Baby Boomers making out like bandits as usual

ruggedtoast

suki1001 wrote: »

It's interesting. I can think of many times in my life when having a mobile phone would have been an ultimate lifesaver. Like the time I was heavily pregnant and working and the trains were delayed nearly everyday and I needed to let my husband know when I'd be back so he could pick me up from the train station, especially when the train driver wouldn't give me the time to use a pay phone.

Or the time I was followed and had to wait until I'd found a payphone, very frightening indeed.

Or the time someone collapsed in front of me - I was able to phone for an ambulance.

The time I broke down on a heavy ringroad meant I could phone for a breakdown van straight away.

The list is endless. A mobile phone is useful, but there are times when it has been something that has really helped me.

To me it is far more useful than broadband in terms of how it has helped me out in emergencies.

There is no point arguing with them, these people are utterly clueless.

If you're at the point where you are debating with someone whether or not you need a mobile phone and internet then there is no debate, because they are living in a cul de sac that starts two decades ago.

Try applying for a temp job (all that is available for many) and telling the agency that you either dont have a mobile phone or dont have quick access to email. They literally will not even put you on their books.

I started this thread as a bit of fun, but I am literally astounded reading the parade of misapprehension, prejudice and just sheer, pig headed utter denial of facts advanced by the many of the boomer contributors in order to ring fence their consciences from the slightest shred of pity, compassion or altruistic bent for people struggling to start out in life.

If you remember back to when you people were young and thought your elders were out of touch, my God most of you sound like you're coming from a different temporal dimension (and I'm in my 30s).

I hope there is a pensions crisis, you people seem to think you're entitled to everything and responsible for nothing. A reality check would do many here a lot of good.

wotsthat

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I started this thread as a bit of fun, but I am literally astounded reading the parade of misapprehension, prejudice and just sheer, pig headed utter denial of facts advanced by the many of the boomer contributors in order to ring fence their consciences from the slightest shred of pity, compassion or altruistic bent for people struggling to start out in life.

A bit of fun?

ruggedtoast wrote: »

With a wasted generation hitting the dole queues all over the country, their pockets stuffed with worthless new labour exam certificates, and their own parents struggling to pay the rent to their boomer btl slumlords, it is clear that these boomers have the country stitched up like a kipper.

Yeah right - laugh a minute that OP.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Oh just bring on one of the house price threads, and say it's harder today.

Same people as on this thread telling the younger generation they never spent a penny, will tell you how their washing machine cost tripple what ours do now and that they had to pay £400 for a VCR.

Of course, this thread, they spent nothing, and had no technology which they bought into, whatsoever.

But do you know how much a VCR cost in 1980? Do you!? Do you know how much a walkman cost?! Do you!? And records, they were damn expensive too. Couldn't play them on a £20 item from Tesco either, had to buy expensive hi fis to play them on. You know how much that all cost!??

Woe betide you if you have a phone though. You can do without. And an Iphone? Scandal....write off the whole 20-30's generation because of the avaliability of such an absurd piece of technology.......

#


VCR was £400 but I don't think there were many people buying them although maybe some renting at £20 a month, doubt it was the people saving up for a house though. Mind you it was truly leading edge to be able to record television when only 3/4 channels were available probably the similar in wow factor to the original TV and PC. The IPhone pales in comparison

ceridwen

ILW wrote: »

Apparently, you lot are going to live longer than the boomers on average.

Are you trying to cheer them up or make them shoot themselves now at that thought? You've just made me feel rather more sympathetic actually - and actually I DO feel rather sympathetic to the next generations ....(even though I'm getting unfairly "blasted" just for being a Boomer)...

Please don't tar us all with the same brush - because many of us honestly DID think things would be better for succeeding generations than we had...

Going4TheDream

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Try applying for a temp job (all that is available for many) and telling the agency that you either dont have a mobile phone or dont have quick access to email. They literally will not even put you on their books.

I think this must be the first valid point in any of your arguments....

I am just mildly surprised that you didn't blame this on the baby boomers as well though

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

#


VCR was £400 but I don't think there were many people buying them although maybe some renting at £20 a month, doubt it was the people saving up for a house though. Mind you it was truly leading edge to be able to record television when only 3/4 channels were available probably the similar in wow factor to the original TV and PC. The IPhone pales in comparison

Clearly renting a VCR is completely different to having a phone on contract.

One was expensive and the height of technology. The other is expensive and the height of technology.

Only difference being the people who were paying for them having an extreme sense of snootiness and being holier than thou.

I actually started on this thread stating that babyboomers cannot and should not be blamed. But little effect that had. Straight away I was being lambasted for being one of the younger generations having a go at the babyboomers. Doesn't matter that I implicity stated I wasn't or that we shouldnt, so I have given up the train of thought of trying to actually discuss the issue.

Jimmy_31

Going4TheDream wrote: »

I think this must be the first valid point in any of your arguments....

I am just mildly surprised that you didn't blame this on the baby boomers as well though

No the blame for that one lands at the feet of the middle men who have to take other peoples wages because they cant manage to make their own.

Oldernotwiser

suki1001 wrote: »

I would think many of them do. Have you seen how much it costs to learn to drive and then there's the insurance. For the young it's eyewatering.

I agree that it's expensive but it doesn't seem to put most people off.

reweird

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

I think its quite clear to all and sundry that its you that is hurting:rotfl:

Come on whats a builder, google it quick:rotfl:

Not On Normal Courtyard Exercise:rotfl:

You wouldnt last 5 minutes on site because you bite too easy boy:)

No JimmyLad it is not me who is hurting, and no matter how many smilies and protestations to the contrary you try you and everyone reading senses and feels your sadness. It is not right for a man approaching middleage still to be at home. A man who has known no other teet than his mums. And still at the age approaching mid 30's. You're a man-baby. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Jimmy_31

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I agree that it's expensive but it doesn't seem to put most people off.

It hasnt put most of the people i know off.

No van = No job