• Please go to your preferences page and make sure your "See Mature Topics" setting is set. Setting it to "Yes" means you see the Mature Topics forum (contains political and religious debates). Setting it to "No" means you do not see those threads.

Generational Theft ?

Does the US practice generational theft?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 50.0%
  • No

    Votes: 4 33.3%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 2 16.7%
  • Unsure

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    12
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

ani

Guest
There's been much conversation regarding the idea of generational theft lately. The spending associated with the financial collapse is nearing $10 trillion. This equates to approximately $33,000 per person in the U.S. This doesn't seem plausible. If $33K were given to each person, which includes children, most families could pay off a significant amount of their debt. We have projected Federal deficits of over $1 trillion annually for the next decade. That's another $33K, without interest considered, raising the total of debt per person to almost $70K per person.

How do you feel about this? We often use terms for previous generations like "greatest generation" and "baby boomers" that provoke strong positive emotions. What's the definition of the greatest generation and who determined it? While making sacrifices for the country, these generations also voted in record levels of entitlements (social spending and protections) while voting to reject tax revenue to fund those obligations. So how will they be paid?

SO - QUESTION: Do you feel that previous generations have committed generational theft? If so, in what way?



$8 Trillion Price Tag for the Government Bailouts
 
Messages
369
Role
Private
It is a reality. No offense to any potential baby boomers, but they are the entitlement generation they have been complaining about since genx and beyond were they. Their management has slowly eroded the earnings of middle class and below families and killed the housing market for their own gain and status over decades. They attempt to apply the same ideals applied to them in a environment more hostile than the one they were raised in, and then bemoan the failures of their children.

I have watched the family of friends crying to them over the last 10-15 years "Why are you not making more, why don't you have a house, why are you not married" ignoring the fact that they made more after 5 years of working out of high school than their children do 6 years out of college, while costs have risen even faster. Rent for a one bedroom apartment in the city I grew up in is hundreds of dollars more than the mortgage of my parents in that same city. They bought it in 1998. To buy that house now would cost me 300,000, over six times the yearly income of most families.

I personally do not have a problem with what I have right now, but the blame game a lot of boomers have been playing on younger generations has gotten old and is disingenuous. I still see families throwing out their 18 year olds, refusing to help them with school because "thats how they had to do it." Well guess what? We make less, work longer and pay more for all of it then you did.


edit: Hahha wow I just realized who posted this. The cycle continues! :)
 
Last edited:
A

ani

Guest
Hahha wow I just realized who posted this. The cycle continues! :)
Ha - like my last post on that thread, we are actually in concurrence on most of what was previously discussed. So it's no surprise, to me at least, that we are in concurrence here as well. For the record, I considered the previous exchange a debate and not an argument - which is why I chose not to reply to your last post on that thread.

Thank you for your thoughts.
 
Messages
369
Role
Private
Ha - like my last post on that thread, we are actually in concurrence on most of what was previously discussed. So it's no surprise, to me at least, that we are in concurrence here as well. For the record, I considered the previous exchange a debate and not an argument - which is why I chose not to reply to your last post on that thread.

Thank you for your thoughts.
For sure, I just laughed because I posted, looked for a second and went "oh man is this the same person" after I remembered the last post about baby boomers.
 

Diapered Rabbit

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,027
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
To buy that house now would cost me 300,000 dollars a month, over six times the yearly income of most families. :)
:bunny: So, the annual house mortgage payment would be $3,600,000? That's not my neighborhood. :bunny:
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
The answer is a obvious yes, however no one is trying to go out of their way to say "Bwhahaha, screw you next generational kids!!"

So really the answer to this is rather simple and always has been. STOP SPENDING SO MUCH BLOODY MONEY.
 
Messages
369
Role
Private
:bunny: So, the annual house mortgage payment would be $3,600,000? That's not my neighborhood. :bunny:
Woops, haha 300,000 as the cost, the house was worth a little over 80,000 when they bought it. I was pointing it out because historically houses costs around 1-1.5x the yearly average income of the area, but now in even some working class neighborhoods the home cost has shot up to be 6 times that. My rent in a city 45 miles away is almost twice their current mortgage. The thing is everyone is frantically trying to keep house prices from plummeting in a lot of areas because a whole new pile of shit is going to hit the fan in some of the bigger markets when people get stuck in 400-500,000 dollar mortgages for 250,000 dollar homes. People are already threatening to just default and deal with the consequences because a period of bad credit is better than bleeding yourself dry on something worth a fraction of what you paid for it. Defaulting is going to get way worse. This is why deflation is bad. Inflation hurts is immediately, but deflation can leave large portions of a population once stable completely indebted.

The answer is a obvious yes, however no one is trying to go out of their way to say "Bwhahaha, screw you next generational kids!!"

So really the answer to this is rather simple and always has been. STOP SPENDING SO MUCH BLOODY MONEY.
It isn't just about spending. Birth rates have been stagnating for middle income families while poverty rates of families have skyrocketed. This is not unrelated. People are putting off having kids until their late thirties now just because if you are not in the top 20 percent or so of earners you need a dual income to raise a family in a lot of places, and getting their isn't done in your twenties. The people having kids cannot feasibly afford them, and in turn end up living paycheck to paycheck unable to afford daycare, and trying to get their kids enrolled in latchkey programs. It has slowly gotten to the point were a lot of people either have the option of having kids and being poor, or raising a 2 year old in their 40's which is not healthy.

Some people like to place the blame on over extending which ignores the fact that the housing market in some areas was so overvalued and overbuilt there wasn't a "Reasonable" house to buy. I personally worked for a developer who owned 90% of the sale-able reality in this particular area. He had demo'd or remodeled every single affordable house and sold them back for two to three times their actual cost. Of course by raising all the property values the rent skyrocketed too. A lot of people being screwed by this were just working class folks trying to find a place to live, and unfortunately they listened to all the noise around them telling them to buy buy buy. There was a period where the mantra was "buy now or you wont be able to afford to later!" which is how we got into this situation. Every late night get rich scheme in the last 6 years has been about capitalizing on your mortgage and real estate.

Americans credit habits are bad, but they are not the real overriding issue. If you get to talk to some of the people you mention their very attitude is "fuck the next generation they will figure something out, I worked for it so I deserve it." That very attitude is what everyone is getting frustrated with wall street about. When the times are good it is because they are awesome, and when the times are bad it isn't their fault, and they deserve to be wealthy still. There is a complete disconnect when it comes to their performance and earnings. They completely believe they are so important that they deserve their salaries and bonuses more than we do jobs.

It sucks because a lot of the discontent is misdirected, but not completely misplaced.
 
B

Butterfly Mage

Guest
What cracks me up is that the boomers *aborted* close to 1/3 of the Gen-X generation and then somehow find it shocking that there aren't enough of us left to keep Social Security afloat via payroll deductions.

Well, a v6 engine doesn't work so well with two spark plugs missing either.
 
Messages
1,113
Role
Other
The US National Debt is never going to paid off. At some point either the US Government will collapse and disappear or it will just default on everything it owes. My vote is for the second.
 
Messages
3,351
Role
Private
The US National Debt is never going to paid off. At some point either the US Government will collapse and disappear or it will just default on everything it owes. My vote is for the second.
There is option 3, which I'm voting for: the US will so grossly over-print the dollar that it becomes utterly worthless (which is China's worry). At that point, I think we'll pay the debts off and then change currencies, ala Venezuela*. Hence, we won't recognize these "dollars" as legal tender.

The Aristocrats!



*Yeah, the VOA is a CIA front organization, I know, but the news came through normal media channels a couple years ago.
 
Messages
1,113
Role
Other
There is option 3, which I'm voting for: the US will so grossly over-print the dollar that it becomes utterly worthless (which is China's worry). At that point, I think we'll pay the debts off and then change currencies, ala Venezuela*. Hence, we won't recognize these "dollars" as legal tender.

The Aristocrats!



*Yeah, the VOA is a CIA front organization, I know, but the news came through normal media channels a couple years ago.
Your scenario is basically defaulting on the loans.
 
A

ani

Guest
Your scenario is basically defaulting on the loans.
Most people don't think about or understand what this means. Ten (10) years out we are projected to spend nearly 50% of our revenues on debt service alone. Which means that services will need to be severely cut or substantial tax raises, or both? It's likely the 3rd alternative. Curious about what a country looks like when it defaults on government bonds (external national debt)? Check out this video about the Argentina collapse in 2001:

Argentina's Economic Collapse (FULL VERSION)

Defaulting on government debt is highly likely. I would say nearly impossible to avoid. Inflating our economy as others have suggested won't work this time. I have been debating that this time is significantly different from previous "recessions." The difference is globalization. We were already non-competitive with other countries. If our cost of living increases significantly it will makes us even less competitive in the global market. Therefore inflation will not solve this problem like it has in the past. In the past the markets weren't evolved to a truly globalized position. There was significantly less global competition for goods and services. Therefore containing the cost of the American products and services was not a real issue. It is now though. That's a major difference.

The only reason we haven't slipped deeper is because other countries are heavily leveraged with the US. This leverage is in the form of both debt (buying government bonds, corporate bonds of US companies, and stock in US companies) and the dependence of their economies on US consumption. If these two variables didn't exist, or existed to a significantly lesser degree, the US would be near or at collapse with a likely revolution. This sounds crazy and almost unfathomable.

Coming out of this, if we do, the intelligent countries will completely revise their strategy. They will de-leverage their dependency on the US by selling off their US debt, slowly so their actions don’t further devalue their investment, and looking to significantly diversify the variables of their economy that depends on the US. Many countries are already looking internally for this change and hinting at positions of protectionism. If we transition to a point where there is a successful de-leveraging of the US dependency by other countries then the US will no longer be a "super" power. The US will then be required to be a nation that produces more than it consumes. That transition is not compatible with our current debt levels or government service levels. This transition might have been possible over 50-75 years but is not really possible over 5 years, which it appears to doing.

We have band-aided the issue on a very temporary basis. I think markets may do well for the next 3-5 years. At that point the impending bill that will be due 7-10 years out from the spending spree we're on now will be known. Capital will look to other countries, like BRAC - Brazil, Russia, Australia, and Canada. Russia could be in the driver’s seat today if they chose to. Unfortunately, for them and fortunately for us, they continue to operate an economy that is rife with corruption and therefore deters foreign capital from investing in them. If they ever change their policies and become ethical then Russia could dictate the global economy.

Over consumption and greed is likely the primary cause of this. Ironically it is also what is saving us. If our consumption didn’t drive other countries’ economies then we would have been left behind.

This question really hits to the root of what many believe is a root cause of the problem. When and where did we change our values from a country primarily of producers to a country primarily of consumers? Some would argue that the 60’s resulted in many advances in civil liberties with a significant downside of a complete loss of personal accountability. Thoughts?
 
Messages
369
Role
Private
Most people don't think about or understand what this means. Ten (10) years out we are projected to spend nearly 50% of our revenues on debt service alone. Which means that services will need to be severely cut or substantial tax raises, or both? It's likely the 3rd alternative.
Oh taxes will rise. People bitch about our taxes being high, but the reality is outside of the bottom tiers they are way to low. People always complain about progressive taxes punishing the rich but that misses the point. Progressive taxes make those that get the most out of the economy pay the most. You are not getting taxed more for making 150k because we hate you, you are getting taxed that much because your ability to make that exists only because of our (previous) stable growing economy. Look at pre Regan post WW2 taxes. They were insanely high by comparison today. Our continued cutting of taxes is was a stupid, shortsighted thing.


Again though while our debt is very bad the good thing is that no country, for the time being, has and interest in it leading to our collapse. It is in everyones best interest to slowly back out of dollar dependance and prevent us from defaulting.

We are still huge producers. We produce massive amounts of goods. Our consumption issue is mostly a result of cheap, disposable goods. Look at the largest consumer markets. Most of us could have access to less than half of what we consume now and we wouldn't even notice in a short while. When consumption is easy we do it because it is in our nature. We also have trouble assessing value. The real issue to me is we haven't been good about how we used our money as mentioned above. It will be a rough transition, but we are a country that really needed to step back a bit and see what we were doing.
 

BabyMullet

Est. Contributor
Messages
859
Role
Diaper Lover, Carer
Old Navajo saying.

"We did not inherit the lands from our fathers, we are borrowing it from our children."

Frankly I see a time when we have no clue what next will look like, on a lot of fronts beside economics, politically, militarily, culturally, everythingaly. With such unknown about us, I can't see not doing something. Does that equate to 20 trillion dollars of spending and debt, I have no clue, I am not an macro-economist, and barely understand the forces of micro-economics.

Honestly, nothing will ever be ideal for our children, or any generation. Why bother trying at that point? In other words, no matter what happens, something will happen, and it will suck. I find the idea of a generational theft a petty excuse not to do something.
 
Messages
3,351
Role
Private
Your scenario is basically defaulting on the loans.
Oh yes, but doing so in a way that will allow our government to wring their hands and tut-tut over what a shame it is that the dollar collapsed.

I propose the sock puppet on the one hand while the other slits your throat.
 
Messages
369
Role
Private
Honestly, nothing will ever be ideal for our children, or any generation. Why bother trying at that point? In other words, no matter what happens, something will happen, and it will suck. I find the idea of a generational theft a petty excuse not to do something.
While you can't ensure a perfect future you can do a lot to help avoid making it worse. A lot of policy made in the last 30 years was designed to help the interests of a limited group of people at the expense of us now. Just because you don't know if your house might burn down in the future doesn't mean you should be reckless with the matches now.
 

Martin

Est. Contributor
Messages
3,833
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
No, I honestly believe that at this moment the spending is needed. Because if we lose our economy we lose all the investments the economy makes in the US, we need that so if we lose that we'll lose WAY more then what we're spending now.
 

Peachy

Banned
Messages
7,449
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Carer
There is option 3, which I'm voting for: the US will so grossly over-print the dollar that it becomes utterly worthless (which is China's worry). At that point, I think we'll pay the debts off and then change currencies, ala Venezuela*. Hence, we won't recognize these "dollars" as legal tender.
It's already happening, now that the Fed announced that it will be buying U.S. Government securities. It's the same as giving the government freshly printed dollars. Needless to say, the Euro jumped from $1.31 per 1 EUR to $1.36 per EUR the day of the announcement.
Inflation...here we come!

Peachy

P.S.: My country has experienced the 2nd worst inflation in history. A U.S. dollar, which was worth 4.2 Marks in 1919, was worth 4.2 trillion Marks in mid-1923.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top