Are Gen X-ers Falling Behind?

Nan's Policy Recommendations are Crazy

Nan says, "As intelligent, articulate members of the political system, we are in a position to demand more federal support for education, housing, child care, healthcare, and retirement. This is far more than just a financial issue; it's a moral issue about the shifting values of a country where a staggering number of people cannot manage to get by."

Nan may be articulate, but I question her intelligence if she wants to rely on government handouts for her education, housing, childcare, healthcare and retirement. The government doesn't have any money. She wants to take someone else's money to pay for her demands. That should not be the role of government. If Nan's generation moves in that direction our current mess will pale in comparison.

It's not moral for government to take away your money to spend on someone else. Read the Constitution people.

Don of UT @ Jul 02, 2008 21:52:56 PM

Related Trends (Please don't censor!)

Ultimately, a shrinking middle class traces back to government policy. That, in turn, is influenced by lobbying firms, which exist, in part, because corporations and special interest groups have achieved recognition under the law as individuals. The middle class is a low priority when there are pork barrel favors owed to those who finance political campaigns. Look back to the time in history when lobbying firms and special interest groups were not sophisticated operators, and you will find a robust, up-and-coming middle class.

Women entering the workforce SHOULD have ensured a higher standard of living, but over time two incomes net the buying power of one income decades ago. With increased family pressures divorce rates have begun to parallel the Big Squeeze. (Sociologists say financial problems are a leading cause.)

Every developed nation, when the populace becomes more educated, sees native birthrates drop. In Western Europe, birthrates have sunk so low that the offspring of Muslim immigrants, among others, may outbirth "native" populations by the end of the Century (look it up). Similarly, Latino and Southeast Asian immigrants are likely to outnumber existing US residents by 2050 (Pew Research Center). This is not a commentary about minorities vs. majorities, it is a demographic REALITY.

Immigrants bring children to Europe and America thinking there will be plenty of opportunities whereas existing residents may be less optimistic. It may be that "natives" who are more familiar with domestic realities weigh the economic feasibility of starting a family (or at least limit family size). An early Planned Parenthood goal, which is factually verifiable, was to encourage family planning as a means to reduce poverty (not a slam, but verifiable fact.). But here's what the studies found: Those of middle class means embraced family planning whereas the poor, who may feel they do not have access to birth control OR who express cultural objections, generally have not. This *may* explain why demographers have found that birthrates in developed nations tend to decline relative to immigrant populations. (Again, not a commentary but a summary of the research.)

Whereas in the past single family homes were the norm, population growth and economic realities are sparking a trend in which extended families begin to share multi-family dwellings in order to pool financial resources (a factor behind "mansionization"). Meanwhile, marketers are stripping us of our frugal tricks. It's no longer cheaper to sew one's own clothing, and the gap between eating in and eating out is narrowing too. Grocery store chains use club cards to track buying habits so they can attract shoppers with discounted cereal while making up a perceived savings with increased milk prices. It's a very sophisticated game, which is too efficient to favor a consumer who is working longer hours and can't find time to outsmart the system. Economists call it information asymmetry. Look it up!

Diana Lynn of CA @ Jun 30, 2008 16:10:49 PM

So what's changed?

The cost of housing and more recently, real incomes have stagnated (the last few years).

Baby boomers are happy to make money speculating on overpriced homes, driving up prices during the bubble, but they're unhappy that the kids (40 yrs old) can't afford a home of their own and now have to move back in.

The so-called Greatest Generation and the Baby Boomers fell asleep at the switch while the Fed and the USGov destroyed the economy.

For instance, for several years now, we've had to listen to you freeloaders gleefully joke about passing on the national debt to us and future gens.

You had many chances and blew all of them.

Boston Dan of MA @ Jun 27, 2008 04:31:18 AM

great, blame the baby boomers...

And you guys are doing much better? Our generation is continuing to make the same mistakes as the baby boomers! If that's the case, then you're as much as part of the problem instead of the solution! Stop playing the victim and blaming others and start taking care of yourselves!

Henry of MA @ Jun 26, 2008 23:36:55 PM

baby boomers are greedy and ignorant

baby boomers and the people currently drawing more from SS than they ever contributed. Now our generation has to pay for this mess. What do you expect from the generation that grew up in the 70s. They don' believe in responsibility or common sense.

dave of CA @ Jun 26, 2008 11:08:17 AM