"boomer" thread 2 💥

[IClaudine]

A thread for people who want to combat ageism on the site, because MNHQ can't be bothered to.

There's a thread now from a man being intimidated by elderly women at the gym. 🙄

Apologies, @EveryKneeShallBow - I was trying to talk about how we use language and the sometimes unintended consequences of that for older woman. Possibly not very clearly.

Hope we can begin again? I'll attempt to rein it in, and be clearer, and focus on the fact this thread is in Site Stuff and about language & moderation.

This ! This , right here! , I was told in my twenties by a financial advisor ( came to my work strangely and spoke to all of us!)
That I wouldn't get a state pension so should start planning accordingly, now I tend to blame this , not on older generations ( I wasn't their choice or actions) but firmly at the feet of the government!
They are to blame if you won't get a pension, they are to blame if you can't buy a house, they are to blame if wages are low and costs are high!
Not other people!

Because you're explicitly blaming a cohort.
Because you're accusing a generation of stealing.
Have a look at what happened to the economy under the brief leadership of Liz Truss.

Sorry - my mistake - it was the one on the parking in P+C spaces that was deleted

A poster on the royal topic of all places threatened to call us all " Karen's " in retaliation of a post she found offensive that wasn't called out by other posters!!

I want to apologise, @LittleBearPad because it wasn't you who said that - it was another poster.
Many apologies.

No worries at all.

Good thread.

👍

This is the crux really isn't it @Maireas

Also, instead of directing ire towards an older generation, look to the group who have accumulated a truly ridiculous amount of wealth, the group who the "wide boys" court for votes and donations. The group that basically don't pay income tax. We need to generate more tax in this country but it's the wrong people, particularly younger generations, who are being targeted and squeezed.

To me it's a class issue, not generational.

It is a class issue, @BellaBellla - did you read that report that the partners in one asset management group paid less tax than the cleaners did?

That board needs a Site Stuff thread all of its own. Another time, though.

Excellent.
Must've been my bad luck yesterday with the HQer who got my report. Maybe we ARE slowly getting through then...

All the wealthy Baby Boomers and Generation X will all pass their ‘wealth’ down to their children and grandchildren, no one seems to address that, if the main problem of ageism is that older generations have more money which really does seem to be the root of it all, then surely then we need to look at inheritance and how that is taxed so we become a fairer society?

They will but likely much later than was historically the case as Baby Boomer and GenX live longer than the Greatest Generation / Quiet Generation. So it won’t buy family homes for middle aged children as perhaps it once did, it will supplement pensions.

Exactly - I was born at the beginning of 1947 so part of the post war baby boom. This generation spans 18 years so it is possible for a parent and child to be in the same cohort. Furthermore there was another baby boom in 1963.
What irks me is that other 'generations' are 15 years and none of them so far have been the butt of any negative connotations.

That should be 16 years not 18 years.

Yes I think that could be the case in some part, however even if inheriting in your 60’s with life expectancy ever increasing there will be some very wealthy late middle age people, there will still be a huge divide, also there does seem to be a trend that children of wealthy parents are often skipped in favour of the grandchildren inheriting, there will be a lot of twenty or thirty somethings inheriting a lot of unearned wealth.

The only people who have amassed wealth through means other than inheritance or a high paying career are home owners. They were able to benefit from huge house prices and are often sitting on a huge amount of equity. However that does not account for all people in their seventies and beyond. My parents didn’t benefit from being house owners. I think those who could buy council houses for a couple of quid provable benefitted the most and those lucky enough to live in an area where prices absolutely sky rocketed, but that wasn’t all those people that was some of those people.

So, we have lazy generalisations of older people being wealthy, younger people being entitled and feckless. People in need of salary top ups being lazy, the disabled ,

I just reported a post where the poster resorted to "OK Boomer" in a discussion and it was deleted instantly, possibly someone else reported it before me. TY MN.

Good.

I think that the difference between the MN treatment of the protected characteristic of “gender reassignment” and the combined protected characteristics of sex and age, is verrrry instructive.

<strokes old-lady hairy chin>

But most of the press isn't owned by boomers.

The Telegraph Group has long been controlled by the Barclay Brothers - Greatest Generation. Ditto News International under Rupert Murdoch. The Daily Mail group is the Rothemeres but for some time has been under the current Lord Rothermere who is a Gen Xer, inheriting from a Greatest. The Express/Mirror now belong to the same publishing group chaired by a Gen Xer.

The Guardian/Observer belong to a publishing trust - this seems to be the only one chaired currently by a boomer. These are all longstanding ownerships/chairs and not recent changes.

All white and male, but not boomers.

I think the key is white, male and rich.