Why We Hate Millennials

Brett_Murphy said:

You're all overlooking the fact that Gen X is *small* and fairly uninfluential. Don't blame us for a damn thing the Boomers did.

To clarify, the Boomers (and earlier generations) pretty much directed an influenced events from 1970 until... well, now.

 

I feel like they're almost a sort of "lost" generation.  Half of them are like boomers, half are here with us millennials, and no one seems to remember the generation X pepsi commercials.  The focus is all millennials and boomers these days.  Maybe 15 years in the future it'll be gen X and zoomers?

infinitenexus said:

In reply to Adrian_Thompson :

Your comments on time off reminded me that I left the Army back in early 2014, and since then I have yet to work a job that offered me ANY paid time off - and one of those jobs I worked was at NSA as a reporter, so I'm not talking crappy jobs. 

Now I routinely work 50-60 hours per week, any time off for medical appointments requires me to just miss work and therefore money so even when I'm sick, I don't go to the hospital or take time off because I generally can't afford it.  And I live a thrifty life and don't blow money on things, so please no one start with the "stop spending money on blah blah" horse e36m3.  I'm 38, a first year millennial, and most of my friends that are millennials would describe their work/time off situations as the same.  Meanwhile, we grew up with just a single parent working 40 hours a week and there was always a bit of money leftover.  So taking that into consideration, I've lived practically my whole life hearing boomers and gen Xers just complain that my generation is lazy, and every time I hear them say that I just want to punch them straight in the mouth.  There's a reason, a very good reason, why a lot of millennials can't stand boomers.

I'm 37 and my work/life is exactly the opposite. 

I had more, but I can't write it in a way that doesn't make me sound like I'm trying to be a jerk or talk down to you. And that's not my intention.

But my experience is similar to yours, in that all my friends are basically in the same situation I am.  Well paid, PTO, 401k, good benefits, etc.

I am very happy for you!  I wish I had your experience.  I'm hoping moving to a different state will help my situation, as where I live now feels like a massive dead end for everyone except the rich.

infinitenexus said:

You know, I typed out three separate replies and wound up deleting them all because in the end, I know boomers just don't give a E36M3.  All they seem to care about is correcting millennials, or telling us we don't know how good we have it.

For the record, I'm just 4 years older than you.    My parents are in the "boom" generation, and they have never once told me how good I have it.  

Is that 50-60 hour work week part of your job requirements or just what you do?

Personally, I don't do more than 40 and make sure the company knows it. Only very rarely will I do an hour or two of OT a week.

Brett_Murphy said:

You're all overlooking the fact that Gen X is *small* and fairly uninfluential. Don't blame us for a damn thing the Boomers did.

To clarify, the Boomers (and earlier generations) pretty much directed an influenced events from 1970 until... well, now.

 

The whole Boomer-Gen X shift really does have the potential to wreak some havok, due to the shrinking average family sizes and the resulting number of people paying into things like social security vs those taking out.  

One boomer told me something interesting the other day, that put one issue - health care - into persepctive.  They said they'd paid into their pension/ health care all these years, and in retirement had the health care costs mostly covered under various insurance(s).  However, if we go single payer, all this goes away.  Not a problem, right?  Wrong- in order to pay for single payer, there will have to be (emphasis on "have to") tax increases.  So this person in this example gains absolutely nothing, and has to pay a higher tax bill for the privilege of the exact same health care they'd already paid for.

Now, you may very well say, berkeley 'em, who cares, but when retire-ees have less to spend, that is going to trickle down to negatively affect the rest of the economy.  

FuzzWuzzy said:

Is that 50-60 hour work week part of your job requirements or just what you do?

Personally, I don't do more than 40 and make sure the company knows it. Only very rarely will I do an hour or two of OT a week.

In defense of infintenexus, I've worked for companies on salary and been told that if I wasn't working more than 40 hours, it would negatively affect my performance reviews.  It sucks, and it's wrong, and borderline illegal and absolutely unethical, but it happens- all the berkeleying time.  One place mandated 12 hour days and Saturday work after I'd been with them for a year.  I started looking for a different job the week after they implemented that, and had one secured within a month.  

I'm hourly now (contractor) and I punches my clock in at 7 and punches it out at 3:30.  

infinitenexus said:

What I fear for most is my children.  When you look at the past let's say 30 years and how housing prices have skyrocketed, productivity has greatly increased, consumer debt has increased, and wages have been basically stagnant, I fear for their future.  I could go on and on about that.

Same boat here. Probably going to work a little longer than I otherwise would, and I'll keep my cheap ratty toys instead of buying something nicer. If current trends continue, I see my situation as what might be the last really good chance for building generational wealth for my heirs and giving them a reasonable chance of having a better life than I do. It means I don't have a bunch of build threads here like I otherwise might, but it's not an opportunity that I want to just throw away flippantly.

I apologize if I came off as harsh, Volvo.  I went back and read through the thread and learned you're the age of my brother.  But my comment was a bit more general and not directed towards you.  I was typing out a reply to someone else and realized it was kinda pointless.  Throughout my life I would say I have had overwhelmingly negative experiences with boomers, more often than not.  I've learned to basically give up all hope when it comes to boomers, unless I need to know how to synch triple weber carbs.  

I think perhaps one of the main issues isn't even boomer vs millennial, or the cycle of hating youth everyone mentions.  When I was a kid I never remember anyone talking about how awful generation X was.  They were the future!  I remember a lot of positive talk about them.  I feel like society today has gradually progressed to being more negative in general over the past couple decades, and especially in the last few years.  Sure, there's always been the "kids these days" people, but now I feel the disdain for younger generations is scathing and in the open.  No one likes each other and we're sick of everything.  Or maybe that's Baltimore seeping into me.

And then I remember all the news articles about things millennials have been blamed for destroying, and remember that everything is just berkleying stupid.

https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-are-killing-list-2017-8

In reply to STM317 :

That's a really good point - the whole "generational wealth" thing.  It's something my grandparents started on, my parents have built on, and I plan on continuing.  Of course, one bad apple along the way can spoil the whole thing, but saving and defraying gratification to give your kids a better shot is one of the more noble uses of earned income. 

My hat's off to you, sir, for thinking along the same lines.  

In reply to volvoclearinghouse :

We're getting dangerously close to flounder territory so I'll delete this if people want.  But there's no reason a single payer system should affect them if it comes from payroll tax.  Also, you could make a similar argument about social security that people paying for retirees today will get less equivalent benifits when they retire than those retiring today are getting.  Also, there has to be a starting point for new social programs.  The first social security recipients didn't pay in much or anything yet received something.   Finally, the longer we go before we get a single payer system, the further we fall behind other first world democratic countries in average standard of care.  

Again, I am happy to delete if this crosses the line.

volvoclearinghouse said:

The whole Boomer-Gen X shift really does have the potential to wreak some havok, due to the shrinking average family sizes and the resulting number of people paying into things like social security vs those taking out.  

One boomer told me something interesting the other day, that put one issue - health care - into persepctive.  They said they'd paid into their pension/ health care all these years, and in retirement had the health care costs mostly covered under various insurance(s).  However, if we go single payer, all this goes away.  Not a problem, right?  Wrong- in order to pay for single payer, there will have to be (emphasis on "have to") tax increases.  So this person in this example gains absolutely nothing, and has to pay a higher tax bill for the privilege of the exact same health care they'd already paid for.

Now, you may very well say, berkeley 'em, who cares, but when retire-ees have less to spend, that is going to trickle down to negatively affect the rest of the economy.  

This is really no different than requiring one generation to contribute more to social security during their working years (to support older generations ) than they'll get in return when they reach the appropriate age, which is likely to happen in the next few decades, either to my generation or my kids generation.

Edit: It looks like I was just alittle slow (as usual) and Adrian made the same point

infinitenexus said:

I apologize if I came off as harsh, Volvo.  I went back and read through the thread and learned you're the age of my brother.  But my comment was a bit more general and not directed towards you.  I was typing out a reply to someone else and realized it was kinda pointless.  Throughout my life I would say I have had overwhelmingly negative experiences with boomers, more often than not.  I've learned to basically give up all hope when it comes to boomers, unless I need to know how to synch triple weber carbs.  

 

I think perhaps one of the main issues isn't even boomer vs millennial, or the cycle of hating youth everyone mentions.  When I was a kid I never remember anyone talking about how awful generation X was.  They were the future!  I remember a lot of positive talk about them.  I feel like society today has gradually progressed to being more negative in general over the past couple decades, and especially in the last few years.  Sure, there's always been the "kids these days" people, but now I feel the disdain for younger generations is scathing and in the open.  No one likes each other and we're sick of everything.  Or maybe that's Baltimore seeping into me.

 

And then I remember all the news articles about things millennials have been blamed for destroying, and remember that everything is just berkleying stupid.

https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-are-killing-list-2017-8

 

It's interesting, I have a brother who's about your age, so your experiences may echo his.  And for the record, growing up in the 80's and 90's, I did hear all the negative things about Gen X you're hearing about Millennials.  

Come on out to Carroll County sometime if you ever need a break from B-more.  It's amazing those two places are even in the same state.  

In reply to Adrian_Thompson :

While I disagree with your post, and the whole concept of single payer, I see no reason why we cannot have intelligent debate on a serious topic.  That's what civilized folks do, I hear.  

In reply to infinitenexus :

like this level of destruction or a whole other level of destruction?  I'm always wondering about what it's meant to be like? 

volvoclearinghouse said:

FuzzWuzzy said:

Is that 50-60 hour work week part of your job requirements or just what you do?

Personally, I don't do more than 40 and make sure the company knows it. Only very rarely will I do an hour or two of OT a week.

In defense of infintenexus, I've worked for companies on salary and been told that if I wasn't working more than 40 hours, it would negatively affect my performance reviews.  It sucks, and it's wrong, and borderline illegal and absolutely unethical, but it happens- all the berkeleying time.  One place mandated 12 hour days and Saturday work after I'd been with them for a year.  I started looking for a different job the week after they implemented that, and had one secured within a month.  

I'm hourly now (contractor) and I punches my clock in at 7 and punches it out at 3:30.  

It's what I do when overtime is allowed.  We have some medical bills (due to tricare screwing up and us getting the shaft) and a couple other things (high cost of living here) that add up and make things tight for my wife and I.  Basically, when they allow overtime, I work myself to death so I can try to get ahead and maybe be able to stash a few bucks away so we can move somewhere cheaper with a better future for us.  I absolutely long for the day I can work a salaried position and just do my 40 hours and go home, believe me.  Right now allowed overtime is minimal, so I work the same hours as Volvo.

Adding on to what Volvo said, I was interviewing for a project manager job about a year and a half ago and they told me in no uncertain terms that my starting pay would be about $37K/year, and for that amount of money I would be expected to work 55-60 hours per week - and to not report any overtime.  They paid overtime, but I would be expected to only claim 40 hours per week.  Weekends were expected. Not too long after, I had an interview with a different company for a similar position and the situation was the same.  

My current job pays just okay, but I work with nice people and the job is easy on my back so I'm very happy to have it.  And anywhere else I'd be doing well, but as I kinda alluded to earlier, higher cost of living here along with a few things in our life makes for tightened belts.

nutherjrfan said:

In reply to infinitenexus :

like this level of destruction or a whole other level of destruction?  I'm always wondering about what it's meant to be like? 

Ah!  I see you found a picture of what millennials have done to several businesses because we prefer avocado toast to health care!

z31maniac said:

I'm 37 and my work/life is exactly the opposite. 

I had more, but I can't write it in a way that doesn't make me sound like I'm trying to be a jerk or talk down to you. And that's not my intention.

But my experience is similar to yours, in that all my friends are basically in the same situation I am.  Well paid, PTO, 401k, good benefits, etc.

I'm in this situation as well.

I think I might know people in the other (infinite nexus) situation though and I think the gap between us is widening :(

I dont have anything more to contribute to this thread but I think it would be an interesting discussion over a beer with some people.

I look forward to a separate thread where single payer is discussed like civilized adults.

volvoclearinghouse said:

It's interesting, I have a brother who's about your age, so your experiences may echo his.  And for the record, growing up in the 80's and 90's, I did hear all the negative things about Gen X you're hearing about Millennials.  

Come on out to Carroll County sometime if you ever need a break from B-more.  It's amazing those two places are even in the same state.  

What's interesting is my older brother, in general, seems to have experiences more similar to yours.  Interesting.

Carroll County is so different from Baltimore!  My boss of my weekend job (wedding photographer) keeps trying to get my wife and I to move up to the Harford County, in the Havre de Grace area.  It's so nice and peaceful up there, with like 1/2 the property taxes of Baltimore.  My former drummer lived in Carroll County and it was peaceful there also.  Definitely different worlds.  Baltimore is neat, and full of art and life - if you can afford the taxes.  My wife and I found a super cheap house just inside city limits, with a nice big yard and whatnot, and our monthly property taxes are literally almost equal to our monthly loan payment.  Living in Baltimore is draining us dry.  And don't even get me started on my $70/month water bill that includes $15 of water usage and $55 in fees.  Sorry to ramble.  Thank you for the kind words.

Hey guys, I'll start a different thread for a single payer system.  If nothing else, that way I can stop replying so much in here, I'm starting to feel like frenchy with the novels I'm writing.

Before the lock... I was born in the early 60s and never though that put me in the Gen-X group. Lazy bunch of whiners.

I earned my government funded health care (with co-pay) by retiring from the military with over 20 years of service. So... everyone should get that now and I should have to pay for them to? No.

infinitenexus said:

I'm starting to feel like frenchy with the novels I'm writing.

Please include more V12 Jaguar 

ProDarwin said:

infinitenexus said:

I'm starting to feel like frenchy with the novels I'm writing.

Please include more V12 Jaguar 

Every day on our commute to work my wife and I pass by this tire shop with a red XJS parked in front with a flat tire.  It's been sitting there for months.  I have dreams of getting it super cheap, gutting it, putting a very loud exhaust on it and flogging it at the $2019 challenge.  Or at least I did, until reality set in a bit haha.

In reply to infinitenexus :

I bought my first home in balto county back in 2004- the peak of the housing bubble.  Still have it- it's been a rental for the past decade or so. If I were to sell it today I'd about break even- and owe a big tax bill since it hasn't been my primary residence for over 5 years. Fortunately, it is in the county, not the city. The water Bill's about 60 bucks a quarter, and the property tax is like half of that in the city.

You get double-pinged because you live in the city so your income tax is higher, too. I'd wager for every 1000 in yearly income one pays an extra $50 or more a year for the "privilege" of living in the city, between all the extra taxes. That adds up.

I won't get on a soapbox about what all it takes to "make it" these days, even as a late gen-x er. I've changed jobs multiple times, moved up and down the east coast, gotten a master's degree, and currently live hours from any family other than my wife and 2 kids. It's tough, but others have it far, far worse.

infinitenexus said: Basically, when they allow overtime, I work myself to death so I can try to get ahead and maybe be able to stash a few bucks away so we can move somewhere cheaper with a better future for us.  I absolutely long for the day I can work a salaried position and just do my 40 hours and go home, believe me.  Right now allowed overtime is minimal, so I work the same hours as Volvo.

I always bestow the virtues of OKC. The job market is booming, housing is CHEAP, we have an NBA team, many world class museums, a new restaurant was named the best in the country last by Bon Appetit. Along with plenty of other really neat little districts with great food, bars, galleries, all that kind of thing. Of course there are negatives like July/August/September heat, the very real threat of tornados and severe storms, typically in the spring.

I bought my house two years. 1800sq ft, 3 bed, 2 bath, 2 car garage. Nice quiet neighborhood close to many conveniences. Fully renovated.........new flooring everywhere, new paint, black granite counters in kitchen/bath/bar, etc. I paid $156k for it. 

Don't mind a commute? You live up near Guthrie (OK's original capital) you can pay $250k for a brand new house on 1 acre.