Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
johnycoldears

Jeremy Paxman Slags Off The Boomers

Recommended Posts

It's a figure of speech. I'm not wishing anyone dead. You are trying to take the moral high ground via an interpretation in order to avoid responding to the actual points. This is a poor debating technique.

Also your first sentence is barely legible. The fact that you are alive and have somehow amassed enough money to purchase a computer is proof in itself that your generation had it quite easy.

...glad I don't have to hear your voice ..you sound a right bore..bet most people avoid you ...get on with your life instead of looking for someone to blame for your misery.... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...glad I don't have to hear your voice ..you sound a right bore..bet most people avoid you ...get on with your life instead of looking for someone to blame for your misery.... :rolleyes:

And as per my original post and the repeat - macro please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get fed up with 'the young today don't work like we did' refrain.

Is that the 'young today' what was dropped off by aliens?

I think the problem with the young is too much helicopter parenting.

Barely spend any time with your kids the fight their battles (which should be part of their growing up experience) as an over-compensation for general lacklustre parenting.

We get it a lot with part-time youngsters with parents turning up berating store managers for giving them the push, no matter how egregious their behaviour.

They also seem to think their offspring are better than lower-paid jobs but are quite happy to join the general young people have no work ethic meme.

EMA is a contributory factor to young people's lack of inclination towards employment. And is probably mostly going on the bottom line of high St fast fashion chains and mobile phone operators.

Edited by Soon Not a Chain Retailer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im tale end boomer . It is a bit like walking accross a bridge and im half way there when suddenly the part of the bridge im walking towards is getting taken away and im going to need to jump the gap at the end to get to the other side of the river. The gap keeps getting bigger .

All generations have had things hard at times , this is my third recession since leaving school in 1979 ( however this is more than a recession ) there have always been ups and downs , for the boomers who bought a house way back things have turned out very well.For those that paid into a pension in most cases they will get some or all of it. The fairy god mother of wage inflation did them well.

The generations after the boomers have not had it so good and this last lot ( not sure what their name is ) and those that follow are well and truly fked.

I do not lay the blame at my generation as such ( a whole generation did not meet on mass and decide to fk those that followed ) but the few elite at the top. I also blame govenments for not taking a look at what was happening and how history is repeating itself.

The industrial revolution produced some massive gains for this country , but those gains were grabbed by a few at the top for many they went backwards there was more poverty in 1900 than 1800 due to many skills that people could commarnd a decent standard of living for not being needed any more due to mass production and those people becoming cheap labour factory fodder.

We have/are going through another industrial revolution now OUTSOURCING, COMPUTERS , CHEAP PHONES. like those who lost their decent paid jobs in 1900 the many from this generation and the next generations will become NMW poor or unemployed .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what's sparked Paxo's guilt trip?

Would love to know whether it's a dinner party topic in the privileged circles in which he moves.

Or could be he's just recycling the ideas of David Willett's MP (Minister for Unis and Science). Last year he published The Pinch: How the Baby Boomers Took Their Children's Future – And Why They Should Give It Back. Perhaps Paxo read it on his hols.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does not in any way excuse those ponzi lovers from extorting £145 per annum out of minimum wage workers.

please dont think Im trying to defend the zanu bad boys extorting moeny out of everyone else,but I find them persecuting poor people beyond the pale.it's funny how when african dictators do it,it's bad,but it's ok if the BBC do it,cuz they're os cuddly and friendly and without them noone would review cr@p books/shows/films that noone reads/sees

here's some of the cu*** at it.scabbing off the back of minimum wage workers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPxemXu6DUI.

I've taken to referring to them as British State Television.

I often notice how they refer to 'reports from Chinese State Television' with a heavy intimation it cannot be trusted whilst displaying no sense of self-irony whatsoever.

Edited by Soon Not a Chain Retailer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im tale end boomer . It is a bit like walking accross a bridge and im half way there when suddenly the part of the bridge im walking towards is getting taken away and im going to need to jump the gap at the end to get to the other side of the river. The gap keeps getting bigger .

All generations have had things hard at times , this is my third recession since leaving school in 1979 ( however this is more than a recession ) there have always been ups and downs , for the boomers who bought a house way back things have turned out very well.For those that paid into a pension in most cases they will get some or all of it. The fairy god mother of wage inflation did them well.

The generations after the boomers have not had it so good and this last lot ( not sure what their name is ) and those that follow are well and truly fked.

I do not lay the blame at my generation as such ( a whole generation did not meet on mass and decide to fk those that followed ) but the few elite at the top. I also blame govenments for not taking a look at what was happening and how history is repeating itself.

The industrial revolution produced some massive gains for this country , but those gains were grabbed by a few at the top for many they went backwards there was more poverty in 1900 than 1800 due to many skills that people could commarnd a decent standard of living for not being needed any more due to mass production and those people becoming cheap labour factory fodder.

We have/are going through another industrial revolution now OUTSOURCING, COMPUTERS , CHEAP PHONES. like those who lost their decent paid jobs in 1900 the many from this generation and the next generations will become NMW poor or unemployed .

OT:

Globalisation will make life hard for many.

Computing is unusual in that yes it will put people out of work by replacing them, but it's the first time that people will be getting rich at the expense of a machine. Prior to this in history the only way to get rich was to organise people using your superior intelligence and then pay them less than the sum of their parts, thereby taking the difference. Often this required vision and perhaps a game-changing idea, but it always required people to then go and do the work. Computers represent the first time we can exploit a cpu instead of a person. This has the potential to lead to more leisure time. It also has the potential to go very badly, but at least there is a good path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OT:

Globalisation will make life hard for many.

Computing is unusual in that yes it will put people out of work by replacing them, but it's the first time that people will be getting rich at the expense of a machine. Prior to this in history the only way to get rich was to organise people using your superior intelligence and then pay them less than the sum of their parts, thereby taking the difference. Often this required vision and perhaps a game-changing idea, but it always required people to then go and do the work. Computers represent the first time we can exploit a cpu instead of a person. This has the potential to lead to more leisure time. It also has the potential to go very badly, but at least there is a good path.

Ah, the argument was voiced back in the 70's. We were told we would only need to work 20 hour weeks, or we'd have to job-share. Life would be...so easy. The computer would replace all the tedious jobs.

What happened?

Just about the reverse. The dull jobs were the only ones left, the ones which couldn't be done by machine. Hair dressing, shelf-stacking. Call centering.

I admire your optimism, but take it from an old-timer, It'll be the second of your paths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OT:

Globalisation will make life hard for many.

. Computers represent the first time we can exploit a cpu instead of a person. This has the potential to lead to more leisure time. It also has the potential to go very badly, but at least there is a good path.

And there lies a massive part of the problem , " THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO LEAD TO MORE LEISURE TIME ".

Instead of the more leisure time they have kept people working the same hours or more ( last time working week cut was 1980 ) but used less people so the surpluss people have had to take forced leisure time . The more unpleasent word for it is unemployment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what's sparked Paxo's guilt trip?

Would love to know whether it's a dinner party topic in the privileged circles in which he moves.

Or could be he's just recycling the ideas of David Willett's MP (Minister for Unis and Science). Last year he published The Pinch: How the Baby Boomers Took Their Children's Future – And Why They Should Give It Back. Perhaps Paxo read it on his hols.

...he probably read about it first on this forum.... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what's sparked Paxo's guilt trip?

Would love to know whether it's a dinner party topic in the privileged circles in which he moves.

Or could be he's just recycling the ideas of David Willett's MP (Minister for Unis and Science). Last year he published The Pinch: How the Baby Boomers Took Their Children's Future – And Why They Should Give It Back. Perhaps Paxo read it on his hols.

He is not on a guilt trip. He is merely obeying orders from the mothership just like Willetts.

Behind his sarky interviewing style Paxman is every bit the establishment stooge. He gets a million quid a year for being so good at appearing to be critical of politicians and the system while at the same time managing not to lay so much as a glove on either. That is the whole point of the BBCs role in British society. It appears to stand at arms length from events giving a supposedly unbiased analysis when in reality it very much tries to shape what issues are brought to the populaces attention and which ones are hidden from view. By this process of inclusion, omission and discrete manipulation of stories such as the protest outside St Pauls the focus of the public on events is controlled and manipulated. In particular it is keen to ensure that any anger about the way things are run in Britain is diverted into conduits where they can be allowed to dissipate. This is the whole point of the 'boomers are to blame' meme. It is designed to provoke pointless threads like this one where the terms of the debate are never really defined in detail. The aim is to generate facile fingerpointing and provide some vague focus for peoples anger without actually changing anything fundamental. Indeed, there is a subtle sub text to the story which is that anyone under 40 is encouraged to think that everyone over 40 (ie their Mum and Dad) is responsible for the plight rather than a relatively small group of powerful and well connected individuals at the top of society. By the same token the message to the over 40s is that the under 40s are out to get them but if they are prepared to sacrifice some of their savings and pensions the boys and girls at the top will ensure that nothing untoward happens to them. By playing both ends against the middle and controlling the debate the establishment stay in control and are able to shaft all generations equally.

What is so sad is that so many suckers fall for it.

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is so sad is that so many suckers fall for it.

.... :D ...he always gets upset when another University beats an 'Oxbridge' team on Univesity Challenge ....and sometimes offers an excuse for them ....a real BBC type.... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All with money derived from extortion.

Just try not having a TV and you'll run into the BBC's "guilty until proven (temporarily) innocent" routine.

Not necessarily. They've left me alone for more than five years now. Perhaps the fact that I don't have a telly means they don't suppose I'm watching it on the sly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily. They've left me alone for more than five years now. Perhaps the fact that I don't have a telly means they don't suppose I'm watching it on the sly.

..you don't need to ..when you can watch on your PC..... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it's the other round. A large cohort of any generation exert undue power across the generations above and below them. So whilst they do compete against each other collectively they create more opportunities for their whole generation and bend rules\behaviour\political systems to the benefit in general of their whole cohort.

Isn't that the whole baby boomer debate?

I always thought of the 'fortunate generation' as those who partied in the 60s, matured in the 70s, and got rich in the 80s. Lots of them, but far fewer in the next generation up - hence a disproportionate abundance of opportunities to advance in a static system. But of course they also had more overcrowded and substandard (not to mention literally bombed-out) housing than us, all-time big class sizes at school, and other drawbacks.

The 60s-born are the opposite: not just lots of competition from our contemporaries, but all the slots a generation up firmly occupied.

It's the charlatan Willetts who lumped these very different generations together in a move to nudge public mood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not so much that they are the recipients of a windfall, it's the "I left school at 15 and worked harder than you are prepared to work, that's why I'm rich. You spend all your money on iPods" mentality.

That's what pisses me off.

Funny, I've never, ever seen any of the middle-aged folks mention ipads in any of these slanging matches.

It's always the Willetts acolytes attributing that kind of nonsense to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, I've never, ever seen any of the middle-aged folks mention ipads in any of these slanging matches.

It's always the Willetts acolytes attributing that kind of nonsense to them.

You've obviously not read the comments underneath articles about Boomers in the Daily Mail/Telegraph!

e.g.

"Dear o' dear, Paxman have you been so long removed from the reality of the real world, that you now regard Flat-Screen TV's in several rooms, and array of Electronic games and Mobile Phones for the kids as a sign of acute deprivation and poverty..........Your analysis, is not unlike your interviewing technique: In that you are well aware of what should be said, but are reluctant to chase the truth, for fear of what you might find..!

- cassius, britannia, 31/10/2011 21:11"

Edited by MiCasaSuCasa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought of the 'fortunate generation' as those who partied in the 60s, matured in the 70s, and got rich in the 80s. Lots of them, but far fewer in the next generation up - hence a disproportionate abundance of opportunities to advance in a static system. But of course they also had more overcrowded and substandard (not to mention literally bombed-out) housing than us, all-time big class sizes at school, and other drawbacks.

The 60s-born are the opposite: not just lots of competition from our contemporaries, but all the slots a generation up firmly occupied.

It's the charlatan Willetts who lumped these very different generations together in a move to nudge public mood.

So you don't like being labelled a boomer, got it. Now stop being so defensive.

Random question to no-one in particular: which label would you like less - chav or boomer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you don't like being labelled a boomer, got it. Now stop being so defensive.

Random question to no-one in particular: which label would you like less - chav or boomer?

I was going to post PM but two birds with one stone. I am 1961 and would consider myself a late boomer but....as has been pointed out many times our baby boom generation was a different shape entirely to the US curve that led to the phrase.

I would also agree with PM that Willetts as befits a politician actually didn't really do his research the main beneficeries of the massive cohort were those born 1950 -1955 as Malcolm Gladwell's book points out.

Look around at the middle manager nothing spectacular in fact a bit of a goon but born late fifties early fifties rose through full employment era, retired on a non contribution pension mid nineties. Sitting pretty. Late boomers 1961 onwards not complaining but not quite as smooth ride and here we are in 2011 with tax going up, kids at uni and fees going up and no where near retirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to post PM but two birds with one stone. I am 1961 and would consider myself a late boomer but....as has been pointed out many times our baby boom generation was a different shape entirely to the US curve that led to the phrase.

I would also agree with PM that Willetts as befits a politician actually didn't really do his research the main beneficeries of the massive cohort were those born 1950 -1955 as Malcolm Gladwell's book points out.

Look around at the middle manager nothing spectacular in fact a bit of a goon but born late fifties early fifties rose through full employment era, retired on a non contribution pension mid nineties. Sitting pretty. Late boomers 1961 onwards not complaining but not quite as smooth ride and here we are in 2011 with tax going up, kids at uni and fees going up and no where near retirement.

The magic birthday that cuts you off from all the benefits of a lucky generation is 5th/6th April 1960 (the tax year boundary, of course). Born before that, you had access to the tail end of an era of some financial advantage, born after if and you're legally barred from a whole raft of advantages.

What Willetts has successfully done is a bit of psychology. He sees another generation of young folk protesting and changing things (as his lot did in the 60s), and that they'll resent their elders. He sets up a scapegoat. But the clever psychological trick: he knows that one sacrifice will defuse blood-lust. He also knows there'll be negotiations, and arguments about those near retirement having been made all those promises, therefore an argument for the older folks to be spared.

So he gets the young onside by writing a populist book blaming a generation, and gains instant star status from the fact that it includes himself. But he extends that generation to encompass those younger than him, who never enjoyed the major advantages he described but - being further than himself from retirement - can take the full force of the resentment of the young.

To put it succinctly, a clever sacrifice to save his own contemporaries.

Being an educated man, he knows the true value of a scapegoat in its original sense. You want a modern(ish) parable for it, try Ursula LeGuin's The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas.

Edited by porca misèria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a boomer, I personally remember that nasty piece of work Willets and his neo-con social engineering when he was Thatcher's adviser. That was when all this damage to our financial systems started, the privatise everything mantras, make people "responsible for their own health" tosh. Everything he writes or says has a hidden agenda. This time is transparent, to deflect the rage of the mob onto the bystanders, whilst his cronies walk off with every assett that's not nailed down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 317 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.