Gen X Hits Another Bump in the Road(blogs.hbr.org)
blogs.hbr.org
Gen X Hits Another Bump in the Road
http://blogs.hbr.org/erickson/2012/04/gen_x_hits_another_bump_in_the_1.html
13 comments
It collapsed because it was a bubble being pumped up by the Federal Reserve and its' "easy money" market manipulations. That is the flawed logic of a Keynesian system, that you can plan and manipulate a world economy. You can't, and thus we ride the roller coaster of boom and bust. It's been happening as long as the unaccountable Federal Reserve has been calling the shots.
I'm no economist ... I think houses were appreciating while people were upwardly mobile in the economy. So not just more people, but more people with the means to buy a house (or borrow money for same).
Now we're stagnant, and people are talking about the disappearing middle class, and housing prices are flat.
Now we're stagnant, and people are talking about the disappearing middle class, and housing prices are flat.
They should appreciate simply due to a growing population + currency inflation right? Beyond that I'm wondering if the average homeowner (not a real estate investor) actually sees a high appreciation.
I find it hard to sympathize with the tone of this article. Seriously how can anyone feel bad for being born in that wonderful time. Didn't we all live through huge transformative things like the internet (GenX/Y remembers how boring the world was before that), don't we live in the most technologically advanced environment ever? What does it matter if there are less payroll jobs, or more loans when in total we produce more; financial indicators have different meaning in different contexts. That doesn't mean people receive less education, healthcare, leasure time and other things that make people happy less than before! Hell, i wish i 'd been born ten years later, not earlier!
The growing income inequality is an issue, i give you that, and the rise of new economies has brought the West to an uncomfortable position, but hey, here's something to work toward fixing.
And i know that it's silly, but whenever i hear whiners like that, i can't help but think "grow a pair".
The growing income inequality is an issue, i give you that, and the rise of new economies has brought the West to an uncomfortable position, but hey, here's something to work toward fixing.
And i know that it's silly, but whenever i hear whiners like that, i can't help but think "grow a pair".
The author appears to either not know how old Gen-Xer's are, or is smoking crack. We entered the job market during the 90's boom, so we were much better employed in our early careers compared to today's grads. We've never had jobs that had pensions, and have been told our entire lives to save for retirement, so we won't "lose" our pensions. The housing boom/bust affected all ages. And we're not quite old enough to suffer from recession-induced early retirement. Nor are we currently retiring and moving our savings into fixed-income investments with historically low rates. I'd say Gen-X has done well in the Great Recession, comparatively.
EDIT: I reread the article replacing "Gen-X" with "youngin's", and it makes a lot more sense. Also, we were the last generation that could reasonably work their way through college without loans.
EDIT: I reread the article replacing "Gen-X" with "youngin's", and it makes a lot more sense. Also, we were the last generation that could reasonably work their way through college without loans.
Can somebody tell me who is considered "Gen X"? I thought I was, as a kid, but I believe I might even be too young.
Kurt Cobain was in Generation X, right? I was 11 when he died. Where does that put me? What about my 5 year old?
The whole idea of distinct "generations" seems wacky to me, but it sure does appeal to journalists.
Kurt Cobain was in Generation X, right? I was 11 when he died. Where does that put me? What about my 5 year old?
The whole idea of distinct "generations" seems wacky to me, but it sure does appeal to journalists.
The whole idea of distinct "generations" seems wacky to me, but it sure does appeal to journalists.
People like to be part of a group. It's warm and comfortable. To not be part of a greater collective, part of something more powerful than their own individual beings, can be terrifying and lonely.
Journalists surely understand this; they tap into this inner fear, this inner desire of ours, when they generalize and talk in terms of distinct groups rather than in terms of individuals, even though surely none of us are so uniform that we truly belong to any such group as defined by any journalist anywhere.
People like to be part of a group. It's warm and comfortable. To not be part of a greater collective, part of something more powerful than their own individual beings, can be terrifying and lonely.
Journalists surely understand this; they tap into this inner fear, this inner desire of ours, when they generalize and talk in terms of distinct groups rather than in terms of individuals, even though surely none of us are so uniform that we truly belong to any such group as defined by any journalist anywhere.
There's no exact date boundaries to generations, however if you reside around the boundaries you are generally considered to be on the cusp.
According to Wikipedia, Gen-X ended around 1981. In my lifetime (we're probably around the same age) I have seen Gen-X referred to ending anywhere between 1976-1980.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_X
According to Wikipedia, Gen-X ended around 1981. In my lifetime (we're probably around the same age) I have seen Gen-X referred to ending anywhere between 1976-1980.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_X
It's the "baby bust", as mentioned in the article. I'm exactly in the middle of it - 1971. Bought my house at the high point of the internet bubble in 1999.
I think it's birth on anywhere from ~1962 to ~1980, around 18 years for one generation.
'Generation' overgeneralizing is a cousin to decade overgeneralizing, a handy way to generate trend stories and social pseudo-science out of vague impressions. (The categories and qualities remain fluid enough that, like Astrology, anyone who wants to believe can find some support.)
I find it interesting that the 00's have been less subject to such generalization and nostalgia, and I think it's for no other reason than it's harder to say, with no one clear winning decade moniker, compared to the Nineties, Eighties, Seventies, Sixties, etc.
(The Teens may be a little easier to refer to in casual overgeneralizations, and then the Twenties will come a roarin' back with decade-o-centric thinking.)
I find it interesting that the 00's have been less subject to such generalization and nostalgia, and I think it's for no other reason than it's harder to say, with no one clear winning decade moniker, compared to the Nineties, Eighties, Seventies, Sixties, etc.
(The Teens may be a little easier to refer to in casual overgeneralizations, and then the Twenties will come a roarin' back with decade-o-centric thinking.)
The whole idea of distinct "generations" seems wacky to me, but it sure does appeal to journalists.
The context of your youth tends to have a guiding hand in who you become as a person. Grouping people into distinct "generations" that span a decade or two is very imprecise, to be sure, but it does manage to roughly identify facets of the kind of environment you grew up in.
The context of your youth tends to have a guiding hand in who you become as a person. Grouping people into distinct "generations" that span a decade or two is very imprecise, to be sure, but it does manage to roughly identify facets of the kind of environment you grew up in.
Now, I understand that a neighborhood can become more desirable, or the land where the house is becomes more constrained, but that doesn't apply to every house. I feel like most of America (outside the cities) has plenty of room.
I guess that's partly why the housing bubble collapsed? It was based on feelings or something?