Boomer life according to the economist
Discussion
OoopsVoss said:
Sorry, what? Are you using Google translate?
It's not a solution, the data is an observation of FACT. It's a terrible data point that suggests the country is unhealthy. Obviously you don't make London poorer, you upgrade the rest of country or grow regional hubs.
Not really. No reason to apologize It's not a solution, the data is an observation of FACT. It's a terrible data point that suggests the country is unhealthy. Obviously you don't make London poorer, you upgrade the rest of country or grow regional hubs.
The press delivers negative headlines, most people judge on headlines. heck many don't read further, reaction on more paywalls. How is the UK with newspapers? Do you still print those?
Data you like:
Twitter said:
Minimum wage in California was $1.65 in 1973.
Minimum wage in Pasadena California is $16.93.
A cheeseburger in 1972 was $0.33 (20%) of the minimum wage.
A cheeseburger today is about $3.49 (21%) of the minimum wage in Pasadena California.
A Twitter now x-corp debate about the 1972 MC Donald prices. Minimum wage in Pasadena California is $16.93.
A cheeseburger in 1972 was $0.33 (20%) of the minimum wage.
A cheeseburger today is about $3.49 (21%) of the minimum wage in Pasadena California.
We have more money and don't use it for sensitive stuff, like new rails, more schools, better methods. The biggest erosion is at a very personal level. in the '50 of the last century People learned how to adjust valves from a manual. Today you get a warning not to drink battery fluids.
turbobloke said:
ake the £3 trillion (min) for Net Zero 2050 and make better use of it six times over.
Its just a number. We tend to place value to high numbers.turbobloke said:
?
We don't have that number available or anything like it, without mayem - it's Densa not Mensa.
A state just prints more of it. We don't have that number available or anything like it, without mayem - it's Densa not Mensa.
No other country can as their money is limited to just one country.
The US $ is the only currency used by several countries.
Money gets old and needs to be replaced, but in digital times you don't need to print anything.
Prolex-UK said:
Born in 1959.
I do feel sorry for the youngsters growing up now as the world does seem less stable.
I don't think it is much harder. When younger I got a micro credit, me and a mate talked a county manager in overdrawing an account we made for the intent. I do feel sorry for the youngsters growing up now as the world does seem less stable.
It did not work out.
Nowadays the banks have more cash to distribute, there are more banks, venture capital, crowd funding, you need plans (business and marketing) and have a bank which lends you say 15%, then a fundraiser event and you have a shot.
The kids have it harder as they could not play as we did, they used video gaming. So no reason to feel sorry.
Slow.Patrol said:
I was terrified of a nuclear bomb going off as a kid. Then the IRA bombings as a young adult, especially as I lived in a garrison town.
so were we. No IRA where I grew up. But the Red Army is how they called themselves.The biggest difference is that the rockets were new. Now all Nuclear Warfare is outdated, people grow comfy, so do the armed forces of most countries . And lucky Ukraine that it is like this. Imagine Ukraine at the beginning with all rocketry working.
I wonder why that comes up relatively late in the threat.
Most commented and did not go through that?
Condi said:
Yes, lets ignore every single bit of research and evidence, and blame it on expensive coffee and avocados!
Honestly, there is little point having this thread if you're just going to say that, it's categorically, provably, not correct. Also, in the same way you say life today is a luxury compared to when you were young, the same would be said of you in then 1950s vs your parents in the 1910s and 1920s. And the same would have been said of their parents in the 1880s.
Sure we have, still that did not influence (us) in our halfway austerity, needed to get a start-up capital.Honestly, there is little point having this thread if you're just going to say that, it's categorically, provably, not correct. Also, in the same way you say life today is a luxury compared to when you were young, the same would be said of you in then 1950s vs your parents in the 1910s and 1920s. And the same would have been said of their parents in the 1880s.
Banking in the 90, last century, was not easier but it got things done. Not so today?
If you are in your comfort zone you wish to stay in it. That is how we are geared.
Edited by NickZ24 on Wednesday 8th May 15:29
Panamax said:
There's a very good reason why Parliament fails to rein in the continuing, unaffordable generosity of public sector pensions. It's that MPs have awarded themselves the most generous public sector pensions of all!
Depending how much they contribute themselves MPs can get a full 2/3rds pension after just 27 years.
Ministers can get another pension on top and even if they "retire" early there's no reduction for early payment.
In Germany a member of Parlament needs to serve 27 years. A minister only needs 2 years to collect about 50% Depending how much they contribute themselves MPs can get a full 2/3rds pension after just 27 years.
Ministers can get another pension on top and even if they "retire" early there's no reduction for early payment.
Source: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/ruhegehalt-bun...
The very problem of any system is that it serves the system. So you need to grease those bearings to make it run smooth.
havoc said:
Don't get me wrong - I've enjoyed a decent life...just need to accept that over the next 20 years I'm going to pay the consequences for my decisions when younger. Which is sort of why I'm defensive of the younger generations - they're going to get it tougher than me, being really squeezed to afford property while (actually being told) they also need to put away for retirement as early as possible. All in their 20s when they probably just want the opportunity to have a little fun like we did - y'know, holidays with mates to the Med, mucking around with cars, going clubbing/gigging**.
I wonder if you could could give us a number of the cost of the decent living. The exact issue of the following generations is that decent live and creating fortunes don't go well together.
havoc said:
I'm not talking about creating a fortune.
I'm talking about being able to 'live'* (not just exist) in your 20s and 30s while subsequently not being a pauper in retirement / never really retiring.
* The odd meal out with partner or friends. Gigs and clubs every couple of months. A holiday maybe. s
t, a trackday if that's your thing, or a hiking trip with the lads, or a football/rugby tour...whatever. Stuff that adds flavour to what might otherwise feel like a punitive existence.
And I'm not talking about buying a house anyway, but in order to become independent, independence comes before you buy a house. I'm talking about being able to 'live'* (not just exist) in your 20s and 30s while subsequently not being a pauper in retirement / never really retiring.
* The odd meal out with partner or friends. Gigs and clubs every couple of months. A holiday maybe. s
t, a trackday if that's your thing, or a hiking trip with the lads, or a football/rugby tour...whatever. Stuff that adds flavour to what might otherwise feel like a punitive existence.Condi said:
You're very dismissive of the actual evidence and academics who have looked at this stuff. Don't you believe them? Or is easier to simply put your head in the sand and keep complaining about avocados and coffees?
Why and where am I dismissive? How can you read an emotion out of a few lines of text?
turbobloke said:
What exactly is 'this stuff', and which journal(s) is it in - I might strike it (un)lucky and have access; if it's open access then all the better to check it out.
Belief is hardly relevant; if their data is sound, their methodology reasonable for their aims, and conclusions are in keeping with that, then their positions would have credibility.
Belief on its own without the above analysis isn't the same thing as credibility, it's for the religious types and sometimes cults.
Exactly, it is not about beliefs but about reality. Hardly any statistic you can trust nowadays. You need to know who paid for it first. Belief is hardly relevant; if their data is sound, their methodology reasonable for their aims, and conclusions are in keeping with that, then their positions would have credibility.
Belief on its own without the above analysis isn't the same thing as credibility, it's for the religious types and sometimes cults.
BandOfBrothers said:
Call me a cynic, but we're fked no matter what.
Our competitive advantages are largely gone. The speed of information and learning has never been faster. We simply cannot expect to maintain significantly greater living standards than the rest of the world any more.
Our, that term is mostly used to provide for some national pride. Hardly any individual benefited from the competitive advantages. ked no matter what.Our competitive advantages are largely gone. The speed of information and learning has never been faster. We simply cannot expect to maintain significantly greater living standards than the rest of the world any more.
You just need to learn a skill and execute that better than the norm. That with a little marketing and you are good.
Britain has the pound, OK for many that currency is not an advantage. Just consider there are only a handful of currencies which are that stable. A former world currency.
Still there are thousands of smallish companies there wishing for a foothold in the UK. Netflix, Dreamwork all are LTD, or started as such. Some companies selling the set up of companies make money, others try and fail.
GT03ROB said:
I've read that several times now & also have no clue!!
That because you haven't read the part I answer to. here again:
BandOfBrothers said:
Our competitive advantages are largely gone. The speed of information and learning has never been faster. We simply cannot expect to maintain significantly greater living standards than the rest of the world any more.
havoc said:
There's a lot of words there and not a lot of meaning.
What exactly is the point you're trying to make?
I was answering:What exactly is the point you're trying to make?
BandOfBrothers said:
Our competitive advantages are largely gone. The speed of information and learning has never been faster. We simply cannot expect to maintain significantly greater living standards than the rest of the world any more.
asfault said:
Nobody else plays the competative advantage game. we open up construction tenders and orders for new trains etc to loads of other countries and the Germans get the contracts or whoever then every other country just uses protectionism and awards contracts for home grown infrastructure to themselves. Then we wonder why we fall behind.
The US have the right idea, Years ago they gave st about the middle east because of oil and energy. Now they are a net exporter so dont care. They look after Tawain for Chips and tech. But they are now building fabrication factories in the US with massive government grants.
Not nobody but a few who still believe that if the country is number one they could also benefit. The US have the right idea, Years ago they gave s
t about the middle east because of oil and energy. Now they are a net exporter so dont care. They look after Tawain for Chips and tech. But they are now building fabrication factories in the US with massive government grants. You hit the nail on its head. That game is called a fire-sale to China and other nations by upper echelon managers.
OoopsVoss said:
Anything over 50% is a majority. 80%? wow, I don't think the West has fallen into election rigging like Russia and co....
Inflation came in hotter than expected this morning, June cuts now looking super unlikely.
Ask your boss to pay more. Inflation is a valid reason to do so ? No success rate guaranteed. Inflation came in hotter than expected this morning, June cuts now looking super unlikely.
as a crude example how democracies vote: 80% to to the election, 5 % casts an invalid vote. Now you have already 25% not in favor of the winner, plus the 30% of the opposition party, in case of just 2 parties.
Last election 2021 it is pretty hard to find the % of how many actually participated. Usually it's around 60%.
50% of that is against 70% of all people capable of voting.
OoopsVoss said:
Boss?
BTW, participation figures are lower than you think.
could be. That makes the crude calculation even more accurate.BTW, participation figures are lower than you think.
The Winner of a democracy nowadays is governing against the electorate.
A low participation makes a mockery out of any democratic process. And the elected officials know, otherwise they wouldn't need police protection.
Steve H said:
Are they part of the electorate if they don’t bother to vote?
In my view yes. Every vote counts, so does every non vote.
Imagine an election where 65+ % do not vote. A blind could see that something is not going as it should go.
Its not so farfetched. Venezuela being the vanguard on may thinks shows how politics should not be done.
Funnily enough Venezuelan Gimmicks are more often copied.
You buy the media, news outlets and arrest the people who disturb, stick them criminal charges so they are not immediately declared detained for political reasons.
Steve H said:
Let’s face it, telling a politician that you don’t vote is hardly going to motivate him to consider your views on anything.
It takes just a few press conferences when a reporter live begins questioning a newly won election how he feels to govern against 85% of his people. A little coverage and a hype and the newly elected government look for asylum. In any given country it could go that way. How to wake up reporters? Journalism it is not they usually publish.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff