A lot of holes can be blown into that article.
some good points- but still very general and not super factual.
We're talking in generalities. Generations span millions of people over 1+ decade, so it's always going to be difficult to give universal data. But the broad strokes are IMHO
generally accurate.
When the median home increased from 2-4x the median wage to 6-8x, it suggests that the Boomers had an easier time affording homes. When you look at the cost of education, it's pretty clear they had an advantage there.
The pension point cuts both ways. Many younger generations are in dire positions relative to retirement savings compared to Boomers, and of course Boomers can call them stupid, or poor planners, or just not responsible. But of course for many of those Boomers, retirement saving wasn't optional, so it's not like they can substantiate the claim that they WOULD have been good at it in a way that later generations aren't.
And some other things cut both ways. The cost of healthcare is a lot higher, but healthcare is MUCH better than it was 30 years ago. So you can argue that you're getting more/better care, so it going up as a percentage of income is justified. But it's still more expensive, which takes money away from things like being able to afford a house--a house that's twice as expensive as a percentage of income than it was for Boomers.
I'd also factor in divorce as something that cuts both ways. Boomers were the last generation to overwhelmingly grow up in 2-parent nuclear family households. Divorce was stigmatized. Boomers then got married, and much more than previous generations, got divorced. Which has impacts on childhood outcomes. It also leads to reduced household sizes and more demand on real estate, when suddenly mom & dad need two houses to live in rather than one.
I think it's hard to argue that the Boomers didn't have financial advantages in their generation that later generations do/did not.
And contrary to your earlier post- I don't see any examples or evidence of Boomers taking credit for benefits they had or didn't create, or blaming following generations for issues they (boomers) created.
I don't see them blaming later generations for the issues they created. I see them as dismissive and lacking empathy for those later generations. It's a matter of being tone deaf.
Just like Badge--who I was originally replying to--called the offspring of Boomers and some GenX "lazy slugs", who don't "work hard, take risks and support society".
To his credit he blamed the Boomer/GenX parents for coddling the children and letting them get this way.
But it goes to a consistent attitude that I think we see from the older generation that the later ones are lazy, whiny, entitled, etc. And a complete lack of understanding that some of these complaints are actually warranted, about things in society that the Boomers themselves never had to face.
