A desperate cry of anguish for "Boomer Rage"

ruggedtoast

This young Guardian journo is in straits of desperation. Her and her generation are pleading, begging, with the boomers to do something.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/12/babyboomer-rage-generation-jobless-pension-triple-lock

WHY DO YOU STAND IDLY BY BOOMERS?

Erica Buist - young

If I were a babyboomer, I'd be furious. That might seem strange coming from someone who blogs about youth unemployment, a topic typically sprinkled with jealous references to how easy our parents had it (admittedly, a temptation I gave into once or twice). But this "us and them" dynamic between the generations has got to stop. And not just because, admittedly, they're beating us – this isn't me quitting because the game is unfair. I've expended enough energy denouncing David Cameron as a heartless, corporate-driven, boiled egg-faced tit; it's time for some fury from the other side. It's time for some babyboomer rage.

Every blow to the young – such as the slashing of benefits unless we're earning (despite the lack of jobs) or learning (despite the whacking up of tuition fees) – seems to come with a boost for the older generation, like a triple-lock on state pensions. Chris Huhne argues that because the voting turnout is more than 30% higher in the pensioner age group than the 18-24s, politicians pander to them to the point that we're living an a "gerontocracy". It's a clever illusion, that they're rewarding the older generations, their "loyal voters", at the expense of the young – but an illusion it is.

To begin with, triple-locked or not, pensions aren't a gift from the taxpayer. They're pre-earned. They're as much a generosity as having a party in a stranger's house, and saying: "Sorry about the damage. We triple-promise not to steal anything (else)."

But the pension triple lock isn't even decent "compensation" for the collateral damage of the youth crisis. In her smart and sensitive comment piece, Jackie Ashley argued that "an injury to one is an injury to all" because we live in families, which are by their nature multigenerational. But the injury casued to the older generations by the youth crisis is even more direct and blunt than familial concern. Has nobody noticed how often a blow to the younger generation leads to babyboomers footing the bill?

The generation we have been repeatedly told to envy are the first who have to care for the generations either side of them – not only their parents who may need help in their old age, but their adult children. When young people were stripped of job opportunities, benefits, and the affordable roofs we so naively thought would come with our degrees, we became the Boomerang Generation. In the past decade and a half, according to the Economist, about 3.2 million 20- to 34-year-olds have gone back to live with mum and dad.

It is sad for the young people who probably envisaged a more independent life and can be horrendous for their sense of self-worth – but it's not brilliant for parents either. Having their adult children back is like a middle-class bedroom tax – the government haven't fixed the economy, the housing or job markets, so they've passed the cost of the generation on to the boomers.

Aside from the financial burden, the youth crisis must pack a nasty emotional punch to the older generation because through no fault of their own, they've failed as parents, in part.

They did everything they were supposed to; they sent us to school and university, convinced us to study so we'd have the freedom to choose our careers. Yet the result is a generation facing unemployment, or career ascension so slow and internship-ridden they may never afford to buy a house or have a family of their own. Was it their aim to spawn Generation Jobless who, according to World Health Organisation, are a public health timebomb? Of course not. The most fundamental aim of parenting is surely to make sure your kid will be OK. Isn't it maddening that, despite doing everything right, they're not?

So how does a 2.5% increase in pre-earned state pensions, a cynical lunge for the rudely named "grey vote", make up for any of that? It doesn't. But by focusing all the visible damage on the young who so famously "don't vote", the generations are being divided and conquered. The "selfish, shortsighted old" versus the hard done-by young. God forbid we should all fight for the same thing – a stable economy, a functioning job market, houses we could conceivably end up buying without a nifty inheritance-tax dodge, a winning lottery ticket or an act of God. Maybe if we did, boomers wouldn't refer to their own money as "the kids' inheritance", as if they've already outstayed their welcome just by continuing to live alongside their struggling offspring.

The "mustn't grumble" generation need to start fuming along with the young. Like it or not, an angry generation of 18 to 24-year-olds is a nuisance; at this point the only clout we could claim would be a mass withholding of grandchildren. But an angry mob of babyboomers might actually effect change. Let's see some boomer rage for the raw deal we've all been dealt.

Ready and waiting

AndyGuil

The grandkids in 2 generations time will be saying the same thing. Just get your head down and work hard. Sieze every opportunity and you will get there in the end. It's not supposed to be easy.

"Raging" and being angry is just immature. Stop blaming others and start focusing on yourself.

mayonnaise

ruggedtoast wrote: »

This young Guardian journo is in straits of desperation.

Yes, her life (so far) seems to have been one of pure hardship and despair.

http://ericabuist.com/

I am a journalist, travel writer, photographer, stand-up comedian and
videographer. Often all at once.
After living in Mexico, I am fluent in Spanish and do occasional freelance
interpreting.
I am also an accent expert and give accent reduction courses in
London.

....

Most recently I have worked as travel editor for Metamedia on the beautiful island of Koh Samui, Thailand. I am currently trotting through South East Asia, spending the holiday season visiting various family members who, for labour and love, are scattered about the continent

MrRee_2

It's how it's always been ..... just that, now, the anger can be spread across the world so easily.

In my day we simply moaned to our friends and family.

If the youngsters actually got up and voted then the politicians would have to satisfy them .... and not the pensioners who can elect a government alone as a group. Such is that power.

BillJones

AndyGuil wrote: »

"Raging" and being angry is just immature. Stop blaming others and start focusing on yourself.

Or, to put it another way,

God grant me the sereniity to accept the things I cannot change
The courage to change the things I can
And the wisdom to know the difference.

I feel quite sorry for the crowd on here whose constant refrain is "Everything's terrible, it's not fair, I never had a chance".

And I am constantly impressed by those who say "Here's the world I live in, let's set about doing the best I can given my starting point".

Only one of these routes leads to success, and it is out there for each of us, if we want it.

[Deleted User]

1. Get young people to vote in higher numbers
2. Let politicians know that policies need to be nicer for 18-24 year olds
3. Actually get off the Xbox/mobile phone/facebook and vote
4. Something might change

I don't really remember finding a job to be a piece of cake when I graduated 12 years ago. I don't remember buying a house to be that easy and I had to save for years, sacrificing holidays/stuff for quite a while.

I never got a gap-yah either

I slightly feel sad for 18-24 year olds. They don't remember a time before mobile phones or the internet.

the_flying_pig

BillJones wrote: »

Or, to put it another way,

God grant me the sereniity to accept the things I cannot change
The courage to change the things I can
And the wisdom to know the difference.

I feel quite sorry for the crowd on here whose constant refrain is "Everything's terrible, it's not fair, I never had a chance".

And I am constantly impressed by those who say "Here's the world I live in, let's set about doing the best I can given my starting point".

Only one of these routes leads to success, and it is out there for each of us, if we want it.

not really sure what you're getting at.

if you were talking about someone moaning about something that strictly happened in the past [e.g. 'it's not fair that the norman conquest resulted in a concentration of land in the hands of a tiny few individuals'] then fair enough, people need to accept that & move on, but all the griping i see on this subforum is about stuff that is very easily within the gift of current politicians to change through small tweaks to a couple of laws & policies & as such more than fair game for debate. i don't ever recall anyone here saying that they were so upset by [say] current planning laws that they were just going to throw the towel in, not bother with exams, advanding their career, or whatever. if anything i see the opposite.

CLAPTON

the lady is a totally amoral jobsworthy who would write anything to make money irrespective of whether it does harm or not.

chewmylegoff

If the "young" are so angry about boomers pensions and cuts to benefits for under 25s or whatever then they can all go to the polls in a year and vote the government out. Probably the best way to achieve change rather than becoming guardian journalists and whinging about it or posting endless rants on MSE.

Of course they won't turn up to vote and then after the election will complain that there were no "relevant" candidates, and them wonder why they get screwed for another 5 years.

Running_Horse

A fair chunk of government debt must have been all those new school buildings thrown up under the last government. Are those who benefitted from all that educational spending saying it was wasted? What should it have been spent on instead?

Loughton_Monkey

Running_Horse wrote: »

A fair chunk of government debt must have been all those new school buildings thrown up under the last government. Are those who benefitted from all that educational spending saying it was wasted? What should it have been spent on instead?

Condoms.

Then this sarcastic little kid who seems to have done quite well for herself wouldn't be around to whinge.

She doesn't seem to understand that not many boomers are likely to have children aged 18 to 24. That's not surprising as no doubt she wasted her education like so many others. Just another confused journalist with parents from generation X. Co-incidentally like the OP.