The final screwing by the boomers...

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,969
7,886
136
Well I can't speak for the UK but as far as the US goes the increasing cost of tuition at non-research public universities (ie: where most people go) has been driven primarily by declining government support for them. The fundamental question in loans vs. government funding is who pays - if it's loans the kids pay and if it's funding the parents pay. The parents have increasingly declined to pay.


I guess that's a difference, then. The funding might have changed as well, but the _huge_ issue here is the increase in the numbers attending - maybe tenfold.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,873
136
I guess that's a difference, then. The funding might have changed as well, but the _huge_ issue here is the increase in the numbers attending - maybe tenfold.

Yes because the boomer generation set it up so that anyone and everyone had to have a college education or some sort of degree and/or licensing for any particular job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,003
12,067
146
I guess that's a difference, then. The funding might have changed as well, but the _huge_ issue here is the increase in the numbers attending - maybe tenfold.
Blame the hiring practices, and subsequent counseling by parents/schools in the 80's for that one. We're still trying to swing that pendulum back the other direction.
 

DarthKyrie

Golden Member
Jul 11, 2016
1,531
1,279
146
Yes because the boomer generation set it up so that anyone and everyone had to have a college education or some sort of degree and/or licensing to any particular job.

They were just trying to make sure that their kids didn't replace them as easily as they replaced their parents in the workforce.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,326
10,230
136
Blame the hiring practices, and subsequent counseling by parents/schools in the 80's for that one. We're still trying to swing that pendulum back the other direction.
Blame the federal government. Look at their requirments for jobs starting at even GS 9 positions.
Also, blame HR directors with degrees. I made it under the wire, I had a career ending with the title Senior Engineer with only a technician certificate from DeVry. There will be no people to follow me.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,003
12,067
146
Blame the federal government. Look at their requirments for jobs starting at even GS 9 positions.
Most people aren't employed by the federal govt, they likely followed the trend. Actually they likely very slowly followed the trend, given how slow stuff changes within the govt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,873
136
They were just trying to make sure that their kids didn't replace them as easily as they replaced their parents in the workforce.

Yep and because they didn’t bother saving enough for retirement they are continuing to work after retirement age making moving up even more difficult for younger generations (or they take up jobs that were once predominantly held by teenagers).
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
Yep and because they didn’t bother saving enough for retirement they are continuing to work after retirement age making moving up even more difficult for younger generations (or they take up jobs that were once predominantly held by teenagers).

exactly...
sub-buzz-11383-1536598936-7.jpg
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,969
7,886
136
Yes because the boomer generation set it up so that anyone and everyone had to have a college education or some sort of degree and/or licensing for any particular job.


I'm not sure it's fair to ascribe that to a conscious choice by baby-boomers. The whole world seems to have being going that way. The culture and economy has just changed, in the mysterious way that it does.

It does seem kind of absurd to me sometimes, I admit, with 'degrees' in all sorts of peculiar subjects for jobs people used to be able to do without one.

I knew one younger person who had a job, went to get a degree, got ill, failed to get the degree, then found the job requirements for their old job had changed so they could no longer get back into that job because they didn't have a degree.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
Yep and because they didn’t bother saving enough for retirement they are continuing to work after retirement age making moving up even more difficult for younger generations (or they take up jobs that were once predominantly held by teenagers).

While this is true in a sense it's really only true for individuals, it's can't be true for the whole country unless we're cashing in foreign assets.

In the end it's a choice by society to determine how much of our economic output we're going to devote to taking care of old people. In an aggregate sense what they have in their bank accounts isn't that meaningful.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
I have to say I'm not a big believer in the whole idea of stealing retirements, in a general sense I don't even think its possible unless we're talking about some sort of mass investment in foreign assets that can be sold.

It was entirely possible and it happened. It was known as "pension raiding" where a company with a pension fun was purchased, the assets (of which pensions were considered part of) and then the money was gone. Ron R opposed legislation which would protect pensions and the process was continued. A point of irritation is that my father worked for 35 years and contributed to a pension plan which was taken and his business closed in two weeks. No retirement and an older man with no job. So tell me what he did wrong and how that didn't happen? Thirty-five years and not a penny to show for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54 and pmv

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
I'm not sure it's fair to ascribe that to a conscious choice by baby-boomers. The whole world seems to have being going that way. The culture and economy has just changed, in the mysterious way that it does.

It does seem kind of absurd to me sometimes, I admit, with 'degrees' in all sorts of peculiar subjects for jobs people used to be able to do without one.

I knew one younger person who had a job, went to get a degree, got ill, failed to get the degree, then found the job requirements for their old job had changed so they could no longer get back into that job because they didn't have a degree.

Ahh the mysterious greed is good generation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
It was entirely possible and it happened. It was known as "pension raiding" where a company with a pension fun was purchased, the assets (of which pensions were considered part of) and then the money was gone. Ron R opposed legislation which would protect pensions and the process was continued. A point of irritation is that my father worked for 35 years and contributed to a pension plan which was taken and his business closed in two weeks. No retirement and an older man with no job. So tell me what he did wrong and how that didn't happen? Thirty-five years and not a penny to show for it.

What I mean is in a nationwide sense, not an individual sense. It is entirely possible to steal one person's retirement but insofar as what we do for an entire generation it's essentially a political question, not a financial one. It's like how with Social Security the idea that the trust fund was raided is nonsense as a trust fund of that type could literally never exist in a meaningful way.

The standard of living for retirees as a whole is basically a function of the political question of how many of society's resources we want to devote towards taking care of the elderly because after all where does that money come from and what does it buy? The products and labor of current workers and that's all it could ever buy. We could shift more of our production and assets towards retired people if we wanted to, society has just largely decided it doesn't want to.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,201
28,216
136
It was entirely possible and it happened. It was known as "pension raiding" where a company with a pension fun was purchased, the assets (of which pensions were considered part of) and then the money was gone. Ron R opposed legislation which would protect pensions and the process was continued. A point of irritation is that my father worked for 35 years and contributed to a pension plan which was taken and his business closed in two weeks. No retirement and an older man with no job. So tell me what he did wrong and how that didn't happen? Thirty-five years and not a penny to show for it.
Well, for starters, did he vote for Raygun and other GOP pols?
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,969
7,886
136
Ahh the mysterious greed is good generation.


Yeah, not convinced that was a trait of an entire generation, rather than of just slightly-too-many of the voters among it. And people make decisions based on the context they find themselves in. I don't think politics is about morals, it's about circumstances.

Plus the shift towards more-and-more-years of education and the requirement for qualifications isn't, as far as I can see, simply a function of the rise of neo-liberalism (which is what I take 'greed is good' as meaning). The nature of the industrial base changed, and jobs changed with it. And a lot of people just prefer going to university to, say, working on a construction site. It's more interesting, fun and less dangerous, whether-or-not it really helps in the job market.

I personally often feel a bit of cynicism about academic qualifications, about that technocratic ideal where only those with the right letters after their name are allowed to have an opinion on political matters...and then I feel very confused because that's also how the US "know nothing" right think, and I don't agree with them either. But it is true that just because someone had an expensive education doesn't mean they know as much as they think they do, or are honest about the things they do know (cf Boris Johnson).
 

FirNaTine

Senior member
Jun 6, 2005
632
174
116
It was entirely possible and it happened. It was known as "pension raiding" where a company with a pension fun was purchased, the assets (of which pensions were considered part of) and then the money was gone. Ron R opposed legislation which would protect pensions and the process was continued. A point of irritation is that my father worked for 35 years and contributed to a pension plan which was taken and his business closed in two weeks. No retirement and an older man with no job. So tell me what he did wrong and how that didn't happen? Thirty-five years and not a penny to show for it.

ERISA was in before Reagan, how did they get around that? Truly curious, as I am in a pension not covered by it, because I am a public, not private, employee. I thought it would (should) have stopped what you are describing

Luckily, for me we have engaged in extremely strong stewardship of our own pension for a long time, and are very well funded. (Though unfortunately, we also benefit because of how many firefighters die young due to work related stress, toxic exposures causing much higher than normal rates of heart problems and cancer, lowering life expectancy and therefore benefit draw time)
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
ERISA was in before Reagan, how did they get around that? Truly curious, as I am in a pension not covered by it, because I am a public, not private, employee. I thought it would (should) have stopped what you are describing

Luckily, for me we have engaged in extremely strong stewardship of our own pension for a long time, and are very well funded. (Though unfortunately, we also benefit because of how many firefighters die young due to work related stress, toxic exposures causing much higher than normal rates of heart problems and cancer, lowering life expectancy and therefore benefit draw time)

I have no idea of the justifications used, I know what happened and using pensions funds to leverage a buyout is a matter of history.
 

FirNaTine

Senior member
Jun 6, 2005
632
174
116
I have no idea of the justifications used, I know what happened and using pensions funds to leverage a buyout is a matter of history.

I wasn't questioning that it did, if that is how I came across. I was more interested in the how, as there have been a number of government pensions that were deliberately mismanaged* and they have or are trying to take away promised benefits from retirees. There is some effort to extend similar protections as ERISA to public pensions, but his case would be one to learn from. If the prior laws didn't help your Dad, they won't help others in similar situations basically.

*(skipping agreed on/required payments from employer side when market returns were up so that money could go to other purposes, knowing full well the market was cyclic and it would eventually drop, but not planning for it.)
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,873
136
I'm not sure it's fair to ascribe that to a conscious choice by baby-boomers. The whole world seems to have being going that way. The culture and economy has just changed, in the mysterious way that it does.

It does seem kind of absurd to me sometimes, I admit, with 'degrees' in all sorts of peculiar subjects for jobs people used to be able to do without one.

I knew one younger person who had a job, went to get a degree, got ill, failed to get the degree, then found the job requirements for their old job had changed so they could no longer get back into that job because they didn't have a degree.

Conscious or not, it happened under their stewardship and they haven’t bothered trying to fix it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,278
5,053
136
It was really the so called greatest generation that started the inter-generational screw job. Once their kids (the BBers) got through school, funding public schools become a lot less important. As long as their SS benefits were good (even though they paid very little in to obtain those benefits) cutting benefits and raising contributions for younger people (to cover the deficits caused by the greatest generation not paying much into the system) was a fine thing. Supporting anti-union politicians was a-okay once the greatest generation was safely into retirement with their union-achieved benefits. Turns out that so many of their values were transactional in nature.
An astoundingly myopic view of history.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,378
7,443
136
I'm not sure it's fair to ascribe that to a conscious choice by baby-boomers. The whole world seems to have being going that way. The culture and economy has just changed, in the mysterious way that it does.

It does seem kind of absurd to me sometimes, I admit, with 'degrees' in all sorts of peculiar subjects for jobs people used to be able to do without one.

I knew one younger person who had a job, went to get a degree, got ill, failed to get the degree, then found the job requirements for their old job had changed so they could no longer get back into that job because they didn't have a degree.

The Boomers were raised with a belief system that happened to coincide with America's post-war prosperity. And the stage of Capitalism that they got to experience at the time. Everyone could be "the man" by opening a mom and pop store or other form of small business. You were the "upper class", all you needed were some bootstraps. Pull yourself up, get rich, and avoid taxes.

But the market is not static. The very virtue of Capitalism is that it is efficient. Over the years its efficiency has improved. From new markets, offshoring jobs, stifling wages and rising automation. Capitalism means we do things "better", no matter the cost. This requires regulation, or it will speed ahead, jump the tracks, and careen our nation(s) off a cliff. Capitalism will cannibalize itself to DEATH, by cutting costs. By cutting labor. By cutting out its own consumers.

Capitalism needs a safety net to prevent it from going over that cliff. Far as I am aware, some form of Basic Income is the only idea on the table for effectively dealing with this developing situation, and handling the burden of automation as we move to cut millions of jobs in the future.

Boomers, however, too few of them process the facts of the case. Instead they'll harp on their belief system. Ignoring the growing mountain of evidence that markets change over time. And their era of mom and pop, that their parents enjoyed and that they benefited from, no longer exists. They'll still believe in bootstraps, though none exist. They'll point out Bill Gates and say you're only a lazy !@#$ up if you don't catch lightning in a bottle. From our point of view it is demented and cruel to taunt the masses with fake promises of making themselves rich off a fantasy. But for a Boomer, they lived in an America where that fantasy was more... real. They cannot comprehend that times have changed.

We must pry Conservative America's economic illiteracy from their icy cold grasp, and slap them upside the head with the GAP. With the massive economic changes that they oversaw and helped orchestrate throughout their life times. That "greed is good" means "mom and pop" died a long time ago. They burned the bootstraps by making Wall Street King. But hey, I can live with that. We can make modern Capitalism Great Again. However, someone has got to pay for that.

Republicans may cling to old fables, but that won't change what needs to be done to save our economic futures.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,873
136
The Boomers were raised with a belief system that happened to coincide with America's post-war prosperity. And the stage of Capitalism that they got to experience at the time. Everyone could be "the man" by opening a mom and pop store or other form of small business. You were the "upper class", all you needed were some bootstraps. Pull yourself up, get rich, and avoid taxes.

But the market is not static. The very virtue of Capitalism is that it is efficient. Over the years its efficiency has improved. From new markets, offshoring jobs, stifling wages and rising automation. Capitalism means we do things "better", no matter the cost. This requires regulation, or it will speed ahead, jump the tracks, and careen our nation(s) off a cliff. Capitalism will cannibalize itself to DEATH, by cutting costs. By cutting labor. By cutting out its own consumers.

Capitalism needs a safety net to prevent it from going over that cliff. Far as I am aware, some form of Basic Income is the only idea on the table for effectively dealing with this developing situation, and handling the burden of automation as we move to cut millions of jobs in the future.

Boomers, however, too few of them process the facts of the case. Instead they'll harp on their belief system. Ignoring the growing mountain of evidence that markets change over time. And their era of mom and pop, that their parents enjoyed and that they benefited from, no longer exists. They'll still believe in bootstraps, though none exist. They'll point out Bill Gates and say you're only a lazy !@#$ up if you don't catch lightning in a bottle. From our point of view it is demented and cruel to taunt the masses with fake promises of making themselves rich off a fantasy. But for a Boomer, they lived in an America where that fantasy was more... real. They cannot comprehend that times have changed.

We must pry Conservative America's economic illiteracy from their icy cold grasp, and slap them upside the head with the GAP. With the massive economic changes that they oversaw and helped orchestrate throughout their life times. That "greed is good" means "mom and pop" died a long time ago. They burned the bootstraps by making Wall Street King. But hey, I can live with that. We can make modern Capitalism Great Again. However, someone has got to pay for that.

Republicans may cling to old fables, but that won't change what needs to be done to save our economic futures.

I feel like UBI would be addressing the symptoms and not the problem with capitalism. UBI in the long run, without addressing the underlying issues, seems like it would simply create even greater class disparity. The bar to enter the market as a worker or an entrepreneur will simply keep rising and in order to deal with that the UBI would have to be continuously raised (sort of like what happens now with minimum wage).

So what problem would UBI actually be addressing and how or will it eliminate the issue?