This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Most Destructive Generation Ever
Submitted by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,
Dorothea Lange Hoe culture in the South. Poor white, North Carolina July 1936
I’m afraid I got to delve into a particularly unpopular topics once again today. Blame it on Bloomberg. They ran a piece on the Silent Generation (people born between 1928-’45), which finds it self in a ‘sweet spot’ but refuses to spend enough. A funny problem: the by far richest group in the US doesn’t spend, while those who would like to spend, for instance to build a home and a family, are too poor to do it.
I know I’m not going to make myself popular with what I have to say about this, but then I’m not running for US President, or Miss Universe for that matter. Besides, people should be careful about taking things personal that are not.
My point is that the Silent Generation is by far the most destructive generation in human history, so it should be no surprise they’re also the richest ever. What’s more, the chance that there will ever be a more destructive generation is eerily close to zero, and that uniqueness warrants scrutiny.
My point is even more that the Silent Generation may and will claim innocence wherever they can, but there is no innocence left today. Today, they can all watch their TVs and look out the window and understand that this is not going to end well. Unless the Silent Generation make very substantial changes to their lifestyles and attitudes, they’re inviting a war with their own (grand)children.
It starts here: World population went from 2 billion in 1928 to 7+ billion today in 2014, as US population went from 120 million in 1928 to 320 million in 2014. In graphs, first the world:
And then the US:
That is huge. But there’s another factor at play that, interestingly, is both a cause and a consequence of the population numbers: energy use. Again, first the world:
And the US:
As should be clear, we’re looking at an exponential function multiplied by an exponential function. World population more than tripled, and all those extra people used 6-7-8 times more energy per capita then did prior generations. That’s 20-25 times more energy use in total. As I said, it should be no surprise that it should be no surprise that the Silent Generation is the richest ever.
But. But there’s one more graph that we should be careful not to leave out. if only because it’s interesting to see that the richest generation in human history, as they were coming of age, and while they were busy increasing their per capita energy use manifold, also started incurring more debt. Much more debt.
That last graph should make us wonder how rich they are exactly. Or, rather, how much of their alleged wealth will need to be serviced by their progeny. And then you have to ask what kind of wealth that is, exactly. Let’s turn to the Bloomberg article:
The Richest Elderly Generation Ever Doesn’t Like to Spend
Jon Burkhart was born during the Great Depression. [..] When he and his wife married in 1959, they lived in Texas and saved 10% of every paycheck. Thanks to well-timed equity and property investments, the 81-year-old now lives a much different life than the elderly he knew as a child. [..] The median net worth for the oldest Americans has climbed to near the top compared with other age groups from near the bottom just two decades ago .. This shift in buying power may not be a positive development for the economy as prime-age workers typically spend more than their elders.
The Silent Generation, born between 1928 and 1945, has benefited from improved health, a more generous social safety net, an exit from the job market ahead of the past recession and rebounding stock and home values. “They are in the sweet spot.” The median family net worth of Americans 75 and older was $194,800 last year adjusted for inflation, compared with $130,900 in 1989 ..Members of the Silent Generation are currently about ages 69 to 86. The title of richest ever will probably go unchallenged for now ..
Increased net worth of today’s elderly may not translate into a boon for consumer spending [..] household spending peaks at age 45 and then falls in every category except health care, dropping about 43% by the age of 75. The term Silent Generation was coined by Time Magazine in a 1951 article as the group was coming of age. It described the generation as “working fairly hard and saying almost nothing,” one that “does not issue manifestos, make speeches or carry posters.”
Not in 1951. They did not ‘not issue manifestos, make speeches or carry posters’ then. But they did in the 1960s, when they were in their late teens and up. It’s curious to see that those who did protest and wave banners and all, from Washington to Paris and beyond, concerned as they were with human rights, corruption and the environment, later became the wealthiest and most destructive people the world has ever witnessed, as a group, as a generation.
From 1962 through 1991, when mid-wave Silent Generation members were in their prime working years, gross domestic product grew an average of 3.5% a year. Since then, GDP has expanded 2.6% a year. The homes and financial assets they acquired as they aged saw outsized price gains over the decades. [..] Meanwhile the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s home price gauge has risen 472% since 1975.
For a large part of the ‘Silents’, rising home prices have been a substantial part of their wealth accumulation. Even when prices were falling in 2008, it didn’t matter much, because mortgages were long paid off.
Federal outlays on programs benefiting those 65 and older also became more generous over the decades. They rose to $27,975 in 2011 per capita adjusted for inflation from about $4,000 in 1960 [..] Consequently, 9.5% of Americans 65 and older were in poverty in 2013, lower than any other age group, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. That compares with 35% in 1959, when they had the highest poverty rate. Back then, “the poor people were old,” said Neil Howe, a demographer in Great Falls, Virginia. “That’s a really fascinating contrast with today.”
Ha! Yeah, fascinating, isn’t it?! Today, the poor people are young. But that’s a big problem, also for the older people. It’s sort of OK for now, just look at the average age of Senators and Congressmen and corporate shareholders. The old folk run the show, and they’re planning to hold on as long as they can,
“The Silents have done very well, and a lot of it has just been their location in history [..] They planned ahead, they were risk averse, they played by the rules and the system worked for them.”
That last bit sounds very cute, but a little too much so. The system didn’t just work for them, they were the system. They still are. They knew this in 1968, and so they can’t simply claim innocence after that. What happened is that they came from innocence, protested the system and then forgot all about it and themselves became the system.
Is it the population numbers, the energy use, or the debt increase that makes the Silent Generation so insidious? That is not even the most interesting issue, other than perhaps for historians. What’s far more intriguing is what the ‘Silents’ are going to do today and tomorrow, as they see their children and grandchildren sink.
Every parent used to want a better life for their sons and daughters than they had themselves. And there can be no doubt that most like nothing more then being fooled until they die by politicians’ promises of growth and recovery.
But one single honest look at younger generations should teach them that those promises are hollow and empty. Some can try and plead dementia, but even then.
I have no high hopes to see this resolved with grace and dignity and respect across generations, I think people across the board will be too reluctant to give up what they claim is theirs. If they are, though, that will mean the dissolution of entire societies, something that never happens in peaceful ways.
»
- 19034 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Better start redistribuing!
You'll have to pry my parents' wealth from their cold dead fingers.
Actually, it will be mine, then, and I'm not going to spend it either.
My mother is in this generation and she has dementia. A perfect banker client but I keep them from her door. They sure do knock a lot, though.
You're a good son...eh..daughter(?).
According to Harbanger, I'm a daughter with a penis (apparently he has a thing for that). Son.
According to Harbanger you're a lying progressive douchebag who also happens to be a tranny. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
The laugh is on you because I can literally fuck myself. I rarely leave the house.
Go do that and stop obsessing over me, you fucking homo.
Have you taken my poll?
That probably sounded gayer than I intended.
Wait, what?
Well let's see...
- a guy who even thinks to start a poll on that subject
- whose AVATAR is a fucking pipe that he's smoking on
- with a big fat SMILE on his face
Umm.. Let me think on that one...
That's J.R. "Bob" Dobbs...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._R._%22Bob%22_Dobbs
If the Silent Generation is old and rich and won't spend, then their riches will soon be inherited by their kids (generation X?). Then that generation can spend it or take the blame.
Just think, if they spend it then all our problems are solved!!!
Here's a thought. Only thing standing between the old hippies and young hipsters is Gen X. X because that will be the only marking left on the ground when this is finished.
Not so fast there youngster, Some of us GenXer's know exactly what's going on and have from an early age, Refusing to participate in the 'system' has caused many of us to have to work hard with little to show for it compared to the Silent and BB generation. So be quite careful what you threaten 'cause a Gen Xer like me can go nose-to-nose and toes-to-toes with any of you youngsters and will promptly embed that 'X' right between your eyes...
Listen.
Now stop that you two. You both earned 10 minutes in Time Out and I want you to answer this question when you get out:
How am I going to improve my comments on The Hedge tonight.
Now go!
Did you take the poll? I mean...
"How am I going to improve my comments on The Hedge tonight.
Now go!"
Don't post.
"I can literally fuck myself"
Well thanks for ruining my evening...lol.
Listen.
Shut up nmewn.
Obviously didn't ruin yours.
Miffed
Have some empathy, the poor thing completely broke his concentration in pleasuring himself just for me, so now he's "down" and in a foul mood and argumentative.
Why, that could lead to him hiring opposing lawyers appealing before a court in how to split his own assets!
I'm such a hussy ;-)
dude this guy is almost as annoying as fonestar/ghoatrider was. I wish he would hurry up and get banned
Well nmewn, how would you feel dressed in a lion suit all day and could only ride a beagle doggy style for sexual satisfaction? It seems to me you need some empathy as well! And now we ladle on some hermaphroditism? I think I need some pictures to understand all involved but that would ruin more than my evening oh impish one.
Miffed;-)
Lion suit, Miffed? Looks more like Bangalore tech support in an ape suit trying to steal a dog after the Halloween party. Must be a recent photo.
Listen.
You "GUY'S" are good!
Listen, "you fucking guy" (no offense, but an Indian friend introduced me to that phrase, and it's a good one),
watch this shit - one of the best skate videos ever made:
Deca - Second to None (2002)
and stop being a little troll bitch.
The Fed is already doing its best to redistribute from savers via Financial repression and ZIRP and takes care of the redistribution UP. The Obumboy Administration takes care of the redistribution DOWN...Problem is, there will soon be nothing left in the Middle to redistribute from.
It's very sad that such an article can accuse the savers of being the problem. The real problem is that as a result of bad policy for decades, the economy is now a hollow shell which operates for the benefit of the top 0.1% and which is incapable of sustaining the "American Dream". That is the very same "American Dream" that the author is accusing previous generations of having benefited from and been responsible savers not frivolous spenders.
I have no problem whatsoever with them as 'savers'. A large savings rate is good in a healthy, productive economy. However, we have a debt based ponzi economy, where everyone must spend not just what they earn, but also go into debt. My problem with this generation and the one after it is that they are responsible for the massive welfare state spending that is bankrupting us. It is because of them that medicare/SS can not ever be reformed, and it is becuase of them this debt has run up so high. They are the most pandered to group of people by politicians becuase they all vote and no hope of reform is possible since no one will dare go against these programs. I blame them not for being savers, but for the reckless ammount of debt they have saddled me(29) and my son(1) with. They consumed so much as a generation that they are living at the crest of the debt wave, and will have largely died off by the time the true bill comes due.
WTF.....debt came from those you voted for...get it straight
The problem is not with savers, who create capital theoretically for productive investments, but with the "Debt Money" system itself and the Central banks who propogate it. That is NOT a generational issue, unless you believe that a whole generation should be held responsible for the 0.1% of that same generation.
Carl, mind if I quote you if I am not talking about you (much)?
"where everyone must spend not just what they earn, but also go into debt"
That is the official line of the people causing the problem. It is certainly no mandate for me, and it does not have to be for anyone else.
The whole concept that the problem is the fault of some other generation is strait out of Bernays/Goebbels and is nourished by the same group who perpetuate the red/blue debate.
Internalize that these people are the root cause of this nation's ills and guide others to understand that they are where the blame should be placed.
Yes.
And keep in mind that the author of this article, Raul Ilargi Meijer is about as Left wing as they come (not that this necessarily means that every point he ever makes is invalid). His interpertations are always colored by his political views. He is not an objective observer.
I find his wife (Nicole Foss) to be a more objective analyst.
That he is a left-wing "P"rogressive should not be a surprise. His "Anaysis" is a smokescreen for what he is really saying which is "Those who have are selfish and should give to the have-nots". Perfectly consistent with the views of the left. Except, of course, when it comes their OWN assets. In Europe, this is referred to as "Champagne Socialism". The Clintons are a fine example of this phenomenon.
All that debt was assumed by the Developed World so that guys like Bangalore Equity Trader could have electricity and internet access, and perhaps in another few hundred years, modern plumbing. It is almost Kipling-esque in its assumed responsibility for the less fortunate.
As for pure US domestic responsibility...the contingent obligations will never be paid, and the Federal Debt has well more than doubled since you (now age 29) have been of voting age. You share the Citizen's Burden. And since your child was a choice, you have full responsibility there.
Sure, I mean if I only got 0.1% interest on my life's savings, I wouldn't spend much either
"Actually, it will be mine, then, and I'm not going to spend it either"
No ~ You'll just tithe it to the fucking church & buy your fucking STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN
Well ~ I got news 4 u pal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RD1KqbDdmuE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKgK91zCq44
I'm not really Catholic, I was just playing devil's advocate.
Too subtle?
Well than why the fuck did you even bring it up?
Look pal... If you want to debate points... Then debate AWAY & I'll come up with POV's that are equally relevant to the topic...
If... INSTEAD... You want to joke around and run & hide under a blanket of RELIGION?...
Well ~ U can do whatever the fuck you want... It's your dime... [but being as this happens to be a 'PARTY LINE' ~ you may be taking your chances]...
I don't worry about that shit... I just say what's on my mind...
I don't have to pry it from your hands. Yellen is doing it for me!
Never heard the term The Silent Generation before. Finally, a neatly packaged demographic that us boomers can ridicule for a change. Identity politics never gets old.
Never underestimate diversionary propaganda. If they have to go back to Time magazine, 1951 to find a new scapegoat.
We all know its the boomers fault!!!
Who the fuck wrote this article?
Paul Krugman?
I'm generation X, and the way I read this is that if these "old fuckers" don't spend, they are evil?
If they don't take on boat loads of debt, they are useless?
They are legacies of the last true Depression, and have been all the better for being prudent.
What am I missing?
Should they have 2 bastard kids out of wedlock? Watch ESPN all day? Tweet Kim's ass all day?
that's unfortunate; you think you might want to buy a telsa... or something. have you see the torque on those.
No generational-warfare shit! Most did the best they could do and I fault them not for that, even if we're left with a bag of shite. Some will use it to build their families, some will blow it in Vegas.
What matters is that "The System" isn't working for their (grand)children. As one of these (grand)children, I'm thankful that I don't need to worry about feeding my children vs. putting grandma on an iceflow. All the same, what can I offer my child (children) beyond survival alone?
Do a little research on Ida May Fuller and you'll see why this article is right on the mark.
"Ida May was born on a farm in Ludlow, Vermont in 1874. She worked as a legal secretary in Ludlow for most of her career, and after three years of paying Social Security payroll taxes, she retired in 1939 at the age of sixty-five. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA)'s website, the total amount of Ida May's contribution to Social Security was $24.75. Apparently Ida May came from good Vermont stock, because she passed away in 1975 at the ripe old age of 100 years. And by the time of her death, she had received a total of $22,888.92 in monthly payments from Social Security. With her longevity, Ida May had achieved an impressive 92,480% return on her investment. Not a bad deal if you're Ida May, but if you're the administering the system, or if you're any of the other folks paying into it, then her example might be a source of consternation."It's a great gig if you can get it.
thats just it right there: they are largely responsible for this nonsense, and the debt that will consume us. I have no desire to 'redistribute their wealth' nor do i fault them for being prudent savers. Its borrowing money from their children and grandchildren's futures that i have a problm with.
Even though it is a ponzi SS has always paid it's way and will continue to do so for many decades. The only reason it contributed to the national debt for a couple years recently was because they used SS cuts as a vehicle to get tax cuts to the ones who could use it the most without redoing all the tax rates and stuff. That's now over. Put the blame on the war machine, that's where your debt came from. If one goes through the budgets of every government department and weed out spending for the military the military consumes 54% of the budget. That's as of a few years ago and with Obama wanting billions more for wars that will most likely increase. This is not a generational thing it's your politicians playing god with your money while the 1% benefit. Don't blame the voters either. They have little choice in the candidates and even when a good candidate makes it to DC it isn't long before he is just as corrupt and power hungry as the rest.
Yes a few people did make out that way. On the other hand think of all the people who die before collecting a cent after contributing for 40 some years.
@Umh - There's that word...."contributing". Nobody contributed a dime. I have not contributed a single cent to Social Security. What has happened is that a lot of money has been stolen from me to fund a Ponzi. Do yourself a favor and read the two salient SCOTUS decisions - Helvering v. Davis and Flemming v. Nestor. Social Security is a "pay as you go social welfare program". It is not insurance either (Flemming), has none of the attributes of insurance including a contract. All funds collected go into the general fund to be spent at the discretion of congress (Helvering). The rules can change overnight and there's not a damned thing anyone can do about it. It's one of the biggest scams in history. Language matters - stop using the word contribution when it comes to Social Security and Medicare.
This article was talking about people born between 1928 and 1945. Your illustration of the inequity of SS in favor of Ida May has nothing to do with the generation in question, since none of them were old enough to vote for or against it at its inception.
Aside from that minor point, I agree that SS is a stupid, unsustainable system. Should I reach age 100, and if my current SS benefits remained unchanged for those 32 years, I will have received approximately 500% of my (and my employers') contributions. Of course I fully expect the entire farsical system to have collapsed long before 2046. But SS was not the subject of the article.
Regarding the article itself, and your comment that it was right on the mark, I found it way off the mark. The author said that much of that generation's wealth is in property. How is that destructive? How is anything done as a generation destructive? Is it more destructive than the machinations of the three Boomer presidents the US has had? I'm sure that there were individuals in that cohort that were destructive. Maybe Nancy Pelosi, born 1940, or Harry Reid, born 1939, would be good examples of destructive members of the Silent Generation, and I'm sure both the Red and Blue teams would be well represented if I cared to go on. But are they any worse than Clinton, Bush and Obama? It's individuals with power and destrucive ideologies that are the problem, not a bunch of geezers conserving their financial resources.
Well said.
So a 90 year old, who can't make a safe return on his savings, who can't work any more, who can't get buy on and does not trust social security and medicare... should start spending his money like crazy?
How about raising the intrest rate on an FDIC insured account a few points above true inflation? -- Wait we can't do that, it'll blow up the system.
You see these old folks are already being fleeced.
The author of this piece is a dick.
Lord,please give me back the 2 minutes I spent reading this worthless piece of dreck.
nitrate feritlizers brought to you by mr haber. the bosch-haber process.
and.....petroleum and coal.
together they all equal more food for more people in more places. that simple.
And more depletion of soil fertility and upsetting of soil biodiversity both which are unsustainable because in order to keep up agricultural production more fertilizer is needed and next to nitrate they require also potassium and phosphor which are finite resources that the world is running out of.
Sounds like you graduated from MoreScience High School...
The only answer appears to be 6 Billion fewer people.
And robots!
Eb,
I call Georgia Guidestones. Twice in one day.
Wow.
What do you talk about whien you have them on the phone?
So working hard and being a good steward of one's assets is bad now? What the hell do you teach your children?
It's a conundrum, because never ending exponential growth is required to keep the capitalist machine running. Otherwise, I think we just eventually go back to something like medieval feudalism. I mean even more so than right now.
Never ending economic growth is a political fantasy, not an economic reality. That same generation of people (my parents included) were born into hard times. That's where they learned to value their earnings and save.
As for not spending the money to maintain the never ending growth fallacy, most have their money invested which is the basis of capital expansion. At least until the financialization of the economy.
Well, actual goods and services have to be produced for real capital expansion to occur, or else we can call Feudalism 2.0 "Capitalism 2.0" if we want. I'm sure those who currently have considerable tangible assets would be OK with that.
In the current Kleptoligarchy? Take out student loans, join the F.S.A., don't vote, and when the time comes hang a banker.
On the flip side how is 16.9 billion of debt being a good steward? (This generation was actually capable of stoping this theft) What do you teach your children and grandchildren when you've stolen their future?
Well, let's see. The welfare state began under Roosevelt in the 30's, long before this generation was able to vote. What have you done to stop it since you were of voting age?
As for your strawman, the article is about personal choices of financial conservatism by a generation, a rather innocuous whine on the same level as that of an heir wondering why his Mi-Maw won't go ahead and die so he can start spending her money.
Relax, that's why I said on the flip side and I did get your point but their is no denying they benefited from a system that was out of control. My opinion is the last chance to stop this runaway train was in the 60s - 80s, when deficits mattered and we weren't that far removed from a gold standard. Then again, we see what happened to Kennedy when he threatened the system so that opinion could be off base as well.
Probably one of the more accurate posts was the one that stated that those that get into the pyramid scam the earliest benefit the most.
Gotcha. The fact is that the progress toward a full-blown welfare state has been long and drawn out, taking advantage of each succeeding generation to accept a new normal and then allow it to expand into the next generation, each with the seeming inability to change its course.
So true, these bankers are a patient bunch, if they can't get your assets when you're alive they'll get them from your kids. And all with a "measly" 2-3% loss in purchasing power per year. (Andof course they have to change the goal posts on thst every so often because in reality it much greater)
dupe
Greatest group of suckers in American history. Brought us most of the failings of the last 10-50 years (i.e. when they were in charge). Squandered unparalleled opportunities and chances to make real, meaningful changes. Voted for largesse and socialism over and over and over again. Benefited from and promoted the pyramid scheme we live under today.
Bullshit
I'm thinking Ilargi's gramma didn't love him.
They must be ZH's. Starve the beast.
Those wicked, evil people! Curse them for not being mindless spendthrifts!
Don't worry. The silent generation is already starting to pass away. They will spend their savings on end-stage medical care or leave them to their children: the boomers.
Born '28 - '45 i.e. aged 69 to 86 i.e. THEY'RE FUCKING OLD AND RETIRED AND HOPING TO DIE BEFORE THEY RUN OUT OF MONEY SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO STARVE!!!!!!!!
Perhaps the oldies could lend their savings to younger generations who could start up productive businesses and pay the oldies interest which would be enough to live on ...
Oh yeah, and did I mention that those particular oldies not only looked after their own oldies but they also fed, clothed and educated the baby boomers until the BBs were old enough to look after themselves? And here we are with all our wonderful advances in technology and we're having bullshit inter-generational squabbles - oh this generation can't possibly look after than generation coz it is orl too hard!
Don't kid yourself! The Silent Gen STILL pays for the fucking baby boomers. Those fat fucking baby boomers "borrow" money (never to be paid back) from their elderly SG parents to buy shit for their useless millennials living in the basement.
... and work ethic or no work ethic, the price of real estate will ensure that those millenials will stay in the basement.
Wow. 5 red arrows when I type out the traditional description of banking. That's funny. But I can see why some may have missed the joke.
This was written by my wife to try and get me to spend us into a hole. totally disregard it.
Relax. I'm familiar with your wife's hole, and I don't find it all that deep.
pull the ladders up
no more room on noah's ark
pull em up
social fabric has been torn
prepare for the overlordsofchaos
That is not the problem. The 0.1% who have more money that the lower 90% need to VOLUNTARILY give 90% of their money to the fiat handicapped. Wouldn't that make them the good philanthopists that they want us to believe they are ... not token publicity seeking faux-philanthropists as they really are.
That will solve the problem as stated in the article (but not the real problem), guaranteed.
However that will never happen since the 0.1% are more concered with their own security, power and legacy and care nothiing about the world.
Fundmentally, I am agaist monetary charity. I believe that real charity is in teaching those considered lesser by the elitists how to be equal and accepting them as equal. This is something the elitists or those wanting to place blame can never accept.
I believe this may be one of our best options. If we ask nicely as an appeal to altruism, along some revolutionary new economic thereoms that perhaps the economy would work a little better without a disinfranchised peonage caste, perhaps truly philantropic members of the wealthy (maybe corporations as well), might see some benefit of the idea of a patronage system where sponsorship of individual citizens or geographic areas might be a better idea than increasing destabilization.
Ha! The POS you refer to as the 1% believe in 'Trickle Down' economics; NOT 'Trickle-Down' MORALITY. They are HYPOCRITES and COWARDS; nothing more.
Costs of doing business include externalities such as instabilities fueled by pressures of growing inequalities of capital, such as civil or other warfare, striking and protests, crime, etc. One way that the vested interests could protect their vested interests could be by the formation of corporate "states" which include their own defense forces. Or the vested interests could come to be brought to see that the causes of such instabilities come in part from income and wealth inequality and the high levels of indebtedness prevalent in the lower wealth percentiles, including large portions of the population with negative real wealth. By in effect forgiving debt at a local level, debt that in most cases would be owed to the high wealth individual or corporation itself, or else debt obligations that could be purchased on an open market, the high wealth individual or corporation could in effect create an area with a higher average wealth, which would be lower in the instabilities present in low (or negative) net wealth areas. Without anything in the way of my own research, mathematical models or fancy thinking on the matter I can only surmise that a local population suddenly without a large debt service subtracted from their income might actually manage to increase their own productivity and economic growth. Thus the sponsor can create an area of safety not through the employment of mercenary security experts, but by raising the prosperity of a local area.
"which finds it self in a ‘sweet spot’ but refuses to spend enough."
Keynesian alert!
Want to know a secret? It's the thieving banksters and their fraudulent-reserve system of grift backed by the violence of their purchased and treasonous government puppets--a ponzi-empire of grift and graft.
An American, not US subject.
"Heard on a playground, "Go ahead, borrow it, it won't hurt you."
I used to like Ilargi. I used to like Armstrong.
Both have apparently gone off the rails.
Of course. The first in, on any pyramid scheme, always make out the best.
Refuse to spend? So funny but fits perfectly for a sham economy that depends on consumption.
Most of the generation that lived through the 1930's started out just like that kid with the hoe. I know a shitload of them.
Shut up and get.....
Off your ass
And on your feet
Out of the shade
Into the heat!
yeah but the silent gen was just born in the 30's they didn't really live through the depression -by the time they were 10 it was ww2, which they missed, but experienced the best growth the usa had to offer.
They lived in the world created by the greatest gen, and silently sucked all the benefits from society while contributing nothing.
They'll scrimp and save their modest money to see it taxed and pillaged on end of life care...
You described why ‘Death w/Dignity’ is against the law.
Dr. Jack Kevorkian had the terminally ill lining up. Assisted suicide doesn’t direct the money flow.
Perhaps Raul Ilargi Meijer is a babyboomer? You know, the real most destructive generation that ever walked on this planet?
So now the dier state of the economy is the fault of the people who actually built it up and not of the FED and the banks getting all these bail outs and not investing that money into the economy?
I think the article is confusing the Silent Generation and the Baby Boomers; the Silent Generation were the ones who grew up during the Great Depression and certainly weren't in their teens in the early 1960's...even the youngest of those born during the Depression would be 20 in 1960. And they were certainly not out protesting; while a handful of them were involved as leaders of the civil rights movement and other causes, that was a rare exception.
"A funny problem: the by far richest group in the US doesn’t spend, while those who would like to spend, for instance to build a home and a family, are too poor to do it."
No shit Sherlock, that's how they built their wealth in the first place! The Depression and WWII left a huge impact on them and taught them the importance of thrift , minimal debt and saving, not buying iShit on their credit cards and making the minimum payment each month.
+1 Choomie.
My folks were born in 1919, and taught me to never spend hard-earned money on frivolity. Not that I learned that lesson right away, mind you...
Now remove "hard-earned money" from the above and replace it with "...worthless fiat currency created ex nihlo and given to the FSA so they can spend it..."
We're doomed.
Author seems to be some idiot Keynesian. Next he'll be arguing we should break some windows or start a war to get out of this malaise.
What do you mean, "they don't spend?" They've spent everything they've ever earned, everything their children ever earned, and are working on spending everything their grandchildren will ever earn.
Obama spent more then all other presidents combined and he's not in that age group so don't blame it on them.
and what did LBJ say of Gerald Ford ? That he couldn't walk in a straight line and chew gum. Well Obama chews gum
You speak of the Boomers; NOT The Silent Gen or Gen-X. Of course some of all these genertaions are nothing but spenders. The spenders are the problem, and, in my opinion, quite superficial and afraid of reality...
By the way, that global population shown in the fucking insurance company chart is contradictory to everything that I have seen in the past. Every other chart I have seen showed about 1.5 billion people in the late 1500s.
Author is an idiot.
Missed the target.
Its the Baby Boomers fault MORE-ON !'
Y a know,..the ones born after 46' that negated reason and through culture wars undermined the Structural edifices of the Republic.
Agreed. Author is a moron and should be banned from ever publishing anything ever again.
Not sure if it is the babyboomer's fault. I think if it more as sociopathic individuals and victims of all generations.
Don't worry so much. Your Obamacare will distribute that lolly they clasp to their wrinkled chests to the Health Care Oligarchs.
Covetousness is a violation of one of the Ten Suggestions, bitchez. Repent or die.
I thought this article was about Janet Yellen and the central bankers - but wait they are spending a near infinite amount of money!
Now i'm confused.
If you're old and have a lot of money you don't spend that's bad? Really! Saving is now a crime against humanity?
If you're old and have a lot of money (central bankers) and spend a lot of money (that's not theirs) that's good?
(well maybe for the 0.1%)
Well maybe this works from a certain point of view? Okay, maybe not.
It's their damned wealth! They somehow managed to work and save and not go head-over-heels in debt. Their timing was fortunate. They accumulated a pile and kept the banker and politician jackals from getting it. They achieved what today's middle class should be shooting for.
Somehow they're "the most destructuve generation in human history" for making good? They can't take it with them, you know. They'll leave it to their boomer kids & millenial grandkids, and soon enough it'll belong to the bankers and politicians.
Yes, he starts off with the standard Keynesian premise doesn't he?
"They ran a piece on the Silent Generation (people born between 1928-’45), which finds it self in a ‘sweet spot’ but refuses to spend enough."
As if "the economy" or strangers or government is somehow entitled to their life savings that they earned.
Some seriously sick shit when you bore down into it, akin to, spoiled brat children sitting around waiting for their parents or grandparents to die.
Worst Offender/best example of that Gen? Jon Corzine
Jon Corzine was born in 1947, making him not of the Silent Generation, but a Baby Boomer.
i was born in 52 and can cash out for 400000. so i,m good for 6 years. trade ya for your youth.
That generation is spending more than you know. But its not tablets, I-phones and homes so much as its on healthcare. Of course, most of its from medicare and many haven't put in nearly enough for the benefits they receive now. Why do I say that? There wasn't a medicare tax till 1966. Aside of that, I don't blame that older generation for any other problrems we're experiencing today. Many were retired before our national debt even hit its first trillion and the sleazy younger generation today are their grandchildren and not their children.
This was a lukewarm article.
The silent generation set this system into motion. The Silent Generation passed the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, The Great Society, Civil Rights…. The so-called Baby Boomers (1946 to 1964) were just becoming aware. ‘The Doors’ hadn’t formed until 1965.
But…. instead of the Baby Boomers paying for their millstone – their parents, they passed the buck. The U.S. manufacturing base was collateralized by the SG and then foreclosed on during the BB reign.
The ‘Silent Generation’ spends. Money never rests. Money is always in use. SG peeps do not buy I-Phones and Davenports and water beds. SG peeps spend on pharmaceuticals, assisted care, replacement joints, etcs….
Strange article indeed with much missing and much erronious. Most of the men of those two generations received the better part of their finishing shool in the military, in war and peace. The volunteer army means most need not think about the military.
Those that would benefit the most from military service are the ones least liable to volunteer.
Grandpa won't buy 47 iPhones?
By the way, that "most destructive generation" as you call it is fully invested in the economy. Their money is in banks, in bonds, in stocks etc.and so their money is out of their control and being used by those banks, companies and governments that they gave it to, trusting in their honor and morality.
It is not as if your "most destructive generation ever" has all of that money hidden in a mattress and refuse to spend it. They have virtually none of it in their possession.
You are a moron. No, you are not a moron. You are a fucking low-life asshole moron, who tries to place blame on others who are innocent.
You need to apologize. Fucking asshole morons never apologize.
Gank those F'ers - I say, FORGIVE the student loan debt!! AMF!
Bwa, ha, ha.
The annuity structure would crumple.
dup.
The coming Greater Depression will be the first major reset since the last Great Depression. When most everyone's business and fortune is wiped out, it will give today's younger generation the same great opportunity to rebuild and compete with everyone equally. I wish I was twenty again.
Savers are suffering from these low interest rates. The leading edge of the massive Boomer generation and those that are older know that every dollar spent is a dollar it cannot re-earn or replenish. The logical thing to do is hoard their wealth.
This means they have little choice but to, keep the car for an extra 50,000 miles, cancel remodeling projects, and make the grand-kids fund their own education. With less interest income they are purchasing a lot fewer electronic gadgets and spending vacations in the backyard. As a result of these low interest rates this "recovery" may be greatly delayed. More on the subject of how lower interest rates have a hidden cost in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/03/low-interest-rates-and-their-cost.html
You should get out of the office more.
Every Geezer I know is off cruising some euro-sewer on a great-cricle-jerk tour or spending the Fall in Aspen or some other shit.
These fucking cotton tops have more money than Gates and are clogging up every coffe shop and yoga parlor from here to muskogie.
They buy 12 dollar bottles of cold press Kale juice and drive .003 mph in the grocery store parking lot.
They are everywhere spending the shit out of that money, gardening, spoiling the fucking dog, massages, new fucking teeth.
Hard on pills... Plastic Surgery... On and ON...
This premise of geezers not pissing away money is not correct.
Have you been to a Ski hill? Geezers are clogging up everything!
Look, even when every stinking one of us is a billionaire (sans inflation) you can still find some blue haired old lady who eats cat food and washes out her used trash bags to save money... Just look at the Queen of England.
Go Figure.
Sorry Raul, you are fighting history. You are blaming people for acting rationally!
The effectiveness of monetary policy was last discredited in the 1970s. The persistent attempts to revive growth with easy money led to stagflation.
Who remembers the 1970's?
It was a time of Stagflation.
The 'Bob Hope" generation entered their 'spend less-save more' life stage. OUR Parents!
It should be clear that the baby-boom is now in the same life-stage.
Not one Politician will admit they are helpless to restart Economic Growth!
They will wait this thing out, just like before.
Even if it takes 11 to 15 years!
Everyone spends.
We spend on the right things – bibles, beans & bullets… Hookers, blow….
The morbidly obese get motorized scooters and chair lifts.
Metro-sexual, hair product.
I don't really subscribe to often over-touted over-population alarmists.
“How can there be too many children? That is like saying there are too many flowers.” - Mother Teresa (nuff said)
I don't really subscribe to often over-touted over-population alarmists.
“How can there be too many children? That is like saying there are too many flowers.” - Mother Teresa (nuff said)
Sorry Raul, you are fighting history. You are blaming people for acting rationally!
The effectiveness of monetary policy was last discredited in the 1970s. The persistent attempts to revive growth with easy money led to stagflation.
Who remembers the 1970's?
It was a time of Stagflation.
The 'Bob Hope" generation entered their 'spend less-save more' life stage. OUR Parents!
It should be clear that the baby-boom is now in the same life-stage.
Not one Politician will admit they are helpless to restart Economic Growth!
They will wait this thing out, just like before.
Even if it takes 11 to 15 years!
Who remembers the Nixon Shock in 1971 and seems linked to high Oil Prices... Inflation that would have spread to other sectors... like food, sugar.
But I'm not an expert on this or the depression like Bernanke. I just think the government would cover up the Gold Problem, geopolitical tensions, and other linked problems.
My aunt grew up in the depresion.
She told me heartbreaking stories.....one about as a child she kept telling her mother than she wanted bread or milk (cannot remember exactly), and she could not understand why she couldn't have any... while her mom had tears running down her face.
She was around 3-4 years old at the time, and remembered it like it was yesterday even though it was at least 60 years ago.
When she died we found 40k stuffed in her grandfather clock.
My husband's grandfather once told him (on a shopping trip), "Careful child, you're going to break something we can't eat."
The people who lived through the great depression never forget the lessons of being hungry. He secretly squirreled away nearly 80k in cash, while he wore boots with holes in them and drove a farm truck that was held together with rust and dirt.
Two solutions seem to be Public Banks and Social Security.
It seems banks create financial cycles, bubbles, and debt... but then they refuse to invest once an economy looks like it is entering a recessionary period or a depression.
Bank of North Dakota seems to have kept lending money in the local economy even during the 2008 Financial Crisis.
http://www.publicbankinginstitute.org/
The author knew he was writing soemthing unpalatable by others but chose not to reanalyze his premise.
Very stupid. After the 1930 Depression whole generations became thrifty.
Why would this moronic author think this time is different? This time is the same or worse than the great depression; only this time we made it worse with printing...
Wow. 2 days in a row. Crummy analysis in support of an agenda. Liberal policies, always offered in the name of the children and the seniors, has driven deficits and debt and asset bubbles. Prudent savings and cautious spending are virtuous habits, now being penalized by financial repression. More like theft from savers to reward all those heroic spenders and debtors paying low rates to buy worthless crap and college degrees not worth the paper they are printed on. As noted above by others, you are a moron. And your analysis is facile. Time to grow up.
I can't believe what this guy, Raul whatshisname, has written here.
He's the epitome of a narcissistic little shitass.
Sorry about a duplicate comment to another article, but I would like to explore this idea:
What would actually happen if the Fed's discount window were opened to Main Street? Say that the inflationary effect was tempered by the closure of the Fed's window to Wall Street and perhaps a per capita limit on borrowing? Trillions of dollars in the bank's dollar carry accounts or trillions of dollars available at close to 0% to main street to pay down debts and acquire capital? Or perhaps, with the Fed's window closed to them, the banks might actively court depositors again by offering them a real return on their savings account? Is throwing money from a helicopter such a bad idea?
""the by far richest group in the US doesn’t spend,""
Do you know how people with money got to have that money?
They did not spend it.
You are shaming savers and approaching a mindset that may one day FORCE people to spend down their assets, current FED policy excluded.
A twin problem to this 'silent generation' not spending is not exactly their fault. So many of those dollars, if they were to be spent, and, obviously, for those dollars that are spent, is their societal benefit is hollowed out because so much of what is purchased is made outside the USA. Imagine a former time when most of what was spent went into the massive manufacturing sector that previously exited in the US.
Check your shoes, shirts, slacks and your other goods. Look for USA made goods. Ask for them in stores. Demand them.
Buying USA made goods, rebuilding this manufacturing sector, is our only way out.
This older generation who are refusing to spend are actually considering willing their money to the next generation.
The problem is the Obama adminstration and all other spenthrift politicians have decided to steal their money through inheritance taxes.
That's how much the government cares about the citizens and the country.
"As should be clear, we’re looking at an exponential function multiplied by an exponential function."
An exponential function multiplied by another exponential function is still an exponential function. And every exp function can be written as the product of 2 others.
TO SPEND OR NOT TO SPEND THAT IS THE QUESTION
I wonder how old Raul Meijer is?
He'd have to be somewhere in his 70's to really know what a member of the Silent Generation thinks.
Get back to us after your 75th birthday, pal.
Don't worry, the hoards of New Mexican Americans will be paying into the system with their fresh SS numbers..
DING DING DING DING DING
Give this man a prize!
Many WILL be paying into the system.
The sum of the contributions will not be insignificant.
This is one of the reasons why I think the Republican hissy fit over immigration is feigned.
They can pretend to get pissed off at Barry while in front of their constituents,
but the reality is that they KNOW the revenue is needed to keep the party going just a bit longer.
Fucking tight fisted scumbag hoarders. Money changing hands is virtuous.
I can help you be virtuous. Put your money in my hands.