Baby Boomers must die...

[alva]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
We should employ old people in televised gladiatorial combats (to the death).

We reverse the drain upon the economy and turn it into a benefit.

I had a great idea for the movies. No-one wants to ****ing hear it, I don't know why. I was watching Terminator 2 and I'm thinking to myself, these are the most amazing stunts I have ever seen. A hundred million dollars it cost to make this film. How are they ever gonna top these stunts in a movie again? There's no way. Unless... they start using terminally ill people... [laughter] Hear me out... ...as stuntmen in pictures. Okay not the most popular idea ever, but I prefaced it with that. What you know, some of will probably think that's cruel, don't you? "Ooh cruel, terminally ill stunt people Bill. How cruel." You know what I think what cruel is? Leaving your loved ones to die in some sterile hospital room surrounded by strangers. **** that! Put 'em in the movies! Whaaat? Do you want your grandmother dying like a little bird in some hospital room? Her translucent skin so thin you can see her last heartbeat work its way down her blue veins? Or do you want her to meet Chuck Norris? Why be so selfish as to deprive her of that thrill? "Tom how come you dressed my grandmother up as a mugger?" "Shut up and get off the set. Action! Push her towards Chuck." Whurf. [Bill does a flying karate kick] "Wow he kicked her head right off her body! Did you see that? Did you see my grammie? She's out of her misery. I just saw the greatest ****ing movie of my life. Cool!" Okay not the most popular idea ever. All I'm saying is people are dying every day, and movies are getting more and more boring. [Webbs fingers together] "I am the weaver." I don't know.

[Bkeela]

Originally posted by Ming


And the current generation is any better? If anything they are even worse.

I don't see any evidence for that. On the contrary. We must not only carry the burdens boomers have imposed, but must get on with our own survival, and that of our children.

This growing awareness of global warming and the changes that must be made has not been energised by wasteful boomers. It is the voice of my own generation finally emerging.

I demand deep respect for the generation that follows the boomers, for we must right all their wrongs - and the very existence of our species - if not life itself, could very well depend on our superiority.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Bkeela
I demand deep respect for the generation that follows the boomers, for we must right all their wrongs - and the very existence of our species - if not life itself, could very well depend on our superiority.

If you want respect, you will have to earn it.

The fact that you demand respect without ever having done anything yet pretty much sums up the current generation

[rah]

Yeah, they'll have to something more grand than moving back home after graduation because they want to soak off the previous generation then actually earn something themselves.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

As a tweener I get to see the self indulgent hypocrites named the boomers while looking at the wasteland that is the Gen X'ers. We're doomed by the many sins of the past and have no hope for the future.

Thanks all you *******s.


Think I'll just slit my wrists now.

[rah]

Yep that's the right attitude. It just proves our point.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by rah
Yeah, they'll have to something more grand than moving back home after graduation because they want to soak off the previous generation then actually earn something themselves.

I'm sorry. I thought you wanted to keep social security and soak us for money. I must have been mistaken.

[Pekka]

So the generation gap battle has once more began. Fortunately, I'm a bridge builder. I'm like the Don who never wants war. Now, baby boomers, no more talk. Generation X? Shut up.

Good. Now we can finish this whole deal with the virtual gap of time, it doesn't exist as we are arguing it exists.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by rah
Yep that's the right attitude. It just proves our point.

What, that boomers screwed everything up and the latest generation is equally inept.

The only ones with sense are the lowly tweeners 64-75. You know the kids being born when all you boomers were f8cking up the Vietnam war.

[mactbone]

What I find worse is that not only is there no expectation of getting SS, we know that our companies are ****ing with the retirement plans that they're setting up seperate. They frequently misstate the actual benefits and change plans yearly. I have no expectation that the companies I have and will work for have given me viable retirement plans.

[rah]

Actually the boomers were the ones that forced an end to the Vietnam war.
I also look out over the great city of Chicago and see that Lake Michigan is now cleaner than before the boomers.
The Chicago river is now cleaner than before the boomers.
The air quality is now cleaner than before the boomers.
Cars are now safer, get better gas millage, and pollute less than before the boomers.
I work at a company that is more DIVERSE than ever possible before the boomers using technology pioneered by boomers.

We were optimistic, had goals and reached for them, and made good progress.

The next generation has already given up without accomplishing anything.

[Pekka]

Boomers did start the computer revolution.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
We should be better sadly we aren't.

I see the rationale behind cutting the benefits, but better that we keep them up as long as possible so that when it does fall apart it won't be possible to set it up back again.

Other options would be to encourage more people to save for their own retirement so that they won't be so dependent upon social security.

We're doing that (at least over here), but that takes 40 years to have an effect.

In the UK the problem's much smaller, since the retirement age for women goes up from 60 to 65 gradually between 2010 and 2020, so the dependency ratio is actually set to fall then. But in the 2030-2050 we start to have a big problem. Basically this means that my generation won't get anything from younger taxpayers, or very little.

I'm all in favour of scrapping social security and just having unemployment benefit. In the UK, this is set at enough to live on, but not a comfortable rate. It means the state stops any old people dying, but puts on them the emphasis to save to have a decent quality of life. Which IMHO is the states role - it's there to provide a guaranteed minimum quality of life, above which you provide for yourself.

Originally posted by Dauphin
Your dad was in (or almost in) his 40s when you were born?

Yeh, my dad was born during the war. He was in his late thirties when my brother war born, and early forties when I was. My mum's seven years younger though, but even that's quite old, I guess. My dad retired early too, so he's been retired for a few years already.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Ming
If you want respect, you will have to earn it.

The fact that you demand respect without ever having done anything yet pretty much sums up the current generation

Doesn't that apply to the boomers too? No major wars you didn't start, not having enough children to provide for you, yet you still expect a far larger share of the national wealth than any previous generation got in retirement. You (as a generation, obviously) were too busy working to have enough children to provide for your retirement, yet also didn't save enough of that extra income you got in order to pay for your retirement. The boomers generation have spent far more of their lifetime wealth on themselves than any other generation had at this point.

Originally posted by rah
We were optimistic, had goals and reached for them, and made good progress.

Now that I accept. The issue is though, that while you guys made things a lot better and more productive like that, you spent the money you made doing it early. That's the big issue. In having less kids, you needed to save more, to provide for your retirement. You didn't. And now your kids are going to be paying the cost, by paying twice, once for your retirement, and once for their own, and on a much bigger burden, because there are so few of us (comparitively).

Also, as one of those goals, you prolonged life expectancy. Which yes, is great, but you didn't prolong useful life anywhere near as much. Extra non-useful life is simply more consumption, that needed to have been saved for, one way or another.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Drogue
In having less kids, you needed to save more, to provide for your retirement. You didn't.

Yeah... some morons haven't. Others of us did. The only reason I won't be retiring as early as I had originally planned was because we had a second child later in life then planned. When she is done with college, then I can retire. And I won't have a problem doing so at that time because we adjusted our plan to do so.

My gripe is that promises were made, and some of us have paid big bucks into the system. We aren't asking for a hand out, or something that wasn't earned. Hell, if I could have taken the money I was forced to put into the system and invested it, I would be far better off.

We were forced to pay into a system. It was done on the promise that each generation was paying for the one that came before and that when our turn came, we would get something out of it. It was very clear early on that this pyramid scheme wasn't going to work in the long run due to the changing demographics. But no real changes were made, and my generation is basically getting screwed. Sure, later generations will be screwed as well, unless real changes are made in the whole system. And that might still happen. The current generation may actually do well if a better system is put in place long before they actually have to contribute large ammounts of money into the current system. Who knows.

I'm just not very happy that I was forced to live up to my end of the deal, and the other side won't live up to their end of the deal.