5 ms·

I am appalled at the ads I see targeted to that generation for cash out refis. Why would you want to do that to your kids?

ebikelaw 8y ago
Taking things out of the economy for themselves is the decades-long operating mode of the generation this article discusses. They went to free colleges and gave their kids ludicrously expensive colleges. They bought houses at fair prices, down-zoned their towns, and forced their children to move far away. They ran government deficits instead of paying taxes. They converted regular schools to adult schools, regular libraries to senior centers, etc. The fact that they would cash out their assets and leave nothing to their kids is 100% consistent.
- mirimir 8y ago
  I guess. Sex, drugs and cheap thrills ;) And some of us went further. We didn't have kids.
- jhayward 8y ago
  This is a grossly unfair reading of what has happened in the economy over the last 40 years, and how it got that way. Unfair enough to be simply a lie. Please stop with the inter-generational warfare rhetoric - we have enough things dividing us as a people, by folks who want us divided. [edit: spelling]
  - ebikelaw 8y ago
    Why is it up to the younger generation to call off the inter-generational war? Facts are facts. 65 and older are now the least likely age group to live in poverty. Net wealth of people 65 and up has increased 50% since 1989 and fallen for all others by 25%. These outcomes are no accident. They are the direct result of an overt policy agenda, from Prop 13 to Reagan to Trump.
    - jhayward 8y ago
      > Why is it up to the younger generation to call off the inter-generational war? It's up to those throwing rocks to put the rocks down. > Facts are facts Aside from ascribing some kind of universal evil intent to people simply based on when they were born, which is idiotic, those are cherry-picked facts that do not accurately sum up the economic reality of how the US got to where it is now. For instance, why not include the fact that the older generation was responsible for the most prodigious productivity growth the world has ever seen? Or that they've overseen massive increases in longevity, decreases in morbidity and childhood mortality, huge increases in number of people achieving higher education, etc? They overcame the enormously damaging economic situation of the 1970's, which the younger people have absolutely not a clue about, and many have suffered decades of decreasing employment and wealth as a result of economic shifts in manufacturing and resource production. There are economic challenges in every generation. The ones facing young people today are not the same as the ones that faced their parents and grandparents. It does no one any good to try to stir up hatred at a sub-group to gain political power, which is what the generational warfare is about. Leave that for the Fascists.
      - ebikelaw 8y ago
        > have suffered decades of decreasing employment and wealth as a result of economic shifts in manufacturing and resource production. It's the counterfactual basis of your argument that makes it absurd. It is undoubtedly true that this describes some people in that age cohort, but it doesn't describe it generally. They are much wealthier than both their ancestors and their descendants. While every generation faces its particular challenges, only one living generation faced those challenges by intentionally impoverishing the future. As for the remainder of your points -- morbidity, mortality, educational attainment, and whatnot -- it is the case that the USA has underperformed all other advanced nations in these measures. You'll excuse me if I don't credit Boomers for falling behind countries like Cuba, Portugal and UAE.
refurb 8y ago
Do what to your kids? The mortgage doesn’t pass down to them when you die.
peter303 8y ago
At age 62 you can receive 45% the equity of your house as a lump sum or annuity and not have to pay it back while you own the house. This is called a reverse mortgage. The lender recovers costs fromthe sale of your house after you sell the house.
- hardtke 8y ago
  Reverse mortgages are fine, but I think a lot of people are cashing out their equity earlier with no means to make their mortgage payments once their income is reduced.
gowld 8y ago
Why are kids entitled to hundreds of thousands of dollars in inheritance?
- lurquer 8y ago
  The smallest unit of a society is the family. It is natural that the family's collective wealth stay in the family. Each generation tries to add to the family's wealth. Clearly that's no longer the view among many... but it was the assumption behind inheritance.
- xenihn 8y ago
  I'd love to know how you feel about inheritance taxes.
mirimir 8y ago
Maybe because you need/want the money? Why is there an expectation for kids to inherit? I mean, parents have typically already spent hugely on support and education. Indeed, grown children were traditionally expected to support and care for their parents. Arguably, reverse mortgages wouldn't be so popular if they still did that. And yes, I get that the economic system is fucked up. But that's not parents' fault, for the most part.

ebikelaw 8y ago

Taking things out of the economy for themselves is the decades-long operating mode of the generation this article discusses. They went to free colleges and gave their kids ludicrously expensive colleges. They bought houses at fair prices, down-zoned their towns, and forced their children to move far away. They ran government deficits instead of paying taxes. They converted regular schools to adult schools, regular libraries to senior centers, etc. The fact that they would cash out their assets and leave nothing to their kids is 100% consistent.

mirimir 8y ago
I guess. Sex, drugs and cheap thrills ;) And some of us went further. We didn't have kids.
jhayward 8y ago
This is a grossly unfair reading of what has happened in the economy over the last 40 years, and how it got that way. Unfair enough to be simply a lie. Please stop with the inter-generational warfare rhetoric - we have enough things dividing us as a people, by folks who want us divided. [edit: spelling]
- ebikelaw 8y ago
  Why is it up to the younger generation to call off the inter-generational war? Facts are facts. 65 and older are now the least likely age group to live in poverty. Net wealth of people 65 and up has increased 50% since 1989 and fallen for all others by 25%. These outcomes are no accident. They are the direct result of an overt policy agenda, from Prop 13 to Reagan to Trump.
  - jhayward 8y ago
    > Why is it up to the younger generation to call off the inter-generational war? It's up to those throwing rocks to put the rocks down. > Facts are facts Aside from ascribing some kind of universal evil intent to people simply based on when they were born, which is idiotic, those are cherry-picked facts that do not accurately sum up the economic reality of how the US got to where it is now. For instance, why not include the fact that the older generation was responsible for the most prodigious productivity growth the world has ever seen? Or that they've overseen massive increases in longevity, decreases in morbidity and childhood mortality, huge increases in number of people achieving higher education, etc? They overcame the enormously damaging economic situation of the 1970's, which the younger people have absolutely not a clue about, and many have suffered decades of decreasing employment and wealth as a result of economic shifts in manufacturing and resource production. There are economic challenges in every generation. The ones facing young people today are not the same as the ones that faced their parents and grandparents. It does no one any good to try to stir up hatred at a sub-group to gain political power, which is what the generational warfare is about. Leave that for the Fascists.
    - ebikelaw 8y ago
      > have suffered decades of decreasing employment and wealth as a result of economic shifts in manufacturing and resource production. It's the counterfactual basis of your argument that makes it absurd. It is undoubtedly true that this describes some people in that age cohort, but it doesn't describe it generally. They are much wealthier than both their ancestors and their descendants. While every generation faces its particular challenges, only one living generation faced those challenges by intentionally impoverishing the future. As for the remainder of your points -- morbidity, mortality, educational attainment, and whatnot -- it is the case that the USA has underperformed all other advanced nations in these measures. You'll excuse me if I don't credit Boomers for falling behind countries like Cuba, Portugal and UAE.

refurb 8y ago

Do what to your kids? The mortgage doesn’t pass down to them when you die.

peter303 8y ago

At age 62 you can receive 45% the equity of your house as a lump sum or annuity and not have to pay it back while you own the house. This is called a reverse mortgage. The lender recovers costs fromthe sale of your house after you sell the house.

hardtke 8y ago
Reverse mortgages are fine, but I think a lot of people are cashing out their equity earlier with no means to make their mortgage payments once their income is reduced.

gowld 8y ago

Why are kids entitled to hundreds of thousands of dollars in inheritance?

lurquer 8y ago
The smallest unit of a society is the family. It is natural that the family's collective wealth stay in the family. Each generation tries to add to the family's wealth. Clearly that's no longer the view among many... but it was the assumption behind inheritance.
xenihn 8y ago
I'd love to know how you feel about inheritance taxes.

mirimir 8y ago

Maybe because you need/want the money? Why is there an expectation for kids to inherit? I mean, parents have typically already spent hugely on support and education. Indeed, grown children were traditionally expected to support and care for their parents. Arguably, reverse mortgages wouldn't be so popular if they still did that. And yes, I get that the economic system is fucked up. But that's not parents' fault, for the most part.