It did work and in fact it's better. Not every company had a pension and those pensions weren't always that great. With 401k's there are more people being able to save for retirement. Prior to 401k's only the people working for a large company would get a pension and have a retirement plan, now everyone can.
Gen Z and Millenial hatred and vitriol toward boomers
- Thread starter General Tso
- Start date
It did work and in fact it's better. Not every company had a pension and those pensions weren't always that great. With 401k's there are more people being able to save for retirement. Prior to 401k's only the people working for a large company would get a pension and have a retirement plan, now everyone can.
LOL. Where did I say I hate boomers? They just need to accept their failures, as a generation, rather than constantly blaming everyone else. I'm sorry you can't understand how me saying that boomers got to take advantage of systems that were in place for them but are no longer in place today, and then you providing an example of someone who did pretty well on the old systems that aren't in existence today supports the point I was making. It's not my fault that you took that as me being personally angry with you and your dad. That's a you problem and I can't help that.
Boomers aren't complaining, you are. If you can't save for retirement that's your failure. Maybe you need to accept it.
That was one of my points, you don't get to pick and choose what you want to keep from 50 years ago. We'd all love to do that. As I mentioned before, women couldn't even get a business loan in the early 80's, they needed their husband to sign for it.
Interesting that you're so insulted by getting a participation trophy, so much that you think the people are insulting you. if you hate participation trophies so much then why are you ok with pensions. A pension is exactly a participation trophy, show up for work and it doesn't matter how good you do, we're going to give you a trophy when you retire. A 401k fits better with your views on trophies. Why should you get to retire (trophy) if you can't manage your money.
I don’t have strong feelings either way about participation trophies. The point was made that Boomers gave their kids participation trophies then chide their children's generation for getting participation trophies.
The irony seems lost on most.
I'm pretty sure that most charging station providers could get more than 1 charging station rolled out in just a couple of months or two, at a fraction of the cost, if they were in charge. I'm not sure why the timeline has to be so protracted, including the planning. The just reinforces the notion the federal government is inefficient and not a good steward of taxpayer money.
Sort of. There are shitheads who vote for and elect shittier shitheads who ensure plans benefitting the public fail. It's not a just boomer phenomenon. It's generational and inevitable. It's just the boomer generation was the 1st following the Big Deal concept of stimulation, and with it the converse conservative flamethrowers.
Boomers were more left decades ago but have moved right as they've aged. Before you complain about programs consider where/when the legislation is/was passed. Could be blame isn't boomer related.
the irony of someone with feelings so strong that they would create a song that is about fvcking your feelings is rich. Then proceeds to seek validation for said feelings by performing in front of other people takes it to another level
I have to disagree with her statement that the "security theater" is causing more anxiety. It might be among kids who don't pay attention to the news, but if you are old enough to hear the news than hearing about a school shooting once a week is going to what causes the anxiety.
The climate change thing is over stated by politicians. It's real, but to me worst cases scenario is that we have to slowly learn to adjust to new realities. Those realities might be very negative but we can adjust. Not that climate change is going to end the world.
Perhaps not, but it could end the sustainability of feeding our current and ever growing global population. So there's the starving thing for millions of people.
I must have gotten sidetracked and never got back to this thread. Not that it matters, the number of completely incorrect assumptions you are making about me is hilarious.
Pensions aren't participation trophies. Pensions are not related to your job performance at all other than if you can keep your job, you get a pension. So it's stupid that you would try to say that. If you suck at your job, you will get fired and then you won't get a pension. A pension is part of the compensation package an employer provides you with. It's not a reward for job performance. That's a really weird take.
Meh. Gen X and the Boomers grew up in an era when nuclear war and "mutually assured destruction' was a very real thing. We had drills where we would get underneath our desks and signs like this (below) adorned the external walls of our schools. Think about how that might create some anxiety in a generation, yet we got through it.
The only difference is no nuclear weapons were used on a regular basis....ever. School shootings are a very real possibility that damn near occur weekly. School shootings happen, "mass destruction events" do not.Meh. Gen X and the Boomers grew up in an era when nuclear war and "mutually assured destruction' was a very real thing. We had drills where we would get underneath our desks and signs like this (below) adorned the external walls of our schools. Think about how that might create some anxiety in a generation, yet we got through it.
I definitely get what you're saying, but it's nowhere near the same type of scenario.
I'm trying to refresh my memory of this discussion.
You're second sentence actually proves that pensions are basically a participation trophy. You say pensions are not related to your job performance. A participation trophy is also not tied to your performance. You can be the worst team in the league and still get a participation trophy. You can be the worst employee and still get the pension. A bonus is typically tied to your performance.
i think there's also a good argument to be made that the lasting effects of those cold-war era, mutually assured destruction concerns were a little deeper than "we got through it"
Come on, that was funny.
To be fair, I say that as a boomer who has no clue what age groups these different generation designations belong to.
Global Warming today is more like the nuclear threat back then. One huge difference, though, is that back then we didn't have one whole party telling us the threat was a hoax and nothing to worry about.
We're already seeing crises caused or exacerbated by climate change and yet we have smart posters here who say we're talking about it too much and we just need to relax and adapt.
Oh, and in case nobody noticed, the nuclear threat didn't go away.
Pensions are part of your compensation, like your salary. Salaries were lower because of payments into the pension plan (funny enough, when pensions were eliminated salaries did not go up to compensate for that). They are not part of your evaluation. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
The worst employee gets fired. No salary and no pension. You are really trying hard to justify why pensions are bad here, and they are far from perfect, but it doesn't change the fact that they were an essential part of the 3 pronged retirement plan for people. In fact, the other 2 prongs were enough to make up for the shortcomings of a pension. They just aren't enough to make up for the entire pension.
Also, pensions are based on your pay while you worked. If you suck as an employee you won't be getting raises like other employees. So even if you don't suck bad enough to get fired but you do suck bad enough to be a "mediocre employee" (poor employees get fired or are first to get layed off in a downturn), your pension won't be anywhere near what it could have been had you been a better employee.
Last edited:
I'm not saying pensions are bad, but I'm not saying pensions are great either. My dad had his pension and it worked out nicely for him, but yet he didn't want to switch company because of losing the pension. He also was stuck in a lower job because the only way to move up was to move from city to city. He didn't want to do that to us. So he stayed where he was at in the job he was doing. There's good and bad to everything. Nothing is perfect.
While pensions are based on your salary they're also based on how long you've been with the company. Basically, how long you participated. I saw it with people at my dad's company (major insurance company), once they were locked into staying some of them basically did the bare minimum when they hit their fifties because they were just waiting to retire. They were just waiting for their participation trophy at the end, while all the younger people were working hard to try to move up. Basically the pension just clogged up all the higher paying jobs with people waiting to retire.
Pensions have issues, for sure, like if a company goes bankrupt it usually would take their employees pensions with it (see Enron). However, that doesn't mean you get rid of them completely. The idea of a pension is good and there are things that could be done to address their shortfalls.
And I'm done debating this weird participation trophy thing with you. It makes no sense and yeah, if you put in 30 years you certainly deserve some "participation" credit.
There's already something in place to handle the shortfalls, it's called a 401K and the employee gets to keep it and manage it how they see fit. You act like every company had a pension when that's not true. It's a weird thing that you're fighting for pensions when most people are just fine with a 401K.
Yeah. 401k. That's part of your personal savings. One of the other two prongs. The other being social security. And pensions. All three of those together are enough to secure retirement for people. When you are missing one, you don't have enough money. You can't ask personal savings to completely make up for the entire pension. Most people don't make anywhere near enough money to make that possible.
Meh. Gen X and the Boomers grew up in an era when nuclear war and "mutually assured destruction' was a very real thing. We had drills where we would get underneath our desks and signs like this (below) adorned the external walls of our schools. Think about how that might create some anxiety in a generation, yet we got through it.
Literally everyone born after Aug 29th 1949 has been living in the same reality, including the kids participating in active shooter drills.
I was born in March of ‘49 and sint have any memory of “kissing my ass goodbye” drills in school.
You act like everyone in history has had a pension. That's not true. Before 401K's most people only had social security to live off of. Now a higher percentage of people can save for retirement because they also have a 401K. You're living in a dream world where you think every people in history has had a pension, social security, and a 401K. You know that's not true but yet you keep claiming that. Just stop with all the BS. Not every company can afford to have a pension plan for their employees. There are still some companies that do have pensions, if you want a pension, then go get hired from one of those companies.
Where did I say everyone had a pension? Once again you are making assumptions to fit your own narrative. People who have pensions have faired far better in retirement than those that do not. That is my point, because the 3 pronged approach, social security, pension, and personal savings, works. When you are missing one of those three, in the majority of cases, people struggle to retire. Usually because they haven't been able to save enough money. And that can be for a variety of reasons, from never getting paid enough to put money away and pay bills to just being irresponsible.
Similar threads
