Interesting poster

[Captain Awesome]

One of the solutions you expressed a hope for earlier on may simply be that the younger generations currently running the show ...

Younger generation running the show currently? News to me.

[NAB]

One of the solutions you expressed a hope for earlier on may simply be that the younger generations currently running the show ...

Younger generation running the show currently? News to me.

LOL, that's all relative to the perspective of the poster Captain. To me it is the "younger generation" running the show. The boomer generation (typically 50 - 64 years old give or take). To you it may be "the older generation". But to both of us it is the same generation of whom we speak.

Edit to add: And I suspect that neither of us are particularly impressed with their governance.

Nab

[Loed]

Check your own attitude at the door please Loed. As much as you try to walk a moderate line (to your credit), you still come across to me as someone who blames their (or society's) problems on previous generations, and to me that is just a cop out.

One of the solutions you expressed a hope for earlier on may simply be that the younger generations currently running the show have to step up to the plate and take ownership of what they perceive to be wrong, rather than continually trying to "pass the buck" (as in responsibility) to someone else. I might add that is a very good description of the idiocy has been going on in Paliament among the opposition parties for the past 5 or so years.

Nab

You may wish to re-read everything in this thread that I have posted. I have shown no attitude, nor disrespect towards anyone, or any generation in specifics. So get your haunches down and breathe a sec please, I've been trying to discuss things civilly and, I repeat, there's no need to be indignant.

I don't have any problems per-say, I live and get along quite fine as is. I realize(again) that I am an exception to the masses. The problems I SEE are those within society, and I blame no-one but ourselves, in general.

I blame NO-ONE and have already stated that if my current generation were to be placed in the same situations as yours were "back in the day" the outcome would be quite similar.

I haven't come in here with any attitude, OTHER than the fact that while the poster in question may have cut a line towards ignorance, it still hit home a solid truth. The youth need to wake up and realize that they are the future, instead of digging themselves into the same horrid holes that their parents started for them.

[grammafreddy]

I figure I'm good for the next 20 years or so on your tax dollar. Please don't skimp with anything, eh? Pay your (increased) taxes happily so I can have my every desire fulfilled and live a life of luxury. I deserve it. I covered your tushes for the past 20-40 years with my taxes. It's MY turn!

I know well how an economy works, and of course I receive a freaking salary. No need to start getting condescending here, seriously calm down. Not sure why you feel the need to get slanderous towards me. I'm not being offensive in any manner.

What I was responding to is statements like this in bold from GF.

She was talking about taxes.

Check your attitude at the door please and try to remain civil if you're going to continue responding.

{In my most civil voice}

The bold words do not refer to salary. Do you see the word "salary" there? It was also not specifically directed at you. I just want all the young voters to vote so that my retirement CPP, OAS and GIS pensions are much higher than the approximately $1100 per month I would get to live on at the moment. I also want them to know that, of course, this will mean their taxes will go up (and their take-home income will go down). Initially I was very concerned about that, but through comments posted here I have become convinced that people don't care if they only get 25% of their incomes to spend on their own survival and that they are very happy to support the NDP, Liberal and Greens who are deliriously happy to provide more social funding, more government employee wages, benefits and pensions, more taxpayer-funded handouts to all and sundry - and raise their taxes to pay for them. They have all promised great and wondrous government gifts if people will just vote them into power but none have said how they plan to fund these gifts from the taxpayers to the people of Canada (and immigrants, too).

I was concerned about fiscal responsibility but now I don't give a damn about saving the bacon (literally) of the total idiots who would vote for anything but good money management for our country - especially in these world economic times. Apparently debt means nothing. Apparently paying high personal income taxes are great. Apparently increasing taxes of businesses is just fine, too - even though it means more job losses. Apparently nobody teaches Economics 101 any more. If they do, apparently nobody paid attention in class. Apparently we are supposed to have $18,000 cars with no way to pay for them except to borrow the money and go deeper in debt. Hell's bells, kiddos - if you don't care, and if you don't think I am right, and if think you know more, then ....

I'll check out the RVs and see if I can find just the right one for me to buy after the election. Have fun paying for it and paying for it and paying for it ............ and Steven's sports car, too.

[Loed]

One of the solutions you expressed a hope for earlier on may simply be that the younger generations currently running the show ...

Younger generation running the show currently? News to me.

LOL, that's all relative to the perspective of the poster Captain. To me it is the "younger generation" running the show. The boomer generation (typically 50 - 64 years old give or take). To you it may be "the older generation". But to both of us it is the same generation of whom we speak.

Edit to add: And I suspect that neither of us are particularly impressed with their governance.

Nab

While we understand your perspective, maybe we should start specifying the age groups we refer. I feel there has been some confusion in reference.

When someone refers to the younger generation in a conversation like this(wherein posters know little of each other and their backgrounds), most people assume 20's ish. Boomers in your statement would be less confusing, as you clarified.

[NAB]

Check your own attitude at the door please Loed. As much as you try to walk a moderate line (to your credit), you still come across to me as someone who blames their (or society's) problems on previous generations, and to me that is just a cop out.

One of the solutions you expressed a hope for earlier on may simply be that the younger generations currently running the show have to step up to the plate and take ownership of what they perceive to be wrong, rather than continually trying to "pass the buck" (as in responsibility) to someone else. I might add that is a very good description of the idiocy has been going on in Paliament among the opposition parties for the past 5 or so years.

Nab

You may wish to re-read everything in this thread that I have posted. I have shown no attitude, nor disrespect towards anyone, or any generation in specifics. So get your haunches down and breathe a sec please, I've been trying to discuss things civilly and, I repeat, there's no need to be indignant.

I don't have any problems per-say, I live and get along quite fine as is. I realize(again) that I am an exception to the masses. The problems I SEE are those within society, and I blame no-one but ourselves, in general.

I blame NO-ONE and have already stated that if my current generation were to be placed in the same situations as yours were "back in the day" the outcome would be quite similar.

I haven't come in here with any attitude, OTHER than the fact that while the poster in question may have cut a line towards ignorance, it still hit home a solid truth. The youth need to wake up and realize that they are the future, instead of digging themselves into the same horrid holes that their parents started for them.

I have read your posts Loed, and if I have misread your attitude then I apologize. But I still am left with a bit of reservation when I read the last line of your post above that I have highlighted.

Nab

[Loed]

I love the assumptions you have made from my posts and others as well.

If you had actually read my posts, instead tried to find something to be offend by, you would have realized by now that I am all for that state of mind(frugality in essence). I'm also a realist that understand the hows and the whys of why society currently is the way it is.

I do not currently see a viable manner in which to reverse this trend in Canada, there is no party out there that wants to do what you speak because it is technically political suicide in Canada. The writhing masses demand more services!

I,for one, do not mind paying taxes to help better my fellow man. The thing is I know there has to be a limit to this and I demand more accountability from the systems in place that govern these services(welfare cheats need to diaf).

Our current available governments will do NOTHING to fix this situation and just raise taxes anyways. They have to, because they have to follow through with their promises.

I figure I'm good for the next 20 years or so on your tax dollar. Please don't skimp with anything, eh? Pay your (increased) taxes happily so I can have my every desire fulfilled and live a life of luxury. I deserve it. I covered your tushes for the past 20-40 years with my taxes. It's MY turn!

I know well how an economy works, and of course I receive a freaking salary. No need to start getting condescending here, seriously calm down. Not sure why you feel the need to get slanderous towards me. I'm not being offensive in any manner.

What I was responding to is statements like this in bold from GF.

She was talking about taxes.

Check your attitude at the door please and try to remain civil if you're going to continue responding.

{In my most civil voice}

The bold words do not refer to salary. Do you see the word "salary" there? It was also not specifically directed at you. I just want all the young voters to vote so that my retirement CPP, OAS and GIS pensions are much higher than the approximately $1100 per month I would get to live on at the moment. I also want them to know that, of course, this will mean their taxes will go up (and their take-home income will go down). Initially I was very concerned about that, but through comments posted here I have become convinced that people don't care if they only get 25% of their incomes to spend on their own survival and that they are very happy to support the NDP, Liberal and Greens who are deliriously happy to provide more social funding, more government employee wages, benefits and pensions, more taxpayer-funded handouts to all and sundry - and raise their taxes to pay for them. They have all promised great and wondrous government gifts if people will just vote them into power but none have said how they plan to fund these gifts from the taxpayers to the people of Canada (and immigrants, too).

I was concerned about fiscal responsibility but now I don't give a damn about saving the bacon (literally) of the total idiots who would vote for anything but good money management for our country - especially in these world economic times. Apparently debt means nothing. Apparently paying high personal income taxes are great. Apparently increasing taxes of businesses is just fine, too - even though it means more job losses. Apparently nobody teaches Economics 101 any more. If they do, apparently nobody paid attention in class. Apparently we are supposed to have $18,000 cars with no way to pay for them except to borrow the money and go deeper in debt. Hell's bells, kiddos - if you don't care, and if you don't think I am right, and if think you know more, then ....

I'll check out the RVs and see if I can find just the right one for me to buy after the election. Have fun paying for it and paying for it and paying for it ............ and Steven's sports car, too.

[NAB]

One of the solutions you expressed a hope for earlier on may simply be that the younger generations currently running the show ...

Younger generation running the show currently? News to me.

LOL, that's all relative to the perspective of the poster Captain. To me it is the "younger generation" running the show. The boomer generation (typically 50 - 64 years old give or take). To you it may be "the older generation". But to both of us it is the same generation of whom we speak.

Edit to add: And I suspect that neither of us are particularly impressed with their governance.

Nab

While we understand your perspective, maybe we should start specifying the age groups we refer. I feel there has been some confusion in reference.

When someone refers to the younger generation in a conversation like this(wherein posters know little of each other and their backgrounds), most people assume 20's ish. Boomers in your statement would be less confusing, as you clarified.

I tried to identify the generations versus ages several pages of posts back Loed to try and provide a point of clarification that posters could better relate to when referencing who is talking about who or what. Perhaps you missed it?

Nab

[rmshort]

To all the youth the poster was aimed at please consider the following has happened in your life time,
Bruce Carsen
Gary goodyear
Bev Oda
38 appointed senators
including Doug Finley, Irving Gerstein
Contempt of parliament
prorogation of parliament
Creationism and the Conservative party
Facebookgate (I made that up but figure it out)
OMG if you paste any line it links you to ........

Really the future is not ours it is the for the kids.
Jails. Jets. No thought to the environment.
The Harper government is the problem not any solution I want in my life.
Really google any of the above and defend it.

[Loed]

(I must have missed your clarifications Nab, apologies. Like I said many(myself included) assume things in reference to the words used, my mistake. Not that it matters in reference to the "younger generation" since, as you put it, that's all based on perspective)

Your reservations are fine, but what you're not reading(maybe I've left it out somewhere) is that what the bold text says, is correct.

That is not me blaming anyone else. That is being a realist.

Certain families I have been around, I've watched their parents examples(40-60's) of money management and social responsibility. This is the digging the hole I was referring to. Parents lead by example, a child's mind develops to it's surroundings and it is, sadly, quite rare to see one grow outside of the box set ahead for them. This is where they continue on into their 20's-30's and make the same mistakes their parents did, but they never realize how bad it may be of a choice. This is digging that hole further.

That's not blame, that's human nature. There are always exceptions to this rule, but the example still stands firm for many households.

Is that an excuse? No, not at all, but it makes it very difficult to connect with these people in order to push for a positive change in behavior.

Check your own attitude at the door please Loed. As much as you try to walk a moderate line (to your credit), you still come across to me as someone who blames their (or society's) problems on previous generations, and to me that is just a cop out.

One of the solutions you expressed a hope for earlier on may simply be that the younger generations currently running the show have to step up to the plate and take ownership of what they perceive to be wrong, rather than continually trying to "pass the buck" (as in responsibility) to someone else. I might add that is a very good description of the idiocy has been going on in Paliament among the opposition parties for the past 5 or so years.

Nab

You may wish to re-read everything in this thread that I have posted. I have shown no attitude, nor disrespect towards anyone, or any generation in specifics. So get your haunches down and breathe a sec please, I've been trying to discuss things civilly and, I repeat, there's no need to be indignant.

I don't have any problems per-say, I live and get along quite fine as is. I realize(again) that I am an exception to the masses. The problems I SEE are those within society, and I blame no-one but ourselves, in general.

I blame NO-ONE and have already stated that if my current generation were to be placed in the same situations as yours were "back in the day" the outcome would be quite similar.

I haven't come in here with any attitude, OTHER than the fact that while the poster in question may have cut a line towards ignorance, it still hit home a solid truth. The youth need to wake up and realize that they are the future, instead of digging themselves into the same horrid holes that their parents started for them.

I have read your posts Loed, and if I have misread your attitude then I apologize. But I still am left with a bit of reservation when I read the last line of your post above that I have highlighted.

Nab

[Loed]

To all the youth the poster was aimed at please consider the following has happened in your life time,
Bruce Carsen
Gary goodyear
Bev Oda
38 appointed senators
including Doug Finley, Irving Gerstein
Contempt of parliament
prorogation of parliament
Creationism and the Conservative party
Facebookgate (I made that up but figure it out)
OMG if you paste any line it links you to ........

Really the future is not ours it is the for the kids.
Jails. Jets. No thought to the environment.
The Harper government is the problem not any solution I want in my life.
Really google any of the above and defend it.

Maybe if you were more clear about what you are trying to get at we would talk about it.
As it stands you're just posting references to some crappy political events and asking the youth to defend it?
"We" don't even have a voice.

[grammafreddy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ge ... enerations

List of generations

Western world

There have been many conflicting attempts to enumerate the generations of the western world.There is more agreement in the earlier parts of chronology through the early part of the Baby Boomer generation, while from the latter part of the Boomer generation on, there are significant differences, especially between those systems partially based on population dynamics and statistics, and those based on sociological theories such as that of William Strauss and Neil Howe. Attempts to define precise dates and features of generations are frought with disagreement stemming from differences in definition, geography, class, and so on. The following is a list of widely accepted cultural generations, sorted by region:

The Lost Generation, primarily known as the Generation of 1914 in Europe, is a term originating with Gertrude Stein to describe those who fought in World War I.

The Greatest Generation, also known as the G.I. Generation, is the generation that includes the veterans who fought in World War II. They were born from around 1901 to 1924, coming of age during the Great Depression. Journalist Tom Brokaw dubbed this the Greatest Generation in a book of the same name.

The Silent Generation born 1925 to 1945, is the generation that includes those who were too young to join the service during World War II. Many had fathers who served in World War I. Generally recognized as the children of the Great Depression, this event during their formative years had a profound impact on them.

The Baby Boom Generation is the generation that was born following World War II, about 1946 up to approximately 1963, a time that was marked by an increase in birth rates. The baby boom has been described variously as a "shockwave" and as "the pig in the python." By the sheer force of its numbers, the boomers were a demographic bulge which remodeled society as it passed through it. In general, baby boomers are associated with a rejection or redefinition of traditional values; however, many commentators have disputed the extent of that rejection, noting the widespread continuity of values with older and younger generations. In Europe and North America boomers are widely associated with privilege, as many grew up in a time of affluence. One of the features of Boomers was that they tended to think of themselves as a special generation, very different from those that had come before them. In the 1960s, as the relatively large numbers of young people became teenagers and young adults, they, and those around them, created a very specific rhetoric around their cohort, and the change they were bringing about.

Generation X is the generation generally defined as those born after the baby boom ended, and hence sometimes referred to as Baby Busters, While there is no universally agreed upon time frame, the term generally includes people born in the 1960s and 70s, ending in the late 1970s to early 80s, usually not later than 1982. The term had also been used in different times and places for various different subcultures or countercultures since the 1950s.

Generation Y, also known as the Millennial Generation (or Millennials), Generation Next, Net Generation, Echo Boomers, describes the next generation. As there are no precise dates for when the Millennial generation starts and ends, commentators have used birth dates ranging somewhere from the mid-1970s to the early 2000s. Experts differ on the start date of Generation Y. William Strauss and Neil Howe use the start year as 1982, and end years around the turn of the millennium, while others use start years that are earlier or later than 1982, and end years that are earlier or later than 1995.

Generation Z, also known as Generation I, or Internet Generation, and dubbed Generation @ by New York columnist Rory Winston and the "Digital Natives" by Marc Prensky and is the following generation. The earliest birth is generally dated in the early 1990s.

[NAB]

OK Loed, I think we have reached a point of mutual understanding, so I can only add one more thought to our conversation. The boomers are running the show, and have been for some time (and will be for some years yet, and naturally are trying to feather their future and retirement bed). The "youth" (boomer's children) are not yet ready to take over as a generation, and even if they have some ideas about many things they would like to change (or see changed) they have to be very careful as to how they approach that.

Trying to rally a "youth revolution" of sorts based on generational conflict at this point in time (such as the poster attempts to do IMO) could very well launch our society into a transitional vacuum that could very well backfire on them - and actually be counter productive to what they eventually want to achieve for themselves, ....and their children.

Nab

[Loed]

I do agree.

The poster, while in bad taste, does have it's objective influence though. From the people I've shown it to, that seems to be the general thought on everything political as it sits anyways. So making a poster expressing that just becomes offensive to many.

The view I have on things is the younger generation(20's some folk) needs to step up and aspire to lead, to run and to learn. Far too few do, because they see it as a hopeless endeavor into endless red tape and meaningless discussion.

What many are missing is the fact that, while sure, the elder generations are running the show, we can learn much from them AND their mistakes. Not enough people do that anymore, they just react. Usually in a loud and obscene manner. Instead of closing the divide we have placed in front of us(separation of households/elders, busy lifestyles) we widen it. Developing bitterness and closed-mindedness.

There was a good reason your generation succeeded in many, many ways. From what I can see you guys did just that. Households worked together to survive, promoting resourcefulness and industriousness. Encouragement was rampant, and you learned many lessons "the hard way". You usually had the opportunity to spend time with your elders, hear stories and learn from them.

These days I see it all to often, an entire family unit either split asunder, OR driven into consumerist greed. Grandparents(50+) going to clubs with their children/grandchildren. EVERYONE wants to be young again, no accountability and no-one does anything wrong(in their eyes). Which I can understand, but it doesn't work!

Elders shouldn't HAVE to fend for themselves. They should have the independence they desire, but still be close to the home unit. If my grandparents were unable to support themselves properly they would be living with me(they passed away long before I was out of school sadly).

I don't know. I'm frustrated with society, and everyone is constantly focusing on, what seems to me, incorrect things.

[I Think]

Richard Drucker, a very well respected economist, who made many predictions that have proven correct, said that one of the biggest problems looming, will be conflict between age groups. The boomers ( not his term) are a huge block of people of similar ages. They did not have sufficient kids to fill in the bottom of the pyramid, so the young workers will have a disproportionate burden, supporting the boomer retirements. He predicted a backlash against the boomers, which is beginning to emerge.

_______________________________________________________________________

I am repeating this from readings I did in the 1980's tho not his actual words, they capture the thrust of his prediction.

My view follows:

Since we do not have enough kids/workers to pay the retirement piper, we must open our borders to immigration, the rules should be changed and people under 40, with real skills, such as machinists, electronics experts, entreprenures and the like, should get priority over a long term immigrants unskilled granny or uncle. Skilled workers will create their own "jobs" thus revitalizing our work a day world. I am guessing that at least 500,000 workers per year are needed to keep us out of bankruptcy.

Loed, hang in there, don't let these defensive geezers grind you down, you make a lot of sense.