 10y ago
    It's just a wacky rationalization for not saving. Similar to people who preach about the evils of fast food hanging out at Chipotle or Starbucks.
codemac 10y ago
Oh I don't think it's unethical. I do think our bankers act unethically, but I still have a retirement account. My statement was that people feel so strongly about this that I know multiple people that don't save money in retirement accounts.
- Erik816 10y ago
  That sounds a lot like people that refused to get married until everyone could get married. That might explain 10% of their situation, but 90% was that they didn't want to get married. Saving is hard, and this is just a nice rationalization for their existing behavior.
- Alupis 10y ago
  Well, time will eventually turn your friend's thoughts towards retirement - and that's when they'll realize who's foot they were shooting all along.

siculars 10y ago

Stable in the 70s? I keep hearing this but I don't buy it. Rolling off of Vietnam. The oil crisis. Inflation. Decimation of manufacturing. I wasn't around then but we're they actually good?

protomyth 10y ago
plus a pretty high crime rate in the early 70's with talk of "super predators"
- jfaat 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure "super predator" was coined in the Clinton era
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Reused, but the early 70's had its own fun with the term. The 90's were already on the down slope of crime. The funner part of the 70's (and part of the 80's) is people doing analysis of the crimes now and finding a serial killer in the data.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
anexprogrammer 10y ago
I was fairly young, so didn't have huge awareness of oil crisis, as i didn't drive until the 80s. Slightly tongue in cheek here... The bad: Constant strikes, works to rule, sympathetic strikes (miners going out in sympathy with the rail works and other such silliness), having to be bailed out by the IMF, three day week and doing homework by candle light due to electric strikes. Horrific fashions and decor. So much bad music! Godawful food - this was when the UK earned the reputtion for terrible food, and it was well deserved. thankfully we're well out the other side of that reputation. High inflation if you were a saver. I recall my childhood saving account paying 16% one year! Tech was a calculator, a record player and a speak and spell. The internet was having a penfriend! The good: Simpler expectations, no great media missions to have government "do something" after every minor crime and accident. No 24hr news so little chance of hearing about the 1:1,000,000,000 crime that took place 500 miles away. Terrorism existed, but didn't result in wholesale change of the way we lived. "They won't change our way of life" was the usual refrain rather than "we need a war on terror"[1]. As a householder, high interest rates. Yes really. As a worker it led to regular, large, wage rises - often perceived to be good whatever your stance on the economics. After 3 years at 15%+ the mortgage you made a huge stretch to take has reduced to affordable. After ten or fifteen years its become pocket money. The house was a much lower multiple of wage to start with. After all that you still got tax relief on mortgages (abolished in the 90s). Final pay pensions. Job security, even if you were a manual worker. Your 15yo wasn't demanding an iPhone 6 to replace her iPhone 5 as it's SO much better! (Meanwhile I still used the Nexus 4).