4 ms·
>This is a fairly narrow view of the issue. Actually, I'm taking a broader view of the issue. >article is focused on economic prospects of our generation, man
by elhudy 6y ago
>This is a fairly narrow view of the issue.
Actually, I'm taking a broader view of the issue.
>article is focused on economic prospects of our generation, many of the ramifications of which will not play out for decades
My response is not focused on the economic ($$) future of millennials.
In fact, I am not even in disagreement that millennials are disadvantaged economically particularly when looking at CoL and debt.
I am pointing out that the article eschews the extreme compounding increases in technological advancements that my generation is fortunate to experience. Is that agreeable? Or would you say that when comparing generational success and/or happiness we should only consider variables where millennials lag?
> The TP delivered to your house was done so by someone working a low paying gig work job. There is a good chance, that like you, they graduated with significant student load debt. How do you think they feel about their economic future?
The same person who delivers my TP probably gets their tp delivered as well. Even though they are a blue collar worker, likely with debt. Isn't that value worth consideration when comparing generational wealth? How is that being accounted for in the article? If it isn't being accounted for, then why not?
- qqqwerty 6y agoI think you are greatly overestimating the impact of technology on peoples QOL. The HN crowd are likely to be heavy tech users, but your average person is not. The average person might get their video from Netflix instead of Cable TV now, and they might use social networking (which has its downsides) instead of phone lines, but they aren't playing MMOGs or taking MOOCs. For example, in my own circle of hobbies. Fishing is getting worse[1]. Surfing is difficult because costal real estate is crazy expensive. Gardening is also difficult due to real estate, etc.. I can think of at least a dozen other activities that are now much harder to participate in due to rising real estate prices, climate change, or wealth inequality. For anyone who participates in these activities, there is a real loss in QOL. Also, I think you are presenting a false dichotomy. Your suggestions is that millennials should be content because technological progress offsets the loss of economic opportunity. This is a false choice. We can have both with the right mix of policy. No one said to the boomers "You can have good economic opportunity, or you can have technological advancements, pick one". In their own lifetimes, they also saw huge advancements in medicine, infrastructure, communication, and tech. [1] https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9058818-181/california-poised-to-extend-abalone https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9058818-181/california-po...
- elhudy 6y ago>For example, in my own circle of hobbies. Fishing is getting worse[1]. Surfing is difficult because costal real estate is crazy expensive. Gardening is also difficult due to real estate, etc.. I can think of at least a dozen other activities that are now much harder to participate in due to rising real estate prices, climate change, or wealth inequality. For anyone who participates in these activities, there is a real loss in QOL. You're using a ban on abalone fishing as an example of how hobbies are "becoming harder to participate in"? I'm sorry, but that's a massive generalization and a ridiculous stretch. The boom in technology over the past 30 years has undeniably enabled free learning, and while you can point at niche examples as outliers, you would be grasping at straws. >Also, I think you are presenting a false dichotomy. Your suggestions is that millennials should be content because technological progress offsets the loss of economic opportunity. This is a false choice. We can have both with the right mix of policy. No one said to the boomers "You can have good economic opportunity, or you can have technological advancements, pick one". In their own lifetimes, they also saw huge advancements in medicine, infrastructure, communication, and tech. Can you help me to understand how suggesting more variables be brought into the equation when comparing generational success is a false dichotomy? I think you're presenting a straw man. My comment was that I am content due to reasons not considered in the article, and that maybe those reasons should be considered when looking at the population as a whole and comparing them cross-generationally.
- qqqwerty 6y ago> My comment was that I am content due to reasons not considered in the article, and that maybe those reasons should be considered when looking at the population as a whole and comparing them cross-generationally. You suggest adding more variables, and I recommended that we extend that beyond technology and then you summarily dismiss those concerns. Abalone is a very niche fishery, but my broader point was that our environment has been significantly degraded for a number of reasons, and for people who value the environment, whether it be for fishing, hiking, or whatever, they have experienced a loss relative to the generations before them. This also holds for anything that requires real estate. For example musicians are finding it much harder to make ends meet in cities due to loss of studio space and event venues. And even technology has not been a net win for everyone. Ask a journalist how they fell about the internet? How about your local bookstore? I am glad you are content. Enjoy it. But recognize that you are literally one of the few winners in this economy. A highly paid tech worker has likely just experienced the best decade in history for their particular profession. But that is a very narrow segment of our society, and a large chunk of our generation has lost ground relative to their cross-generational peers.