"Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
Moderator: Global Moderator
"Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
An interesting take on how secular market cycles have advantaged/disadvantaged generations: http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmay13/genX5-13.html.
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
I didn't read the article, but I assume that it is more than coincidence, since market cycles are driven in large part by demographic trends.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
Interesting article.
I agree with it in the sense that timing is absolutely important and people underestimate the societal impact of the Boomers based solely on their size relative to other generations. "All things being equal" is a natural fallacy -- The market is never constant.
Still, the victim tone that the article degenerates into leaves a bad taste in my mouth. So the Boomers were simply lucky and greedy, and the younger generations are screwed by no choice of their own? Other societal changes such as increasing consumerism and decreasing independence play no part in declining savings rates? I was just waiting for some declaration that we need "generational justice" or the like. Meh.
Regardless of generation, there are those who save well and those that do not. If you're talking retirement, the average Boomer and Gen-Xer are both miserable savers. So screw the averages -- no matter how old you are, take responsibility for your own outcomes and chances are very high you'll do MUCH better than average.
I agree with it in the sense that timing is absolutely important and people underestimate the societal impact of the Boomers based solely on their size relative to other generations. "All things being equal" is a natural fallacy -- The market is never constant.
Still, the victim tone that the article degenerates into leaves a bad taste in my mouth. So the Boomers were simply lucky and greedy, and the younger generations are screwed by no choice of their own? Other societal changes such as increasing consumerism and decreasing independence play no part in declining savings rates? I was just waiting for some declaration that we need "generational justice" or the like. Meh.
Regardless of generation, there are those who save well and those that do not. If you're talking retirement, the average Boomer and Gen-Xer are both miserable savers. So screw the averages -- no matter how old you are, take responsibility for your own outcomes and chances are very high you'll do MUCH better than average.
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
As an early-ish Xer, I can relate...
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
I pretty much straddle the Baby Boom and Gen X generations, which is weird because I find that I don't really identify with either one. 
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
- H. L. Mencken
- H. L. Mencken
-
notsheigetz
- Executive Member
- Posts: 684
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 5:18 pm
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
Hopefully they will come up with less generic descriptions of the younger generations so us old farts can have some idea of what they are talking about. WWII, or "greatest" (debatable) generation, I get. Ditto Boomers (my own). Gen X, Gen Y ? - surely there are some distinguishing characteristics beyond 'X' and 'Y' that we can relate to.
This space available for rent.
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
If the topic of generational characteristics and change interests you, you might wish to read the books "The Fourth Turning" and "Generations" by William Strauss and Neil Stowe. Interestingly, William Strauss died about six years ago and was one of the founding members of the "Capital Steps" comedy troupe. My generation -- the post-WWII boomers -- isn't presented very favorably.
They make some valid observations, although I'm not sure I agree with all of their conclusions about the recurring cyclical characteristics of each "generation".
I have enormous respect for my father (who fought in the South Pacific) and my mother (one of the "Washington girls" that typed death notice telegrams at the Pentagon during WWII) and many others of their generation, but I think calling them the "greatest generation" is a bit of subjective media hyperbole. They were also responsible for the political stupidity of the Vietnam War and are just as culpable as anyone else for establishing the welfare state for the aged we live in today. I've also seen a lot of good and bad in members of both of the so-called "Gen X" and "Gen Y" generations.
At any rate, I agree with Tyler. While I'm not opposed to helping the disadvantaged, I think ignoring the "averages" and taking immediate and direct responsibility for your own outcome will probably result in better world for both you and others.
They make some valid observations, although I'm not sure I agree with all of their conclusions about the recurring cyclical characteristics of each "generation".
I have enormous respect for my father (who fought in the South Pacific) and my mother (one of the "Washington girls" that typed death notice telegrams at the Pentagon during WWII) and many others of their generation, but I think calling them the "greatest generation" is a bit of subjective media hyperbole. They were also responsible for the political stupidity of the Vietnam War and are just as culpable as anyone else for establishing the welfare state for the aged we live in today. I've also seen a lot of good and bad in members of both of the so-called "Gen X" and "Gen Y" generations.
At any rate, I agree with Tyler. While I'm not opposed to helping the disadvantaged, I think ignoring the "averages" and taking immediate and direct responsibility for your own outcome will probably result in better world for both you and others.
Last edited by HB Reader on Thu May 23, 2013 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Pointedstick
- Executive Member
- Posts: 8885
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
And in the end, it's the only thing we can do. I can't change an average, but I can change myself.HB Reader wrote: At any rate, I agree with Tyler. While I'm not opposed to helping the disadvantaged, I think ignoring the "averages" and taking immediate and direct responsibility for your own outcome will probably result in better world for both you and others.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
Re: "Generation X: An Inconvenient Era"
Pointedstick and HB Reader have it right. Forget the averages and take care of you and yours.
The "Of Two Minds" chart of Gen-X net worth theory vs. real and also the income growth almost exactly describe my situation.
I've been investing just over 20 years now, so right in the middle 2000-2002 did cut my net worth, hugely.
So I changed strategy. I figured out that mutual funds both active and index were flawed so I went to dividend growth with every dollar I could outside the 401(k) and put the 401(k) mostly to cash and bonds, with only enough cheap index funds in various categories to get my overall stock allocation up to 50%. After a few years I started going heavily into gold and silver because stocks were looking high again, kind of like right now.
And that change in strategy changed the second 10 years of that net worth chart for me. My net worth has more than doubled since 2002 even though after 2008 I've put aside a total under $25,000.
But the income chart still applies. Been doing side jobs and etc to make up the difference but primarily the hit means I'm no longer putting much aside. Luckily my dividends are putting in nearly as much in every year as I used to do (and could easily do more if I wasn't so diversified).
I can change only myself.
The "Of Two Minds" chart of Gen-X net worth theory vs. real and also the income growth almost exactly describe my situation.
I've been investing just over 20 years now, so right in the middle 2000-2002 did cut my net worth, hugely.
So I changed strategy. I figured out that mutual funds both active and index were flawed so I went to dividend growth with every dollar I could outside the 401(k) and put the 401(k) mostly to cash and bonds, with only enough cheap index funds in various categories to get my overall stock allocation up to 50%. After a few years I started going heavily into gold and silver because stocks were looking high again, kind of like right now.
And that change in strategy changed the second 10 years of that net worth chart for me. My net worth has more than doubled since 2002 even though after 2008 I've put aside a total under $25,000.
But the income chart still applies. Been doing side jobs and etc to make up the difference but primarily the hit means I'm no longer putting much aside. Luckily my dividends are putting in nearly as much in every year as I used to do (and could easily do more if I wasn't so diversified).
I can change only myself.