# Generation Poll



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

There has been a lot of spirited debate regarding the differences between generations. This poll will provide a snapshot of the makeup of users on CMF. The poll is anonymous, but you are encouraged to post where you slot in.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

I am on team Generation X


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

I am Silent (1943) Mrs. Zipper is Boomer (1949) and Zipper boys are Xers (1972-1974)


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

I'm an old Millenial, the ones that don't fit too well with that generation, or with the GenXers for that matter. Young enough to be good with technology, but old enough to remember a world without cell phones and home internet (and I would argue it was better).


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The problem with so many of the spirited debates is they tend to be from the lens of where one is at the time, often with an unwillingness to accept the way one's situation is at that point in life's journey. For the most part, the perspectives of one generation versus another are not really that different today than they were when one was part of an earlier generation, e.g. the trials and tribulations of Gen-Xers today are not very different from when current Boomers were that age some 20 years ago, or what Millennials face today versus where current Boomers were some 40 years ago. The specific hot buttons are of a different nature but life's struggles and financial stresses overall are not that different on a relative basis. Much of the debate is a terrible waste of misdirected angst.

FWIW, SO and I are Boomers born in the '40s and all but one of our blended family children are Gen-Xers born in the '70s. From our perspective, Gen-Xers today have never had it so good compared to our equivalent position in society when at their current ages. The high inflation decades of the '70s and '80s, along with the decade of corporate downsizing were a pretty rough time to be starting out and to make net worth progress. At least Canadians didn't have the Vietnam draft issues our American counterparts had dying for no good reason at all, nor did we have the riots and deaths associated with the civil rights movements that Americans did.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> The high inflation decades of the '70s and '80s


About this, and comparing only the market situation:

High inflation, yes, but with high interests rates. So many Boomers told me they miss the good old times when they could save money at 10%+ interests, risk free. That was in the 80s and inflation in the 80s was 2% to 5% compared to those 8% to 14% interest rates.

70s were tough, but then 80s, 90s were awesome years.

Black curve is the nominal interest rate of US 1-year bond
Red curve is the 1-year inflation rate
Blue curve is the real interest of US 1-year bond

Times were tough from 73 to 80
Then the 80s were awesome years with the highest real yields ever
Then in the 90s real yields were still pretty nice
Then starting from 2000 we've hard negative real yields










Or on the longer term, look at this for 10-year yields from the 80s until year 2000










From 1973 to 1980, it was though, I won't argue, that's 8 though years.

But now look at any Millennial starting his life somewhere between 2000 and 2010, with two of the biggest market crashes and negative (or near-zero) real yields for 20 years, trying to save money as they have no assets and shouldn't take too much market risk... Boomers in their 30s and 40s had a great market in the 80s and 90s while Millennials in their 30s were unable to have access to risk-free savings or housing and are currently entering their 40s with even lower real yields and still no assets or house.






Real Interest Rate - 151 Year Chart | Longtermtrends


The real interest rate is calculated as the difference between the nominal interest rate and the inflation rate. This chart displays the nominal interest rate of a 1-year US Treasury bond, the US inflation rate, and the resulting one-year real interest rate.




www.longtermtrends.net












Treasury Yields, Inflation, and Real Interest Rates: Analyzing the Historical Record


Current nominal Treasury note yields are exceptionally low in part because of massive Federal Reserve QE purchases that were absent in historical episodes. Moreover, inflationary pressures are strong and likely to persist if Congress passes the pending infrastructure and budget reconciliation bills.




www.aei.org


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Your assumptions are wrong. Boomers were indebted to their ears in the '70s and '80s trying to buy houses. I had two mortgages both double digit rates. Boomers were all paying mortgages through the '70s to '90s. They were not availing themselves of high interest rates in their savings. Boomers were only in their 20s and 30s during the '80s, where millennials are today. It was not until the '90s that the senior part of the boomer cohort were able to build wealth and yes, they did well by it IF they had been savvy and frugal enough during the '70s and '80s to get their mortgages paid off in the '90s. There is a significant portion of boomers that have little wealth today (other than their house and maybe a DB pension) if they had not had the discipline to benefit from the '90s.

Your remarks are directed to the wrong generation. Try the pre-boomers born in the '10s to '30s where my parents were able to avail themselves of those 'benefits' of the '80s in their empty nester and retirement years. They are the ones who, if still alive, are now mostly in their 80s and beyond.

You need to come to terms with the actual facts..

Added: FWIW, there were 2 decades where wealth in capital (equity and bond) markets could be built if someone had the good fortune of not being overly burdened with debt. The '90s (other than the early '90s recession) and the '2010s.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As this is a financial forum., as a boomer, I had the opportunity to watch financial "innovation" evolve......and it hasn't ended well.

In my younger days, credit was confined to store "layaway" purchases. You brought your purchase to a layaway desk and they held it for you until you paid it off.

Then came the alternative lenders of the day......companies like Household Finance, who charged interest on purchases.

Then came credit cards......store and gas cards to start, with low limits. Then came Visa and Mastercharge with higher limits.

Then came lines of credit........and people took out lines of credit with their homes as collateral.

Then came mutual funds........with high fees and vast pools of capital demanding quarterly profits from companies, rather than growing the business.

Then came all the alternative lenders, payday loans and everything that exists today.

Auto loans got extended to accommodate rising prices for vehicles.........36, 48, 60, 72, 84, and now 96 months to pay.

For decades, so called "innovation" has led to a huge level of indebtedness being considered "normal".

Innovation is not always a good thing.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Willingness to answer polls like this may vary with age. But who knows.

Also, I'm technically a millennial but a lot more like Gen X based on values, work history, and how I use technology. Many millennials are shocked that I hate social media, etc.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Years ago I got involved in registering internet domain names and had 35 of them or so. I developed websites for them and used Google advertising.

I discovered the German .de internet domain was largely unused and registered some names through a proxy in Germany.

One of the names I registered and developed was for "kreditkarte.de" which is "credit card" in German.

It got no clicks or earnings at all and I did some research on why. Well........the Germans didn't adopt credit cards like North Americans.

The advance of credit in North America was unprecedented around the world and left a lot of people mired in debt.


----------



## MK7GTI (Mar 4, 2019)

I'm a millennial born in 1989. Still remember cell phones really taking off. I remember dial up internet and online gaming taking off. Grew up in a small town in Nova Scotia where my summers consisted of my parents kicked me out of the house at 8:00am, gave me $10 for food and told me to be home by 6:00pm. 

The world has come a long way from those days. 

I'm not sure the generational debate solves anything. Just people pointing fingers, even toes, and folded arms. 

One thing I do know is 100k mortgage at 15% is not the same as 600k at 3%. Housing.. right here, right now is a MASSIVE issue.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> I had two mortgages both double digit rates. Boomers were all paying mortgages through the '70s to '90s.


But what happened? Boomers who bought a house budgeted so they could pay their mortgages at those high rates, right? The amount of debt (amount of capital) was relatively low compared to today because when rates a high, prices drop and the debt is on the house price. And then rates kept decreasing, if you budgeted for $500/month mortgage at 10% rate but now rates drop to 8%, then 6%, and so one, you end up paying more and more of the capital, paying it faster, and you end up even paying your mortgage in less than 25 years. Meanwhile, your house price increases because of this, so you have more equity, you have more financial power.

Millennials are doing the same, they are budgeting so they could pay their mortgages. But since the rates are so low, the amount of debt (capital) is much higher because house prices go up when rates go down. And also because the rates are so low, the risk Millennials are taking is huge in the event of rising rates. Since 2010, the mortgage rates have mostly stagnated around an average of 2% to 3% for a full decade. Meanwhile, in the 80s, they've dropped from about 14% down to 8% and then in the 90s down to 6% and it has continued down to 4%, until it stagnated around 3% in the last decade.

This makes a huge difference when you budget to buy a house at a mortgage rate of 10%+ but as time pass by you end up paying less and less in interests, more and more in capital, while the value of your house skyrockets.

Meanwhile, Millennials who managed to buy a house at insane prices have seen their value skyrocket also due to lack of supply, but they are still paying the same interests and starting now they are paying more interests while their house price cool off. So they have a huge amount of capital to pay, but it turns out they are starting to pay less of that capital so their debt stays insanely high.

Who made the best decision? The one who bought a house at an insane bubble price in 2020 when rates were near zero (but have increased since then, increasing his debt burden) or the one not buying a house at the moment as prices are dropping a bit, because he doesn't want to pay high interest rates?

The 80s and 90s were amazing decades to build wealth for someone in his 20s, 30s with no assets, compared to someone in his 20s or 30s trying to build wealth in the 2010s but unable to save much debt to buy a house requiring insane down payments and debt burden. money risk free and unable to take that



AltaRed said:


> There is a significant portion of boomers that have little wealth today (other than their house and maybe a DB pension)


Other than their house that have skyrocketed in value and their awesome DB pension that fewer and fewer Millennial will have?



















(Yes, that is inflation-adjusted!)




AltaRed said:


> Added: FWIW, there were 2 decades where wealth in capital (equity and bond) markets could be built if someone had the good fortune of not being overly burdened with debt. The '90s (other than the early '90s recession) and the '2010s.



Yup, the 90s, when the Boomers were in the 40s, with high income and high job security due to their work experience and were able to buy a house that would skyrocket, if they hadn't already bought in during the 80s.
Yup, the 2010s, when the Boomers were in their 60s and had already accumulated all their wealth which would compound to even crazier wealth during that decade.
Yup, the 2010s, when the Millennials were in their 20s, with no assets yet and negative real interests on their risk-free savings trying to accumulate a down payment for a house which price skyrocketed 2x during that decade.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MK7GTI said:


> I'm not sure the generational debate solves anything. Just people pointing fingers, even toes, and folded arms.


And yet that is what this thread is devolving too.



> One thing I do know is 100k mortgage at 15% is not the same as 600k at 3%. Housing.. right here, right now is a MASSIVE issue.


I agree housing is a MASSIVE issue just exactly what we said in the '70s. 20 somethings were desperately trying to do to get into housing in the '70s when they couldn't save down payments fast enough to get into housing. Kind of hard to do with rapidly increasing house prices on a $10-15k per year engineering salary. We took on an 'off the books' personal loan from family to add to our first and second mortgages to finally get into the market in the mid-70s. It is the same discussion...... MrBlackhill still doesn't get it.

Added: MrBlackhill likes to data mine too. Toronto and Vancouver are simply extreme examples of housing in Canada. They are now (will be) in correction mode. MrBlackhill will look back on this in 2050 and wonder what all the fuss is about when he has a highly appreciated asset (house) and portfolio and wonder why his children and grandchildren are whining. It is all relative to where one is in life's journey.

MrBlackhill also does not really understand his DB pension graph either The pre-boomers who had the jobs in the '70s having obtained them in previous decades were mostly the ones who had the juicy corporate DB pensions AND years of service already behind them. These plans were in decline such by the time many boomers entering the workforce, or early in their careers in their '70s and '80s were losing access to DB plans and/or switched into DC plans. He might be surprised how many, especially the more junior boomers, have little in the way of DB plans in number and value. As always, the devil is in the details, mostly misunderstood and/or misrepresented.

It is time to stop whining. By the time you are 60, you will wonder what it is you were whining about in 2022. You'll have to put up with Gen-Zers and younger generations whining at you.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> But what happened? Boomers who bought a house budgeted so they could pay their mortgages at those high rates, right?


Home price to income ratios were VERY low back then, compared to now.

This chart stops at 2016. The Canadian ratio has gone really insane since then.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Off topic, but one of my favourite ranting points:

I think Canada needs to dramatically tighten mortgages (make them less available), especially to property investors. We currently have tremendous subsidies in the mortgage space. I would support mortgage subsidies for people owning a single property, maybe just the primary residence -- no more beyond that.

Beyond that, we need to make it much harder to get mortgages. And yes it would wipe out many property investors, speculators, and real estate hoarders. Screw 'em.

e.g. require a minimum 50% downpayment, except for a first time homeowner on their primary residence. This wouldn't even be a problem for well established and responsible property investors who have fully paid for their properties.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Zipper said:


> I am Silent (1943) Mrs. Zipper is Boomer (1949) and Zipper boys are Xers (1972-1974)


 ... a real silent gen(t). You gotta vote.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Off topic, but one of my favourite ranting points:
> 
> I think Canada needs to dramatically tighten mortgages (make them less available), especially to property investors. We currently have tremendous subsidies in the mortgage space. I would support mortgage subsidies for people owning a single property, maybe just the primary residence -- no more beyond that.
> 
> Beyond that, we need to make it much harder to get mortgages. And yes it would wipe out many property investors, speculators, and real estate hoarders. Screw 'em.


 ... do you realize just how "many people/occupations" are gonna to go to the poor house aka not being able to "enrich" themselves with your proposal of "one primary residence only" (per person, per couple or per family?).


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> I agree housing is a MASSIVE issue just exactly what we said in the '70s. 20 somethings were desperately trying to do to get into housing in the '70s when they couldn't save down payments fast enough to get into housing. Kind of hard to do with rapidly increasing house prices on a $10-15k per year engineering salary. We took on an 'off the books' personal loan from family to add to our first and second mortgages to finally get into the market in the mid-70s. It is the same discussion...... MrBlackhill still doesn't get it.


Though years, the 70s, 80s, 90s, I wonder why homeownership rate was pretty much constant in the 70s and 80s, then skyrocketed in the 90s (when Boomers were in their 40s) and then crashed hard in the 2010s (when Millennials were in their 30s) and currently below the levels of the 70s and 80s and certainly even lower if the graph had the data from 2016 to 2022. Yes, mortgage crisis in 2008 also, which we're gonna have a v2.0 soon enough.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> And yet that is what this thread is devolving too.
> 
> 
> I agree housing is a MASSIVE issue just exactly what we said in the '70s. 20 somethings were desperately trying to do to get into housing in the '70s when they couldn't save down payments fast enough to get into housing. Kind of hard to do with rapidly increasing house prices on a $10-15k per year engineering salary. We took on an 'off the books' personal loan from family to add to our first and second mortgages to finally get into the market in the mid-70s. It is the same discussion...... MrBlackhill still doesn't get it.
> ...


I wonder how an “off the books” loan for a down payment would be viewed today…..especially those with similar thinking as j4b. Fraud? Misrepresenting your debt load to prospective lenders? This obviously still happens today…..my parents did the same thing….borrowed some of their down payment from family For their first home.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Money172375 said:


> I wonder how an “off the books” loan for a down payment would be viewed today…..especially those with similar thinking as j4b. Fraud? Misrepresenting your debt load to prospective lenders? This obviously still happens today…..my parents did the same thing….borrowed some of their down payment from family For their first home.


I think many people are doing some loan fraud with mortgages / downpayments. That's a really interesting question, how this compares to the past. I have no idea.

I'm sure some of these GTA property investors today are going to the grey and black market for initial downpayments. Starting with zero money, borrowing a bunch in a non-traceable way, using it as a 5% downpayment.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> MrBlackhill likes to data mine too. Toronto and Vancouver are simply extreme examples of housing in Canada.


Full Canada real price if you prefer. It has 3x from the 70s/80s to the 2010s. In *real* terms. Who owned houses in year 2000 before the crazy skyrocketing? No Millennial, a few Gen X and lots of Boomers. Imagine adding the data for 2010s...!


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

sags said:


> As this is a financial forum., as a boomer, I had the opportunity to watch financial "innovation" evolve......and it hasn't ended well.
> 
> Innovation is not always a good thing.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Imagine in 2050 showing the data for who owns the bulk of housing then? Today's millennials mostly.

Imagine showing the data on an affordability basis rather than a price/income ratio. The latter is a useless measure without the overlay of mortgage rates and terms. If we happen to return to 10% interest rate mortgages in the next 6 months, we can then start to talk in 2024-2025 about where housing prices might be when most everyone is paying 10%.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrBlackhill said:


> Who owned houses in year 2000 before the crazy skyrocketing? No Millennial, a few Gen X and lots of Boomers.


So you are saying the millennials are responsible for the bidding war that drove up the house prices?


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

cainvest said:


> So you are saying the millennials are responsible for the bidding war that drove up the house prices?


No, people who saw opportunity for housing as an investment, people who bought a second house or more. Those were certainly not the broke Millennials.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> I'm an old Millenial, the ones that don't fit too well with that generation, or with the GenXers for that matter. Young enough to be good with technology, but old enough to remember a world without cell phones and home internet (and I would argue it was better).


I am technically a Gen-Xer, but I don't feel like I fit into that generation very well (my uncle is a Gen-Xer). It sounds like you are also a Xennial like me -- someone born in the late 70's or early 80's who has difficulty identifying with either Gen-X or Millennials. It sounds like James also falls into this micro-generation. Xennials have been described as having a mostly analogue childhood and a digital adulthood. We went through high school with minimal technology aside from video games. Few families had home computers or cell phones unless they were quite well off. Things most millennials took for granted, except for maybe the poorest ones.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I suspect it is primarily the Gen-Xers and Millennials who have driven up house prices in recent times. mostly due to FOMO, bank of Mom and Dad, and easy credit. It is also true that both Boomers and Gen-Xers bought real estate as investment opportunities to make money as landlords rather than capital markets, partially or wholly. Today's landlords of family housing will be primarily Gen-Xers based on my anedoctal knowledge in our extended family. Not one boomer has a second home but a number of Gen-Xers have purchased condos primarily as part of their investment portfolios.

Today's millennials will be embarrassed about their whining in 30 years when they hold the wealth as Boomers do today.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> bank of Mom and Dad


*Bank of _Boomer_ Mom and Dad.

Because they are wealthy. Because their house price skyrocketed, their assets also in the 2010s, etc.



AltaRed said:


> Gen-Xers and Millennials who have driven up house prices in recent times


The high income ones only as we keep increasing the wealth gap, unfortunately.



AltaRed said:


> Today's millennials will be embarrassing themselves in 30 years when they hold the wealth as Boomers do today.


If that happens, I'll make donations, I'll pass it on to my kid quickly and I'll keep voting to help the poor, not the rich. I'll make sure we fight climate change and that we reduce wealth gap. I'll teach my kid to reduce consumerism and I'll hope other parents will so that the future generations stop this crazy consumerism spiral.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MrBlackhill said:


> If that happens, I'll make donations, I'll pass it on to my kid quickly and I'll keep voting to help the poor, not the rich. I'll make sure we fight climate change and that we reduce wealth gap. I'll teach my kid to reduce consumerism and I'll hope other parents will so that the future generations stop this crazy consumerism spiral.


Your idealism is admirable and the same sort of things us Boomers said in the '60s and '70s. It will be you wealthy Millenials doing the same thing us Boomers are doing today. I am pleased that you are starting to see the similarities. Just be aware that your views will change as you age. They always do.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> Your idealism is admirable and the same sort of things us Boomers said in the '60s and '70s. It will be you wealthy Millenials doing the same thing us Boomers are doing today. I am pleased that you are starting to see the similarities. Just be aware that your views will change as you age. They always do.


I don't know, I'm in my mid thirties and already renting a fully-furnished unit, including electricity and internet for $300/month to a young Gen Z in Montreal. I think that's already a way to help the next generation. I don't think that as I age I'll suddenly think that I should jack that price to 3x. That price will remain the same no matter how long he stays with us.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> I don't know, I'm in my mid thirties and already renting a fully-furnished unit, including electricity and internet for $300/month to a young Gen Z in Montreal. I think that's already a way to help the next generation. I don't think that as I age I'll suddenly think that I should jack that price to 3x. That price will remain the same no matter how long he stays with us.


Is that the other half of your duplex? It sounds like that guy is getting an incredible deal! Is he someone you already knew?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MrBlackhill said:


> I don't know, I'm in my mid thirties and already renting a fully-furnished unit, including electricity and internet for $300/month to a young Gen Z in Montreal. I think that's already a way to help the next generation. I don't think that as I age I'll suddenly think that I should jack that price to 3x. That price will remain the same no matter how long he stays with us.


You are not being very sincere using a very special case to argue your case. It undermines credibility. With all sincerity, I _do_ suggest you print and laminate the 30 posts so far and re-open the file in 30 years. You can then judge the broad views you express today with those of your generation at that time. I mean that in a sincere way.

Added: This energy in this thread would be better directed to tackling some of the planet's current issues, namely a meaningful effort to GHG reductions of all kinds as rapidly as is pragmatic to do so. The signs are all too real for a troubled future.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> This energy in this thread would be better directed to tackling some of the planet's current issues, namely a meaningful effort to GHG reductions of all kinds as rapidly as is pragmatic to do so. The signs are all too real for a troubled future.


Something with definitely agree on, so we'll up this debate on the positive with this agreement.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Spudd said:


> Is that the other half of your duplex? It sounds like that guy is getting an incredible deal! Is he someone you already knew?


A young African that came here for his studies that my wife knew from 15 years ago when she did a program in Africa and he was just a kid at that moment.

It's not the other half of our duplex, it's our basement which we converted into a fully independent and liveable unit with kitchen and bathroom.

The other half of our duplex is a 3-bedroom unit for $1285/month, unfurnished, no electricity, no internet.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> Imagine in 2050 showing the data for who owns the bulk of housing then? Today's millennials mostly.
> 
> Imagine showing the data on an affordability basis rather than a price/income ratio. The latter is a useless measure without the overlay of mortgage rates and terms. If we happen to return to 10% interest rate mortgages in the next 6 months, we can then start to talk in 2024-2025 about where housing prices might be when most everyone is paying 10%.


You realize that companies are buying RE now right? You know Blackrock?

I was just on the market in Canada and it's very clear the new developments are foreign investment

Cheap made cramped cookie cutter homes with mandarin on the signs and websites


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> A young African that came here for his studies that my wife knew from 15 years ago when she did a program in Africa and he was just a kid at that moment.
> 
> It's not the other half of our duplex, it's our basement which we converted into a fully independent and liveable unit with kitchen and bathroom.
> 
> The other half of our duplex is a 3-bedroom unit for $1285/month, unfurnished, no electricity, no internet.


That makes more sense. I was thinking $300/mo for half a duplex would be incredible. It's nice of you guys to help out your wife's friend.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

MrBlackhill said:


> But what happened?
> Boomers who bought a house budgeted so they could pay their mortgages at those high rates, right?


Budgeted for a 21%+ or 15%+ mortgage rate?

The high rates were a shock to many. Some gave up on buying a home for years, some were able to tighten their belts drastically, some borrowed from friends/family and some lost their home.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that people simply budgeted for it and kept buying.




MrBlackhill said:


> ... The amount of debt (amount of capital) was relatively low compared to today because when rates a high, prices drop and the debt is on the house price ...


People at the time talked about how the mortgage rate increases meant the mortgage plus house bills took essentially _all_ of their income or more.




MrBlackhill said:


> ... And then rates kept decreasing, if you budgeted for $500/month mortgage at 10% rate but now rates drop to 8%, then 6%, and so ...


After eighteen years of 10%+ then they started dropping. Fifteen percent plus was a two year period that including the 21+% spike.




MrBlackhill said:


> ... Meanwhile, your house price increases because of this, so you have more equity, you have more financial power.


Since you keep mentioning Toronto real estate, where's the 1989 to 1996 continuous drop included in your calculations? 


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

james4beach said:


> Home price to income ratios were VERY low back then, compared to now ...


Hmmm ... my co-worker who bought in the early '90's didn't buy as big as others where the house price was 5.5 his annual salary.

Two sisters I know about a townhouse in 2020 where the house price was 6.5 their annual salary.


BTW, the 90's house was 900 square feet while the 2020's townhouse is 1600 square feet.


Cheers


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eclectic21 said:


> BTW, the 90's house was 900 square feet while the 2020's townhouse is 1600 square feet.


Yes, home sizes have become enormous. The average home square footage has steadily gone up since the 1950s and, as I recall, increased dramatically starting around the 1990s or 2000 when the Americans started with McMansions.

These days, in Canadian suburbs, mansions seem to be the norm. Obscenely large homes. And TV shows all show luxury home furnishings, etc.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

AltaRed said:


> ... Today's landlords of family housing will be primarily Gen-Xers based on my anedoctal knowledge in our extended family. Not one boomer has a second home but a number of Gen-Xers have purchased condos primarily as part of their investment portfolios ...


The boomers in my family only own one primary residence (no duplexes or tri-plexes). 
If they are making rental income, it's for a room to a friend or someone who can't pay the going rates.

None of the kids own a house ... but they are teens, just starting out.


Cheers


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

I don't have any data to support so it may be of little consequence to share but most of the income property owners I know are late boomers, early gen Xers. (born in the 1960s)


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Eclectic21 said:


> BTW, the 90's house was 900 square feet while the 2020's townhouse is 1600 square feet.


Instead of replying back about what we don't agree, I'll reply back to what we agree.

In other threads I'm complaining about materialism, consumerism and luxuries.

Actually, house sizes (in the US) went from about 1,600 sq.ft in the 70s to 2,400 sq.ft in the 2010s, all that while household size dropped from 3 to 2.5.

I really don't understand why people need so much space... Oh, yeah, right, because of consumerism and taste for luxury.

I lived 5 years in a 400 sq.ft apartment, 4 of those years were with my wife. I now live in 1,000 sq.ft with my wife and baby.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

At the same time, apartments and condos -- which is what most people can actually afford to buy in 2022 -- are much smaller than they were 40 years ago. It's the upper middle income and wealthy who are buying detached, who are getting more space than ever, while everyone else is making do with less. Logically, this makes sense because most of the value is in the land. If you buy a vacant lot for 750K, would you build a 1500 sqft house for 250K, or a 3000 sqft one for 500K? The larger house is more marketable. Not many people would pay 1M for the smaller house when they could get double the size for 1.25M. Edit: I'm not accounting for the builder's profit, but you get the idea.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


> Actually, house sizes (in the US) went from about 1,600 sq.ft in the 70s to 2,400 sq.ft in the 2010s, all that while household size dropped from 3 to 2.5.
> 
> I really don't understand why people need so much space... Oh, yeah, right, because of consumerism and taste for luxury.


Yeah that's pretty gross.

Basically it's greed and consumerism.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

MrBlackhill said:


> Instead of replying back about what we don't agree, I'll reply back to what we agree ...


No comment on the ratios being close?

Moving on to where we partially agree ...



james4beach said:


> MrBlackhill said:
> 
> 
> > n other threads I'm complaining about materialism, consumerism and luxuries.
> ...


Are these the only factors though?

I can remember looking at many houses around the 900 square feet size in the '90's. Only two of them (one of which I bought) was built in the '70's. All the rest were built in the '40's and '50's.

When the two sister's estimated that the townhouse was 1200 square feet, the insurance agent called to ask them to check again as builders were starting townhouses of that age at 1500 square feet. He correctly doubted their estimate.


Just because one wants a smaller house, doesn't mean there is much of a supply. Particularly with many of the smaller, post war houses being bought up, demolished with either a larger single family home replacing it or a duplex.


Cheers


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Eclectic21 said:


> No comment on the ratios being close?


No, first because your co-worker and the two sisters are individuals, not statistics. Second, because in this thread the price-to-income ratio was dismissed as it doesn't take into account the mortgage cost when rate is high.

Though I could reply back to all those issues with this.












Eclectic21 said:


> Are these the only factors though?
> 
> I can remember looking at many houses around the 900 square feet size. Only two of them (one of which I bought) was built in the '70's. All the rest were built in the '40's and '50's.
> 
> ...


I'll happily blame all the people living in low-density areas, mainly rural areas, who are buying into all those housing projects of 2,000+ sq.ft.

I live in Montreal and there are no single family detached houses being built here, only many, many condo towers. Otherwise most of the population live in apartments built in the 1960s and in all of the plexes built between 1910s and 1950s, so we are all living in the same unit sizes as our parents and grandparents.

The average condo size in Montreal ranges from 700 sq.ft to 1,050 sq.ft. The average apartment size in Montreal ranges from 650 sq.ft to 1,000 sq.ft.

There are a few issues starting recently though, like the rich who are converting their duplex or triplex into a single-family house for themselves, which means they are decreasing the housing supply by 1-2 unit in order to double their living space.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrBlackhill said:


>


I love how people spin excuses for how this ratio can possibly be acceptable. Note, the US housing crash wiped out a lot of that reckless consumer borrowing / HELOC addiction etc.

That never happened in Canada, and we've just been full steam ahead with this consumer credit bubble, encouraged by the Bank of Canada and mortgage stimulus by government. When it goes on long enough, people start to think it's normal and can last forever.

By the way, the Canadian ratio is now at 180

The signs of the bubble are everywhere. A few months ago I was biking in the park, and overheard several children talking about the home renovations being done by their various families. When I go walking in the city, I almost always overhear people talking about their latest real estate ambitions. Everywhere you look, people are driving shiny new cars, often high-end cars, all funded by cheap credit of course. A few decades ago you'd never see a sight like that on a typical street.

There is a sickness across this nation and it's very dangerous.

One dangerous scenario: housing and mortgages start to collapse, and the Bank of Canada decides to rescue them at all costs. Probably abandons QT and maybe even cuts interest rates while inflation is high. Inflation takes root (since the BoC chooses stimulus over extinguishing inflation) and becomes a generational problem, and we're stuck with 6% inflation for 10 to 15 years.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

james4beach said:


> By the way, the Canadian ratio is now at 180
> 
> The signs of the bubble are everywhere.


Yup, and some Boomers still won't admit that Millennials are living in very dangerous economic times. Millennials had the choice between buying into the bubble stock market, the bubble housing, the near-zero-to-negative real yield bonds or the negative real yield savings account. And we're now even adding high inflation combined with low rates to the game!


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I love how people spin excuses for how this ratio can possibly be acceptable.


Exactly. It drives me nuts.

But then we just get nonsense like "The budget will balance itself".
Yeah right


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Yup, and some Boomers still won't admit that Millennials are living in very dangerous economic times. Millennials had the choice between buying into the bubble stock market, the bubble housing, the near-zero-to-negative real yield bonds or the negative real yield savings account. And we're now even adding high inflation combined with low rates to the game!


Maybe the Millenials could pay off their debt?
The idea that they should be investing in stocks or savings accounts instead of paying off their debt is part of the problem.

Secondly, I personally buy into the non-bubble stock market, instead of the bubble stuff.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

I am a GenX and my circle of friends includes Boomers, GenX & Millennials. Although three different generations, each of the generation seems to be moving through life in a similar fashion. All are hard working, down to earth, both spouses work, livable family incomes (some more than others), etc. All have, or are facing, various challenges not uncommon to anyone else. One commonality among the GenX & Millennials in my circle is that we all encourage our parents to spend their money versus worrying about leaving an estate. Travel, make life easier for themselves, the odd splurge. 

About 25% have one or more recreation or rental property. The Boomer group has a big lead in vacation properties, but they are for family use only and none of them rent them out. The GenX & Millennials (even split) lead the group in rental properties. (All are in for the long haul, not flippers and have the financial means to hold them through tough times, work hard to provide a good value, etc)

The Millennials (friends & family) are all doing fine. All have good work ethic, put effort into their careers, own homes or plan to buy one, put money aside in TFSA and/or RRSPs, and a few are doing this while single. All of them are focused on forging their own path and making it on their own.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

I would be curious to know what, if any, impact income tax and other various consumption taxes have had. I would suspect current generations are paying more and that it will get worse.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Post #46 is data mining that doesn't really deserve a response. Canadians of all stripes have been indebting themselves with easy credit for a wide range of things from mortgages to HELOCs (ATM machines) to consumer loans. As James said, all the graph shows is US consumers learned the hard way in the financial crisis... nothing else. Canadians didn't experience that.

interest rates are what can and hopefully will correct this madness, especially by Canadians. It is way overdue and I would like to see a wide system flush.

Added: It is refreshing to see Gator13's post #51. That is closer to reality as I see it.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Maybe the Millenials could pay off their debt?
> The idea that they should be investing in stocks or savings accounts instead of paying off their debt is part of the problem.
> 
> Secondly, I personally buy into the non-bubble stock market, instead of the bubble stuff.


How can you pay off your debt when you have to take on debt to be able to live? That's the issue the low-income Millennials are facing.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> Post #46 is data mining that doesn't really deserve a response. Canadians of all stripes have been indebting themselves with easy credit for a wide range of things from mortgages to HELOCs (ATM machines) to consumer loans. As James said, all the graph shows is US consumers learned the hard way in the financial crisis... nothing else. Canadians didn't experience that.
> 
> interest rates are what can and hopefully will correct this madness, especially by Canadians. It is way overdue and I would like to see a wide system flush.
> 
> Added: It is refreshing to see Gator13's post #51. That is closer to reality as I see it.


You find @Gator13 reply refreshing when he talks about his circle of friends but my post is "data mining"? Clear bias here.

First, you should say "cherry picking data", because "data mining" is the process of turning a large amount of raw data into useful information. So if you truly meant that I was data mining, thanks, yes, I turned a large amount of data into useful information.

In my post there was a 30-year graph, maybe you call this cherry picking data?
Or is it the stats about my city, the 2nd biggest in Canada? It's still stats, down to the sample of a large city. So it's clear that it doesn't apply to all of Canada, but at least to its 2nd biggest city.

A circle of friends is not stats, _that_ is a form of cherry picking data.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MrBlackhill said:


> How can you pay off your debt when you have to take on debt to be able to live? That's the issue the low-income Millennials are facing.


That is low income anyone. I think you should consider looking at this from a macro level to get off your 'woe is me millennial fixation' .


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> That is low income anyone. I think you should consider looking at this from a macro level to get off your 'woe is me millennial fixation' .


Well, definitely not only the low income Millennials.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MrBlackhill said:


> Well, definitely not only the low income Millennials.


Every 20something and 30something is indebted disproportionately, no matter the generation, since that is when they are lower income relative to their elders and have the highest burdens getting established with home and family. The same was true when the boomers were in their 20's and 30's in the '70s. Nothing is particularly special or unique about Millennials today that has not taken place with every young generation since time began.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

_For many years, baby boomers (because of their demographic weight) were driving changes in homeownership rates across Canada. But this is different for younger generations. Younger adults aged 20 to 34—those often referred to as the millennial generation— are slower to get into the housing market than was the case for the baby boomers at that age.

To demonstrate this, one can compare homeownership rates of baby boomers at age 30 in 1981, with millennials aged 30 in 2016. At the age of 30, among millennials who lived in their own home, just over half (50.2%) were owners in 2016, compared with 55.5% of boomers in 1981.

There is also a generational difference in the types of dwellings in which young adults live. In 1981, 44.4% of baby boomers lived in a single-detached home compared with a rate of 35.0% for millennials in 2016. Young adults in 2016 were also more likely to live in apartments than their 1981 counterparts. This is one example of how the housing landscape has changed across generations because of housing trends such as urbanization and increased apartment building construction._

Statistics Canada (now imagine this data from 2016 being updated in 2022, as house prices kept skyrocketing)


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> Every 20something and 30something is indebted disproportionately, no matter the generation, since that is when they are lower income relative to their elders and have the highest burdens getting established with home and family. The same was true when the boomers were in their 20's and 30's in the '70s. Nothing is particularly special or unique about Millennials today that has not taken place with every young generation since time began.


If it's all things equal, then why debt-to-income ratio keeps increasing?

If you believe it's because Millennials aren't managing their debts properly, bring stats to me proving this. There are stats in other threads saying that Millennials are more financially aware than Boomers.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

Can we switch over the conversation to the invisible gen xers? So my understanding is they are known to have entered the workforce in a period of low employment. Was that the 90s? And yet many genxers benefitted from housing prices increasing as my sister’s (born in 1971 ) house appreciated from 300000 to 1.2 million. They are also known as the sandwich generation and for dealing with aging parents. Personally i’m glad my parents benefitted from a run up in housing prices as you hear more anecdotal stories in the states of people having to care for their aging parents financially. No question people buy their house later than the boomers did.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> How can you pay off your debt when you have to take on debt to be able to live? That's the issue the low-income Millennials are facing.


You don't need to take on debt to live.
There are real poor people out there, I accept that.

But most of them are simply spending too much.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> If it's all things equal, then why debt-to-income ratio keeps increasing?
> 
> If you believe it's because Millennials aren't managing their debts properly, bring stats to me proving this. There are stats in other threads saying that Millennials are more financially aware than Boomers.


Not all things are equal, Millennials are overspending.

Show me any stats that Millenials are living within their means.
The reality is people can survive (barely) on the various provincial welfare programs, most of which pay far less than an almost full time minimum wage job.
If you can get a full time job, you have enough.

It's possible to survive on less and stay out of debt. At times I llived on a case of Mr Noodle and walking (to save on bus fare), and carrying 2 thermoses of home made coffee, to avoid buying one.

Now to be fair I only lived like that for a few months at a time, but I had no money, I was broke, and I lived like it.
Of course now if an old guy says "rice and beans" to save money, apparently that's outrageous.

For too many people today "broke" still means still means a $1k smartphone and starbucks coffee.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

latebuyer said:


> Can we switch over the conversation to the invisible gen xers?


We dealt with our s*&&*, and started taking responsibility for stuff.
You play the hand you were dealt. I remember growing up with all the new about how things were looking bad for us, oh well, put on your big boy pants and deal with it.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

Wow! I didn’t say it was all bad for gen xers. Did i not mention my sister making money on her house? Just trying to understand the generation. Some people are sure grumpy on this forum and not a big surprise who it is! Each generation has their challenges, not just the boomers and millennials. I’m actually embarrassed to say as a genxer i don’t understand my own generation.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MrBlackhill said:


> If it's all things equal, then why debt-to-income ratio keeps increasing?
> 
> If you believe it's because Millennials aren't managing their debts properly, bring stats to me proving this. There are stats in other threads saying that Millennials are more financially aware than Boomers.


Read post #53 for your answer. All generations of Canadians have indebted themselves in recent times due to easy credit which is really what your graph in post #46 is saying. Americans had to deal with it as a result of the financial crisis while Canadians did not. I think you misinterpreted your own graph you posted.

Boomers expecially are carrying more debt than their historical cohort ever has. Shame on them. However, we also know every demographic is carrying more debt today. That is what easy credit will do. It is not hard to figure it out. I am sure you could find good information via StatsCan.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

latebuyer said:


> Wow! I didn’t say it was all bad for gen xers. Did i not mention my sister making money on her house? Just trying to understand the generation. Some people are sure grumpy on this forum and not a big surprise who it is! Each generation has their challenges, not just the boomers and millennials. I’m actually embarrassed to say as a genxer i don’t understand my own generation.


Like everything else, aging boomers (mostly in their 70s now) had a somewhat different experience than late boomers (mostly in their 60s now). The same is true for Gen-Xers I think given the difference between those currently in their 50s vs those still in their 40s. There is a fairly significant dicotomy between youngest and oldest. Most Gen-Xers I know, either family or those I interact with mostly via customer/vendor/professional relationships seem to be doing quite well. More savvy overall than the boomers before them and they work hard. Those in our extended family all were able to establish good professional careers even if they were 30 by the time it happened, and even if they were mostly in their 30s before they could buy their first house.

I have far less interaction with Millennials but those I do interface with are mostly professionals and those in which I get to know somewhat seem to be doing well. I really think there is far too much 'blinkers on' whining by some folk. We have one 'senior' Millenial in our family that often whines 'woe is me' even though that individual became a homeowner circa age 35. Just not a $1M house like he thinks he should be entitled too relative to his Gen-Xer relatives. There seems to be an impatience/expectation by some that think they should be in the same financial position as those 10+ years older than themselves. It will come with hard work and time.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

MrBlackhill said:


> A circle of friends is not stats, _that_ is a form of cherry picking data.


It's my real life example. I am fortunate to have Boomers, GenX & Millennials as friends. I appreciate the opportunity to learn from the Boomers who have already been down a lot of the paths. There is some truth to the saying wisdom comes with age. Unfortunately you only start understanding that as you get older. It's good to have friends the same age. They are on the front line with you at the same time. It's good to have younger friends as well. Energy, enthusiasm and a fresh perspective.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

Thanks, i never thought anything really good came of comparisons. I’m single and if i spent all my time comparing myself to couples i’d be very unhappy indeed.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Not all things are equal, Millennials are overspending.
> 
> Show me any stats that Millenials are living within their means.





AltaRed said:


> Read post #53 for your answer. All generations of Canadians have indebted themselves in recent times due to easy credit which is really what your graph in post #46 is saying. Americans had to deal with it as a result of the financial crisis while Canadians did not. I think you misinterpreted your own graph you posted.
> 
> Boomers expecially are carrying more debt than their historical cohort ever has. Shame on them. However, we also know every demographic is carrying more debt today. That is what easy credit will do. It is not hard to figure it out. I am sure you could find good information via StatsCan.


_Millennials, which the study defined as those born between 1981 and 1997, with ages ranging from 21 to 37, "paid a price" for coming of age during the Great Recession. They had to face historically weak labor demand and unusually tight credit conditions.

Dealing with those financial obstacles probably created "attitudes toward saving and spending" that might be "more permanent for millennials than for members of generations that were more established in their careers and lives at that time," the study says.

Despite millennials' much maligned, unofficial hipster status, the study indicates they're pretty mainstream.

Their spending on motor vehicles — which is sensitive to economic expansion and contraction, and accounts for about 20 percent of retail sales — shows millennial households have similar tastes and preferences to older generations, as does their spending on food and housing.

*Their consumption habits are similar to their parents' and grandparents' — millennials just have less money to spend.*_









Why Aren't Millennials Spending? They're Poorer Than Previous Generations, Fed Says


Millennials are less well off than members of earlier generations when they were young. They have lower earnings, fewer assets and less wealth, a new Federal Reserve study says.




www.npr.org





-----

_The middle class is on the decline across the wealthiest countries in the world and the shift is hitting the youngest generations hardest, according to a new report published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

*Today, just 60% of millennials (those born between 1983 and 2002) are considered middle-class, compared to 70% of baby boomers (those born between 1943 and 1964) when they were in their twenties*, according to the report, “Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class.” Worldwide, the share of households considered middle-class has slipped from 64% in the 1980s to 61% today.

*Income inequality is a driving factor*, the report says*. It explains that while average earnings have stagnated or barely risen in developed nations over the past 30 years, the cost of living has increased dramatically, while jobs have become less stable. At the same time, the richest households are accumulating even more wealth.*

“Current findings reveal that the top 10% of in the income distribution holds almost half of the total wealth, while the bottom 40% accounts for only 3%,” the OECD reports.

As the rich get richer, in other words, the middle class is hollowing out.

Although the middle class makes up more than half of the population of OECD countries, it is shrinking. *In fact, “since the baby boomer generation, the middle-income group has grown smaller with each successive generation,” the report notes.*

Because of that, young people are carrying increasing amounts of debt and being priced out of the housing market.

*That’s due, in part, to income stagnation. Median wages grew by an average of 0.3% per year between 2007 and 2017, according to the report, compared to more than three times that between the mid-1980s and mid-1990s.*

Meanwhile, the cost of living continues to increase. Housing costs, in particular, account for a larger share of a middle-class family’s budget. Home prices have grown “twice as fast as inflation and one-and-a-half times faster than the household median income,” per the report.

Adults aged 18 to 29 may feel the squeeze most, thanks to the combination of rising costs and low wages: Those factors can make it difficult for them to pay off loans and save for the future.

They are saving less than in the past and going further into debt, which leaves more people on the verge of falling out of the middle class, the report says. Job insecurity is also on the rise, it notes, with one in six jobs is currently at risk of being automated.

*The shrinking of the middle class means that fewer millennials are able to afford the same opportunities that baby boomers did at their age*, such owning a home and pursuing higher education.

“The middle class used to be an aspiration. For many generations it meant the assurance of living in a comfortable house and affording a rewarding lifestyle,” reads the report. “However, there are now signs that this bedrock of our democracies and economic growth is not as stable as in the past.”

Quart said being middle class used to be equated with stability. Now, it “implies insecurity.”

And young people in particular are struggling, she pointed out. “Stop blaming yourself and start blaming the system, or start blaming the deeper causes of your economic fragility and instability,” she said. “There are forces that are constructed against you, everything from your taxes to whether you can have job security.”_









Here's why millennials have to fight harder than their parents did to stay in the middle class


Only 60% of millennials are considered middle-class, compared with 70% of baby boomers back when they were the same age, according to a new report from the OECD, and "the middle-income group has grown smaller with each successive generation."




www.cnbc.com


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Gator13 said:


> It's my real life example. I am fortunate to have Boomers, GenX & Millennials as friends. I appreciate the opportunity to learn from the Boomers who have already been down a lot of the paths. There is some truth to the saying wisdom comes with age. Unfortunately you only start understanding that as you get older. It's good to have friends the same age. They are on the front line with you at the same time. It's good to have younger friends as well. Energy, enthusiasm and a fresh perspective.


You can share it, my reply wasn't against you. I was just pointing out that it's anecdotal, as a reply to @AltaRed.

My close friends are 27 to 47-years-old. My oldest friend, a Gen X, was able to buy a condo in Montreal only recently, during his 40s. The second oldest friend I know, also Gen X, was also only able to buy a house in her 40s, even though it was out of urban areas. The youngest one I know bought a 700 sq.ft condo recently, but she's in top 10% income and had help from her parents. The second youngest one I know bought a house recently... in a village of 2,500 habitants in the middle of nowhere, at 30 minutes drive of the closest highway and 40 minutes of the closest city of 100,000 habitants. I also know a family with 3 kids who own a house, which they bought for less than $250,000 a few years ago in a rural area and they call anything above that way too expensive. They both work, he does lots of overtime and every time we see them it feels like they are going into a burn out or depression pretty soon. All the other people I know are renting. The only friends that I know who spend on travel or activities are either top 10% income or in their 40s, all the others just meet for a picnic and nothing else.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

_Worldwide, the share of households considered middle-class has slipped from 64% in the 1980s to 61% today._

This actually doesn’t seem that much lower.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

An article from 2021









How the pandemic pushed Canadian millennials to home ownership - National | Globalnews.ca


As mortgage rates "fell to historically low levels", Canadian millennials saw "a window of opportunity and went for it", expert says.




globalnews.ca


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

latebuyer said:


> _Worldwide, the share of households considered middle-class has slipped from 64% in the 1980s to 61% today._
> 
> This actually doesn’t seem that much lower.


None of the data is that much different for generations some ~35-40 years apart. Nonetheless, we should be using StatsCan data rather than US data which is likely different enough to muddy the waters even more, e.g. minimum wages Canada vs USA (wage equality tighter in Canada), age range differences between the generational labels, tax deductible mortgages in the US vs here, the higher cost of US college tuition, etc, etc. 

On the wage issue itself, I suspect the range between the quintiles is much broader in the US than here.Society seems to be more predatory stateside. StatsCan has good data on that aspect but it would take some work to do actual comparisons with US data, for whatever purpose it might serve. I suspect most of us don't really care.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> *interest rates are what can and hopefully will correct this madness*, especially by Canadians. It is way overdue and I would like to see a wide system flush.
> 
> Added: It is refreshing to see Gator13's post #51. That is closer to reality as I see it.


I'm with you there AltaRed, I'm hoping that higher interest rates will correct this and flush out the system.

Also very nice post from @Gator13


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

I didn't realize we are so old. No wonder this place can be grumpy.

I'm going to start a thread, asking people about their latest surgeries. That ought to be quite popular.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

Yes, probably the gap is even lower in Canada. For me, i don’t like the hierarchy of lower class, middle class and upper class. Someone who is lower class may be living within their means more so than a middle class person and doing perfectly well. I dislike the value judgement.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

TomB16 said:


> I didn't realize we are so old. No wonder this place can be grumpy.
> 
> I'm going to start a thread, asking people about their latest surgeries. That ought to be quite popular.


It's not very surprising that it's mostly older people who are interested in stocks and investing.

The peak income earning years occur in the 40s and 50s (for all generations) so most people aren't even thinking about investments in their 20s and 30s, or don't have the free cashflow for that. My guess is that most people don't get seriously into investing until their 40s or 50s.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

I'm a young Gen X and wife is an old millenial. Oldest millenial is 40-something now.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

latebuyer said:


> Can we switch over the conversation to the invisible gen xers? So my understanding is they are known to have entered the workforce in a period of low employment.


I'd prefer we didn't talk about us invisible gen xers. We have managed to do just fine by being ignored by everyone else for most of our lives. I find it somewhat ironic that many of the boomers I know that complain about millennials are in fact parents of millennials. Wouldn't that mean the weaknesses and shortcomings of millennials be the result of those that raised and educated them (boomer teachers and parents)? 

On a more serious note I believe many of the stereotypes about generational groups are simply just that and nothing more. I am sure some of the silent gen felt their boomer kids were lazy and incompetent as well. 

Silent gen "What have you accomplished with your life?" 
Boomer "Lots of stuff. I got a job, a spouse, a car and some kids."
Silent gent "Well that's nothing I was in a war. We saved the world from dictators! and we did it without having electricity!)
Now back to our generational differences.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I want to know what happened to the anti-war and pro-environmental idealism of the boomers.

This is the generation which had a powerful backlash to the Vietnam War. And who grew up with the threat of global nuclear war. From what I read (and saw in pop culture) it sounds like the Baby Boomers had quite an anti-war streak in them, also championed the new concepts of environmentalism. The seeds of that started in the 1960s, for example, "Silent Spring". So much happened in the 60s and 70s, easy for us to forget about now, but huge changes. New regulations and protections for water, rivers, reduction in pollution, banning harmful chemicals, DDT, etc.

I want to know what happened to all that. Did these values just fizzle out over time? Or are they still there (among the boomers), just not very loud any more.

Because I sure haven't heard a lot of anti-war sentiment. Ever since 2001, it seems to be... bomb this, bomb that, wipe out these enemies.

What happened to all the peace-loving boomers? And why are so many boomers fighting against environmental initiatives, even still denying climate change? The younger generations are far more concerned about environmental issues and much more aware of the climate problems we're dealing with.

Another answer may be: the Boomers *did* shape the world with these values. The post WW2 era has been a relatively peaceful one in world history, and we're all lucky to have been alive during these good times. Environmental awareness started with the Boomers, so we're hopefully on a better path to protecting our environment -- even though I'm pretty disappointed with the insanely high oil & gas consumption by the Boomers. But still, I think many positive changes happened while the Boomers were in charge.

An argument can be made that humanity, with the Silent Generation & Boomers in charge, became more peaceful, less violent and more civilized. Obviously there are still war criminals, but I think people are more aware (today) of war atrocities, and we now punish people engaged in genocides, war crimes, etc. If you look at examples such as US military and spy agencies who tortured and brutalized people, things which might have just been shrugged off in the past (or even applauded!) are now socially unacceptable.

These are refinements in society and we might have the Boomers to thank.

I do realize that many of these movements started a very long time ago, before the Boomers, but I do applaud the Boomers for continuing to push for things like women's rights and many other societal improvements. The Boomers are the ones which normalized many modern values that young people now take for granted.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Oh and let's not forget another important Baby Boomer contribution... a crazy stock market! Ever since the 1980s, pretty much when Boomers got into their careers and starting pumping money into stocks, the market has had crazy gains.

I think statistically, the stock market since 1980 or 1990 (or so) has been very unusual. Historically speaking this has been a period of absurdly high performance compared to historical averages.

Sometimes I wonder if it's a bit of a generational ponzi scheme, where the Boomers loaded it up with their money, and it requires continued massive inflows from Millennials & Gen Z to keep going like this.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

With due respect to millennials, a bunch of them seem to think losing money on high frequency trading is the equivalent of the 1930s era depression.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

londoncalling said:


> I'd prefer we didn't talk about us invisible gen xers. We have managed to do just fine by being ignored by everyone else for most of our lives. I find it somewhat ironic that many of the boomers I know that complain about millennials are in fact parents of millennials. Wouldn't that mean the weaknesses and shortcomings of millennials be the result of those that raised and educated them (boomer teachers and parents)?


The boomers actually have both Gen-Xer and Millennial offspring. Boomers are currently aged 58 to 76. Senior boomers have mostly Gen-X children while the youngest ones are still working. 

From my viewpoint, it seems to be mostly Millennials who are doing most of the complaining/whining 'woe is me' blaming the Boomers.... with some Boomers tiring of it and reacting with 'suck it up' and experience what all the generations before you did. We Boomers complained about our parents too for at least two decades (in our 20s and 30s). It is the circle of life. Millennials are about to experience the same thing when their children get to late teens and early 20s.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Oh and let's not forget another important Baby Boomer contribution... a crazy stock market! Ever since the 1980s, pretty much when Boomers got into their careers and starting pumping money into stocks, the market has had crazy gains.
> 
> I think statistically, the stock market since 1980 or 1990 (or so) has been very unusual. Historically speaking this has been a period of absurdly high performance compared to historical averages.
> 
> ...


The stock market used to be a closed club, now it's open to everyone. I prefer everyone have the opportunity than only the elite few.
More people will bid up the prices.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> The boomers actually have both Gen-Xer and Millennial offspring. Boomers are currently aged 58 to 76. Senior boomers have mostly Gen-X children while the youngest ones are still working.
> 
> From my viewpoint,* it seems to be mostly Millennials who are doing most of the complaining/whining 'woe is me' blaming the Boomers*.... with some Boomers tiring of it and* reacting with 'suck it up' and experience what all the generations before you did. *We Boomers complained about our parents too for at least two decades (in our 20s and 30s). It is the circle of life. Millennials are about to experience the same thing when their children get to late teens and early 20s.


 ... encouraged either by their parents (if recognized) or their social media influencers "friends" (where parents are unrecognized).


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The clash between the generations is as old as humanity itself. It probably will never change and probably should not change. It is how progress is made advancing society (we hope).


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Oh and let's not forget another important Baby Boomer contribution... a crazy stock market! Ever since the 1980s, pretty much when Boomers got into their careers and starting pumping money into stocks, the market has had crazy gains.
> 
> I think statistically, the stock market since 1980 or 1990 (or so) has been very unusual. Historically speaking this has been a period of absurdly high performance compared to historical averages.
> 
> ...


There have been several books on the impacts boomers have had on the economy, business and investments. I read a couple of them when I first started DIY. One equated the process to a snake eating a cat lol. starting with diapers and baby food and ending in funeral services and death at the tail. In between toys, cars, houses, financial services, travel and rec, pharma and healthy living, senior care and finally funeral and estate services. It is actually quite frightening to think the previous two sentences sums up an entire human life span.

Slightly related here is a link to spending habits buy generation. Each group does put its own spin on spending. A couple influencing factors include life stage and tech but the amounts by sector do not vary greatly (refer to avg annual dollars spent by generation) 





__





Consumer Shopping Trends and Statistics by the Generation | V12


Learn about differences in how generations shop and the tactics marketers are using to reach different age groups such as millennials, Gex X and Boomers.




v12data.com


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

Gator13 said:


> I would be curious to know what, if any, impact income tax and other various consumption taxes have had. I would suspect current generations are paying more and that it will get worse.


Any thoughts on the impact of never ending tax increases?


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> The clash between the generations is as old as humanity itself. It probably will never change and probably should not change. It is how progress is made advancing society (we hope).


Yes it is. 

I was not trying to assign blame in post 80 to any group. Gen X also promote the negative stereotypes of the generations often with little backlash. The point I was aiming at was more observational and in line that parents and children will often be at odds with each other based on their experience, environments and perspectives. You provided a more concise statement. Who we are is largely shaped by our environment including the events that occur during that time. For example, it would seem plausible those that experienced the great depression would value frugality, saving and security simply through enduring that hardship.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> From my viewpoint, it seems to be mostly Millennials who are doing most of the complaining/whining 'woe is me' blaming the Boomers.... with some Boomers tiring of it and reacting with 'suck it up' and experience what all the generations before you did. We Boomers complained about our parents too for at least two decades (in our 20s and 30s). It is the circle of life. Millennials are about to experience the same thing when their children get to late teens and early 20s.


I still don't understand why parents are so frustrated at their kid's generation. They've educated them. My parents never told me I was lazy and entitled. I never had a bad opinion about Boomers as my model was my parents. Then I got into the workforce, people were super happy with my work. And then I started seeing magazines and articles about "how to deal with the Millenials" everywhere. How can a generation like the Boomers suddenly complain fiercely against their kids Millenials generation? And even do it publicly as if it was truly a thing worth writing an article and magazines about it? Still, I didn't make a case of it at that time.

And then recently I went on vacation and saw another family. A Boomer dad, a Gen X mom, the oldest kid in-between Millenials and Gen Z, and the two other kids bring Gen Z.

The Boomer dad is an engineer. I saw him complain right in front of his Millenial kid that he was lazy. I would see the malaise of the Gen X mom while the Boomer dad would say this. Simply because he chose a different kind of career and as he was trying to build a customer base, he was still having a tough time to find an affordable rent, let alone a house (he wasn't living with his parents, but had to come back for one month), he still had a few moments off during the weekdays, though he would take clients during the weekends, evenings, etc. Basically, his job was definitely not a Monday to Friday 9-5. But to his dad, since his kid had some time off during the weekdays, he was lazy. Their middle kid was studying in engineering so he was so proud of him. And his youngest even did an internship at his organization so he was even more proud and wished he would work at his place, follow his path. I also had a few occasions to talk with the Boomer dad. He would get to work at 7 AM and leave at 7 PM even though it's supposed to be a 35h workweek, because "he had so much work to do as a manager". He would complain at his employees asking for a bit more flexibility for work-life balance. He would totally be against work-from-home, assuming that nobody work when they are at home, you can't have an eye on them. He would fire employees who asked to leave a bit early to go get their kids at the daycare.

Today, I still don't complain when I see a Boomer because he's an individual and I don't judge a book by his cover. But as soon as I hear a Boomer stereotyping Millenials as lazy, entitled, over spending, etc., I'm triggered and it's hard for me to stop.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> The clash between the generations is as old as humanity itself. It probably will never change and probably should not change. It is how progress is made advancing society (we hope).


The clash is good, the whining is bad. There's people out there who are accepting, embracing change and proud of the next generations, no matter if they aren't fully understanding it and not sure where it'll go. Parents generations should be confident of the education they've provided to their kids generation.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> The clash between the generations is as old as humanity itself. It probably will never change and probably should not change. It is how progress is made advancing society (we hope).


I think generation divisions could go either way, good or bad. It becomes very bad when people automatically develop an unwarranted negative attitude due to stereotyping.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> I still don't understand why parents are so frustrated at their kid's generation.


Because like every other older/younger generation "kids these days" do stupid stuff.



> How can a generation like the Boomers suddenly complain fiercely against their kids Millenials generation?


Because they have all sorts of new wacky ideas, like EVERY SINGLE GENERATION IN HISTORY.








A quote by Socrates


The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Child...



www.goodreads.com







> The Boomer dad is an engineer. I saw him complain right in front of his Millenial kid that he was lazy. I would see the malaise of the Gen X mom while the Boomer dad would say this.


Which is different from any other generational divide how?



> But as soon as I hear a Boomer stereotyping Millenials as lazy, entitled, over spending, etc., I'm triggered and it's hard for me to stop.


FYI as a not boomer I can make the following observations.
Some millennials are lazy and entitled, some are not.
As a group they're massively overspending (look at the debt to income ratio) I think this is bad decision making and exceptionally easy credit availability.

Also getting "triggered" about everything is annoying.
I don't know when this became a thing?
It's like they're all walking around thinking they have PTSD or something. Honestly it's an insult to those who experienced real trauma.

I'm not saying you haven't, but it's "triggering" to find out that millenials are taking on too much debt?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrMatt said:


> Also getting "triggered" about everything is annoying.
> I don't know when this became a thing?


It became a thing with social media IMO.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> The stock market used to be a closed club, now it's open to everyone. I prefer everyone have the opportunity than only the elite few.
> More people will bid up the prices.


Yes this is a very good point. Digital access (and low fees) has changed everything, and I think for the better.

The stock market has also benefited from very strong regulations and investor protections which started in the 1980s and 1990s. This has really stamped out chronic problems like insider trading and special deals for the privileged. A great example of strong government regulation helping serve the public interest.

For example, hedge fund "alpha" disappeared right around the time that SEC regulations stepped up. Not a coincidence. We now have a much more level playing field.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Yes this is a very good point, and I think an excellent aspect about stocks going forward. Digital access (and low fees) has changed everything, and I think for the better.


Net better, I think some people are not very good at this, and it may not be better for them.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Net better, I think some people are not very good at this, and it may not be better for them.


You're referring the Robinhood gamblers and app crowd who's blowing away their money?

Or on stupid ETFs? there are some really stupid things out there a person could buy


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

james4beach said:


> Or on stupid ETFs? there are some really stupid things out there a person could buy


Yes but they make sense to some people.

One of the things I adore about investing is, it is the ultimate arbiter in objectivity.

I believe there is something generational about perspectives on investing versus trading, although views do transcend generations to an extent.

Look at the comments on AltaGas, in the retirement forum on this site. AltaRed wrote positive things about the company and someone else chimed in with a positive remark about making money on it, suggesting it is a good company. I wrote that it is bad because they haven't generated much profit for the owners in two decades. The stock is essentially flat for more than a generation and the distribution is very low. This stock has lost to inflation, even during the ultra-low inflationary period we had for 15 years.

Again, this is just a trend with plenty of exceptions but older people tend to look for a company to work hard, make money, and share it with the owners. Younger people tend to look for management that makes noise and causes stock price swings so they can gamble on it as a random number generator. Obviously, AR is not part of the younger generation but he has a very youthful view, in this regard.

My perspective is that I want to own good companies that work hard so I can hold them for a couple of decades and ride out market vicissitudes. I've found two others who have a somewhat similar view. It would be interesting to learn what generation those two gentlemen come from.

Nearly everyone else seems to talk about where the stock price is going.

I'll bet my point of view seems positively ancient to nearly everyone here.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

TomB16 said:


> Yes but they make sense to some people.
> 
> One of the things I adore about investing is, it is the ultimate arbiter in objectivity.


Yeah I think the markets are very neat. There's so much I love about this game. If you do really stupid things, you've put your own money on the line and the market destroys you.

But what makes it even more fun is... there's still a casino-like gambling element to it.

You can also do totally insane things, get lucky, and make a profit. And some people showing good trading results over time have just gotten lucky (and might not even know it), even though they're making bad investments.

For example, a guy can do nothing other than trade GME and UVIX all day and still make money doing it, if he gets lucky. It's a terrible strategy and really stupid, but it doesn't mean it will go badly for him.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

james4beach said:


> But what makes it even more fun is... there's still a casino-like gambling element to it.


Yes, for almost everyone. Almost.

I 8x'ed the size of my post while you were responding and it is pretty inflammatory stuff. Sorry about that (re: the size, not the inflammatory nature).

Gentlemen, I invite you to beat your tools into weapons and disembowel me with your keyboards.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

cainvest said:


> It became a thing with social media IMO.


Absolutely. A forum is also social media. On a forum, you're more likely to talk with people with different ideas and values, and on most social media people are anonymous. It's so easy to end up trolling or in endless debates and insults. Also, chatting/texting is a very bad communication medium for debates.

On forum like these I like debates as this forum is pretty unique in the sense that it has people from different generations, different political opinions, different provinces of Canada.

If I had these debates in person, it would be totally different because you can see non-verbal communication, difference in tone, and verbal communication is faster.

In person, I rarely get into an argument. Due to the kind of job that I have, I have lots of training in non-violent communication, leadership, coaching and people development.

May not always seems like it when I'm on social media, but that's more my... experimentation lab.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

james4beach said:


> For example, a guy can do nothing other than trade GME and UVIX all day and still make money doing it, if he gets lucky. It's a terrible strategy and really stupid, but it doesn't mean it will go badly for him.


For sure.

There seems to be a generation of traders who don't realize there are people, products, and services behind the random number generator they stare into all day.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

When we bought our first home in the early 80's mortgage rates reached 21 percent. Then dropped. We bought at 17.5. There was a land titles office strike. By the time the deal went through a month rates had dropped to 16.75. A year later rates were 10.25 and the skytrain route was determined to go near our home. We had a very good bank mortgage manager. I swear she lent money based on our horoscope. She winked and said didn't I tell her that I would make X amount of commission income each year in addition to my base salary. 

Still did business with that bank two cities and three homes later. Never paid an appraisal fee, never paid one of those hoaky mortgage renewal fees, always got the mortgage for at least 1/4-1/2 point below the quote simply by asking.

The BC Gov't offered a second mortgage at 15points. Between that and the small down payment we had we were able to dodge the CMHC insurance cost. We had nothing to loose, everything to gain.

We did not pay the bank's so called 'appraisal fee' ripoff. Just said no because the house was originally listed at a market high of $135K and we had a deal for what it was worth at the time... $85K.

We negotiated the bank recommended law firm conveyancing/mortgage fee from $675 down to $350 simply by asking. I was selling computer systems to law firms at the time so I knew the score so to speak.

Each generation has it's own challenges. Don't think for a minute that it was all wine and roses for the baby boomers. It was not. We simply saw it through and did the best we could for ourselves and our families.

Our parents did exactly the same thing. And our adult children are doing the same.

As an edit....I owe it all to my parents generation. The greatest generation. They went through a depression, a World War, and like some of my relatives survived the Holocaust, and the Korean conflict. Without the whining, winging, finger pointing, and self pity that some successive generations have exhibited. 

They made it possible for my generation to excel, to grab opportunity, have/realize unbounded ambition, and achieve what our parents, in many cases, were unable to do. . And never experience a day of war for us, or for my children.


----------



## livewell (Dec 1, 2013)

One aspect that has not come up in this thread, is the affect of the size each of these demographics and how that affects perspective/reality. Currently we appear to have a huge exit of the workspace by boomers who are retiring (Accelerated by Covid). It is and will cause increasing pressure on employers - to recruit and contain payrolls. It will also IMO significantly benefit GenX and Millennials who will have significant career advancement opportunities aka salary increase opportunities over the next decade. I think the demographic effect of the boomer just due to the sheer size is going to cause lots of disruptions (Healthcare crisis is the other obvious one.)

(FWIW late boomer with millennial children here).


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

There are a number of articles on this. Such as https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-workers-covid-retirements-1.6529325


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

TomB16 said:


> For sure.
> 
> There seems to be a generation of traders who don't realize there are people, products, and services behind the random number generator they stare into all day.


Along a similar mindset is the automation of money. It is easier to visualize a purchase when paper currency is exchanged for a product in comparison to payment by tap. Most have abandoned physical currency in exchange for a card. There will soon be a generation that will not use coins or paper for the exchange of goods and services. My son who is still a preteen has been taught the concept of money with time. "How many hours will you need to do X to buy Y?" I think this is a much better way to instill the knowledge anyways as in essence we are trading our capital (human) for things and experiences.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

livewell said:


> One aspect that has not come up in this thread, is the affect of the size each of these demographics and how that affects perspective/reality. Currently we appear to have a huge exit of the workspace by boomers who are retiring (Accelerated by Covid). It is and will cause increasing pressure on employers - to recruit and contain payrolls. It will also IMO significantly benefit GenX and Millennials who will have significant career advancement opportunities aka salary increase opportunities over the next decade. I think the demographic effect of the boomer just due to the sheer size is going to cause lots of disruptions (Healthcare crisis is the other obvious one.)
> 
> (FWIW late boomer with millennial children here).


Many early Xers found a lower glass ceiling because of the generational shift. More boomers holding higher positions in an organization. Perhaps the boomers experienced a lot of competition amongst themselves as they advanced through their careers. A lot of my readings say the impact was less so do to the expansive growth in the post WW2 era. Maybe some forum members can share their experiences. 

However, late Xers, myself included, were able to move up the chain fairly easily as junior and mid level positions were abundant when the boomers started retiring. Those that were able to gain one of these roles early seemed to move up the ladder easily. It has opened the door to a lot of opportunities. Anecdotally I know of many Millennials that gained even earlier advancement opportunities because of a combination of boomer retirement and Xers moving upwards. A lot of the firms I worked with really struggled when I suggested they hire people in their late 20s into positions that previously were not attained until workers were in their mid 30s. Inevitably, at some point, each cohort hits a point where the next generation pushes them out of the workplace. It may vary by profession, company and individual but at some point we all are replaced by someone else.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Absolutely. A forum is also social media. On a forum, you're more likely to talk with people with different ideas and values, and on most social media people are anonymous. It's so easy to end up trolling or in endless debates and insults. Also, chatting/texting is a very bad communication medium for debates.
> 
> On forum like these I like debates as this forum is pretty unique in the sense that it has people from different generations, different political opinions, different provinces of Canada.
> 
> ...


Yet you engage in underhanded tactics in your "debates". I sure hope they're mandatory courses, instead of an integral part of your job.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

londoncalling said:


> ... However, late Xers, myself included, were able to move up the chain fairly easily as junior and mid level positions were abundant when the boomers started retiring. Those that were able to gain one of these roles early seemed to move up the ladder easily. It has opened the door to a lot of opportunities ...


Interesting ... late boomers that I worked with who had to have a university degree to be considered for a computer operator job I suspect would disagree about moving up easily.

Moving up from the computer operator job seemed to depend more on them selling themselves to the hiring manager plus HR agreeing to the interviews. It was typically a two to five year process versus those who were hired directly out of college and university.

For one person, the path was three years as a part-time operator and then almost ten years as a programmer before the bean counters decided the budget needed a 10% cut. As no one was hiring, he became a trainee electrician and then landed a job back in programming.


For others, waiting for a retirement was horribly slow versus finding out what was in demand and marketing that they would do things others did not want to do.


Cheers


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Eclectic21 said:


> Interesting ... late boomers that I worked with who had to have a university degree to be considered for a computer operator job I suspect would disagree about moving up easily.
> 
> Moving up from the computer operator job seemed to depend more on them selling themselves to the hiring manager plus HR agreeing to the interviews. It was typically a two to five year process versus those who were hired directly out of college and university.
> 
> ...


I could see how things would vary by occupation. It also makes sense that there would be a significant bottleneck amongst the boomers and early Xers. Waiting for the glut of early boomers to step aside. Along with the demographics there could also be some agism and cost savings at play in regards to hiring college grads over more experienced workers. Thanks for sharing your perspective @Eclectic21. It helps to learn how different experiences in the employment cycle yield different results.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)




----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


>


Great video, makes a few points. Go to Minute 15. I don't think this generation needs confidence as much as patience and competence.
They are pretty confident they're right, in fact overly confident and not thinking things through.
Simon points out participation medals and stuff, well it's gone even further, today you can't fail kids in school, and nonsense like no red ink when you get things wrong.

I think we need people with the confidence to try things, but also the resilience to sometimes fail, and the humility to accept that sometimes they are wrong.

He also points out the lack of deep relationships, and patience.

In another thread you've voiced concerns about how abortion laws will impact your one night stands.
And some suggest that committed relationships are "not necessarily anything we should be striving for."

Additionally he identifies the lack of purpose and impact... yes these are problems, and actually why I oppose things like UBI. 
Without a purpose humans wither and die.


Finally Simon is a marketter turned speaker, he's really good at packaging these ideas in a consumable format.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> participation medals


Introduced by their parents' generation who thought it was a good idea.



MrMatt said:


> today you can't fail kids in school


Because their parents would blame the teacher.

Simon repeatedly said "It's no fault of their own. They've been dealt a bad hand."



MrMatt said:


> I think we need people with the confidence to try things, but also the resilience to sometimes fail, and the humility to accept that sometimes they are wrong.


Fully agree.



MrMatt said:


> In another thread you've voiced concerns about how abortion laws will impact your one night stands.
> And some suggest that committed relationships are "not necessarily anything we should be striving for."


Well, I'm happy I've lived my life and by the way I'm married. You may not have expected that.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Simon repeatedly said "It's no fault of their own. They've been dealt a bad hand."


EVERY Generation has been "dealt a bad hand"
Every Generation complains about the younger generation.




MrMatt said:


> In another thread you've voiced concerns about how abortion laws will impact your one night stands.





> Well, I'm happy I've lived my life and by the way I'm married. You may not have expected that.


Well I'm glad you outgrew the one night stand thing, unfortunately many millenials have not unfortunately.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> EVERY Generation has been "dealt a bad hand"
> Every Generation complains about the younger generation.


Some hands are better than others. I'm certainly happy I'm not part of the Lost Generation or the G.I. Generation, for instance.

But, yes, people should stop complaining at their kid's generation. There's no way I will ever complain about my kid's generation.

What shapes a kid's reality and future behaviour is their environment. And their environment is built upon how us, adults / parents, have been influencing it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> But, yes, people should stop complaining at their kid's generation. There's no way I will ever complain about my kid's generation.


Why?
Honestly when they as a group, do stupid or even evil things, why can't you complain about it?

I don't think any person or group is or should be immune to criticism.



> What shapes a kid's reality and future behaviour is their environment. And their environment is built upon how us, adults / parents, have been influencing it.


I don't share your deterministic view.
I believe that environment has an impact, even a significant one. However that doesn't totally free one from personal responsibility.
Secondly, they NEED TO FIX IT!! Not entirely by themselves, but they should actually try and fix some of the problems.
I understand they didn't cause them, doesn't matter, they still need to fix them.

There are people like Simon Sinek who are trying to help them understand issues, but they need to do their part and make things better too, it's their world.
Now that millennials are entering their 40's they really have to step up and stop blaming the previous generation, they've been adults for 2 decades, some of this is their fault too.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Why?
> Honestly when they as a group, do stupid or even evil things, why can't you complain about it?
> 
> I don't think any person or group is or should be immune to criticism.


In the domain of relationships, the best way to be heard is to properly communicate _concerns_. Complaints, criticism and contempt are unhealthy at different levels. (There's also another level which is "control")

Most of what we've seen in Boomers vs Millenials are complaints, criticisms and contempts. What if we started hearing their concerns, instead?


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Concerns: "When I ask you if you can wash the dishes and you don't do it as you promised, it piles up and I'm concerned that I won't be able to keep up alone without team-work, and I'm also concerned that I'm losing trust in you because you've promised it."

Complaint: "I'm mad at you because you haven't washed the dishes as you promised and now I have to do all the dishes by myself."

Criticism: "When you don't wash the dishes as you promised, you're lazy and untrustworthy."

Contempt: "You are such a lazy and untrustworthy partner who can't even wash the dishes once in a while!"

Control: "Go wash the dishes now as you promised you'd do!"


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Concerns: "When I ask you if you can wash the dishes and you don't do it as you promised, it piles up and I'm concerned that I won't be able to keep up alone without team-work, and I'm also concerned that I'm losing trust in you because you've promised it."
> 
> Complaint: "I'm mad at you because you haven't washed the dishes as you promised and now I have to do all the dishes by myself."
> 
> ...


Yup criticism is the right one.
If you fail to honour your promise you will be seen as untrustworthy.. because you clearly can't be trusted to follow through on your commitments.
If it's a pattern of behaviour, I think your escalation path is appropriate.

Your phrasing in concern is rather condescending, If anyone spoke to me in that matter I would be very unhappy. That's how you speak to a young child who doesn't understand.
I wouldn't talk to a 30 or 40 yr adult, that would be insulting. If I was coaching a young staff member, I would be careful to only provide such comments in private, not in public, because again it's a pretty insulting way to talk to people.

Maybe it comes off different in French and thats why Trudeau comes off as such a condescending [email protected][email protected]


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Maybe it comes off different in French


No, those are communication advices from specialists from English sources.



MrMatt said:


> Yup criticism is the right one.


You know how communication/relationship specialists call that criticism example I gave? A judgement and a destructive attack towards someone's personality and choices.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Your phrasing in concern is rather condescending, If anyone spoke to me in that matter I would be very unhappy. That's how you speak to a young child who doesn't understand.
> I wouldn't talk to a 30 or 40 yr adult, that would be insulting. If I was coaching a young staff member, I would be careful to only provide such comments in private, not in public, because again it's a pretty insulting way to talk to people.


These are just exaggerated examples to clearly see the difference.

In communication/relationship:

Concerns are focused on the present and future impacts on the relationship.
Complaints are focused on the past and the present impacts on oneself.
Criticisms are focused on attacking the choices and the personality.
Contempt is focused on attacking the person.

Clearly, communicating concerns is the way to go as it opens to understanding and it's forward-looking.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Maybe it comes off different in French and thats why Trudeau comes off as such a condescending [email protected][email protected]





MrBlackhill said:


> No, those are communication advices from specialists from English sources.


Okay, the first one is still condescending and I think it is an unacceptable way to talk to an adult.




MrMatt said:


> Yup criticism is the right one.





MrBlackhill said:


> You know how communication/relationship specialists call that criticism example I gave? A judgement and a destructive attack towards someone's personality and choices.


Yeah, it's a bit aggressive, and judgemental.

Criticism: "When you don't wash the dishes as you promised, you're lazy and untrustworthy."

Showing oneself to be lazy and untrustworthy IS a bad choice. Calling it out as a bad choice is completely fine.
"Criticisms are focused on attacking the choices and the personality."

Going on about relationships in a demeaning and condescending manner is far worse than simply treating people like a grown up and saying "that choice makes you look bad".


You can't really have a "relationship" with hundreds of millions of millenials.
But you can easily provide feedback on the choices and actions they are engaging in.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Secondly, they NEED TO FIX IT!!


What's the first step before taking action? Understanding *why* we do it and what are our *concerns* if we don't do it. So we should all communicate our concerns. Then find solutions to those concerns. Then take action.

So if every generation would share their concerns, it would be much healthier, because the goal here is focused on the understanding and the future impacts.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Showing oneself to be lazy and untrustworthy IS a bad choice. Calling it out as a bad choice is completely fine.


Calling it a bad choice is making a judgement.

In a healthy relationship, it's not up to you to call out other people's choices to be good or bad, but you can give your opinion of the present and future impacts it has with regards of the relationship, and then let them decide for themselves if it was a bad choice. You may have your own opinion about it, but if they are grown-up, they should also be able to decide for themselves.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Calling it a bad choice is making a judgement.
> 
> In a healthy relationship, it's not up to you to call out other people's choices to be good or bad, but you can give your opinion of the present and future impacts it has with regards of the relationship, and then let them decide for themselves if it was a bad choice. You may have your own opinion about it, but if they are grown-up, they should also be able to decide for themselves.


Yes, it is making a judgement.
Because breaking your promises is bad, and shows that you act untrustworthy. This has a number of consequences.

But let me try to communicate a concern to you.
I am concerned that you attributed quotes to me, of statements I did not make. Even after this was pointed out to you multiple times, you have chosen not to address the issue. I'm concerned that this may reflect poorly on your reputation and our ability to interact in a civil manner.

Criticism "When you lie about me, it shows you're a dishonest person who is not participating in a good faith discussion" << That's similar to what I communicated before.
Contempt... lets not even go there.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> I am concerned that you attributed quotes to me, of statements I did not make. Even after this was pointed out to you multiple times, you have chosen not to address the issue. I'm concerned that this may reflect poorly on your reputation and our ability to interact in a civil manner.


Not too bad. I'll give you an answer to this:

I hear your concerns and how it affected you. I acknowledge that the discussions we've had weren't civil and that I've participated using an unhealthy communication style which undermined our relationship and would not bring value to the debate.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Not too bad. I'll give you an answer to this:
> 
> I hear your concerns and how it affected you. I acknowledge that the discussions we've had weren't civil and that I've participated using an unhealthy communication style which undermined our relationship and would not bring value to the debate.


I understand what you're saying. But it's such an odd and unnatural way to communicate.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> I understand what you're saying. But it's such an odd and unnatural way to communicate.


I will try more relatable examples. Obviously my wording in English is not perfect.

Say we have a manager who wants to talk to an employee, John, with whom he works everyday but John doesn't always arrive at work at 9h.

Control: "John! From now on you're going to log your arrival time every morning and you better be on time!"

Contempt: "John, you're so irresponsible, you can't even be on time!"

Criticism: "John, I've noticed that you've been late recently, you aren't being very punctual."

Complaint: "John, I'm overloaded in the morning when you arrive late at work."

Concerns: "John, sometimes I need to get ready for my meetings starting at 9h30, but I'm worried that I won't be able to trust you to help me in the morning as I've noticed that you've been late recently."


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> I will try more relatable examples. Obviously my wording in English is not perfect.
> 
> Say we have a manager who wants to talk to an employee, John, with whom he works everyday but John doesn't always arrive at work at 9h.
> 
> ...


I agree, but the "criticism" seems appropriate for typical circumstances.

concerns seems weak and non-committal.
complaint is self centered.
Criticism seems very clear about the problem.
contempt is expressing it a bit more assetively/angrily.
control, is extremely direct and suggests that they're near the last straw with the poor behaviour.

FYI when I had a late staff member I gave him an alarm clock. but my phrasing was always "critical".
FYI, a few years later he thanked me for being so clear, and explaining so much and he VERY rapidly flew into management


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> I agree, but the "criticism" seems appropriate for typical circumstances.


It will depend on the level of agreement with the criticism and the wording choice. Yes, there's constructive criticism which is usually good, but one must be careful with the wording and be aware of the level of subjectivity of the situation.

Here, my example used a pretty factual situation (being late) and proper wording (not being punctual). But if the manager used a word like "lazy" or "irresponsible", it's more judgemental than factual and John would certainly not appreciate it. Or if the situation was more subjective, for instance "John, I gave you this important project, but you aren't working hard enough." Or maybe John strongly believes he's confident and independent and then his manager says "John, I gave you this project, but you lack confidence and you aren't very independent." You may come up to this conclusion with him, but it'll require you to start with proper wording of your observations before concluding with such qualifiers. And one must not forget to tell *why* it is an issue, *why* this criticism. Clarify the expectations and why you have those expectations, what could be the impact if those expectations aren't met.



MrMatt said:


> concerns seems weak and non-committal.


My examples are just the beginning of the conversation. None of the examples ask for commitment (other than control, which I changed the example). They simply highlight the issue and then the next steps would be to talk about possible solutions and agree on the actions to take.



MrMatt said:


> he thanked me for being so clear


Yes if the situation is very factual and both parties agree with the qualifiers, constructive criticism will definitely work out.

But in more complex situations, criticism will seem subjective and judgemental, and the person may not agree with the qualifiers you've attributed to him and may also not understand why you are criticising him. That's why there's different "levels" where talking about concerns brings more openness and understanding in very complex and sensitive situations. Obviously, bad wording when talking about concerns may end up looking like complaints or criticism. Proper communication is hard to master.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

The last 15 or so posts are reflective of the changes taking place.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

I've lost a lot of money in crypto. Why is the government taking so long to bail out crypto?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Gator13 said:


> The last 15 or so posts are reflective of the changes taking place.


And some people don't even seem to understand the problem.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

To everyone saying that Millenials don't want to work anymore or simply that no one wants to work anymore... Here's 130 years of complaints "no one wants to work anymore". (One example in every decade since 1894)

So, to anyone still saying "no one wants to work anymore", you are simply part of the grumpy people.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1549527748950892544








'No one wants to work anymore': Employers complaining about labour shortages may simply not be paying enough


Employers complaining about labour shortages may simply not be paying enough to get people to work for them. Read more.




financialpost.com


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I think there is a two part problem here... Which I would also assume to be the case for many differences between generations. I don't think it is a "one size fits all" type of issue.

I will speak only on what I know most based on my personal experience as a millenial (born in 1990).

Problems by millenials:

First problem that I see is definitely the impatience of millenials. I'm the most impatient person that I know. Even sometimes I catch myself saying things like "it's 2022, I don't understand why I can't get x right now". Naturally, this is a problem, not with the world but with my own way of thinking. I think this is deeply ingrained in most millenials.

Second problem that I've noticed is that millenials are just effing lazy. Not myself, but basically most other millenials I know. All of my friends, coworkers, etc that are millenials can't understand why or how I can work so much. They always "need a break" or "can't handle everything" all the time. I genuinely feel like most millenials don't even know what hard work is. They think going to work for 8 hours and then hitting the gym for 1 hour after that is "hard work". I call that a piece of cake.

Third issue with my generation is that nobody seems to want to take any accountability. Not sure why, but everyone plays the blame game. Their reasons for not having money are x, they didn't get this job because of y, etc, etc. It's as if everything a millenial has done wrong or not achieved is somehow an end product of someone or something else failing them.

Fourth concern - being frugal is not cool. I can understand this, but I would never participate in it. I know tons of millenials who are driving new BMW's, Mercs, Corvettes, Camaro's, etc. It makes no sense to me. They seem more concerned about what people think of them now than their own future. I have people closer in my circle who ask me why I don't buy a Porsche or a lambo or something. My answer is always the same "all I want to buy is stocks". Yet, I know people paying $800+/month for car payments. Yes, those are the people who complain about housing prices, too.

Now, onto the boomers...

I don't think some of the boomers still quite realize the wealth that has been acquired passively, either through stocks or real estate. I am not saying this generation did not work hard, but I am saying that lots of money fell into their laps if they played their cards at least semi decently right in life.

I think it is hard for boomers to understand the complexities of buying a property when the home is 10x the salary. It's hard to get approved. It's hard to manage. There isn't much, if any, free cash flow. It's quite honestly daunting. And to think you'll have to slave away for 25 years to pay it off is pretty scary. It costs a lot of money. Sure, interest rates are lower, but the prices are just so astronomical. I think that mentally, it's a lot easier to digest a house price that is lower with a higher interest rate (keep in mind, I'm not talking about math and payments, I'm talking about mentally being easier). Housing has become quite the liability at today's prices. It is definitely a concern.

Wages are trash. Something I don't think the boomers quite grasp to the full extent. I know that boomers know wages haven't kept up, but they aren't starting from the bottom anymore. It's also just not wages. It's everything... Benefits have gotten worse, pensions have gotten worse, companies have found ways to squeeze every last dime out of their employees. There is no loyalty anymore. You don't just work for a company for 30 years and retire. The employer is too busy exploiting the employee and the employee is too busy trying to do everything except work.

I feel (key word, feel) that some boomers simply have forgotten how difficult it can be at the bottom since they have been on top for a while. Might get some people unhappy with me saying this, and I understand that. But it genuinely is how I feel.

Anyway - I guess the TLDR is that I do think millenials whine too much and don't work hard enough. On the flip side, it would be nice if boomers would just acknowledge some of the kickbacks they have received.

It's a two part problem, and I think it would be nice if each generation could accept their faults and own up to it.

I was almost done my post, but in thinking about things as I was writing it... Maybe the millenials don't deserve lower house prices, in the same way that the boomers don't deserve the high prices. If that makes sense.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> All of my friends, coworkers, etc that are millenials can't understand why or how I can work so much. They always "need a break" or "can't handle everything" all the time. I genuinely feel like most millenials don't even know what hard work is. They think going to work for 8 hours and then hitting the gym for 1 hour after that is "hard work". I call that a piece of cake.


If you are super happy and passionate by your job, if it's your vocation, then I'm happy for you and I totally respect that.

If that's not the case, but you still work long hours, then please watch one of these two videos or ideally both.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

Interesting points.



KaeJS said:


> ... I think it is hard for boomers to understand the complexities of buying a property when the home is 10x the salary. It's hard to get approved ...


My former co-worker is having to cancel a bunch of credit to get approved. That's despite having 1.3x the remaining mortgage in cash, plus other assets and over 3x the assets between non-registered and registered accounts.




KaeJS said:


> ... There is no loyalty anymore. You don't just work for a company for 30 years and retire ...


Interesting ... considering management in the '90's gave everyone a book for the new work culture they wanted implemented. Both the book and their actions said anyone who hadn't changed responsibilities/jobs or moved to another company were dead wood, high the list for firing. Training was cut as under the new system, employees were to pay for their own training.

About five years later management wondered what happened to employee loyalty as employees were leaving in record numbers plus new hires wanted higher wages to compensate for the training they knew they had to pay for.




KaeJS said:


> ... The employer is too busy exploiting the employee and the employee is too busy trying to do everything except work.


You mean like dropping paid overtime, having employees record their overtime to take other time off (which usually wasn't allowed) and then at the end of the month, resetting the banked hours down to a set limit? For example, a co-worker who had eighty hours in the bank had the bank reset to thirty hours with no payout.




KaeJS said:


> ...I feel (key word, feel) that some boomers simply have forgotten how difficult it can be at the bottom since they have been on top for a while. Might get some people unhappy with me saying this, and I understand that. But it genuinely is how I feel.


Some have forgotten and some are reacting to the drastic difference between what they lived through versus what is stated. And some boomers are complaining about what housing costs with concerns about how younger folks can afford anything.

IMO, part of the problem is that each generation looks at the current good situation with little or no knowledge of what struggles there were to get to the good situation. I know as a teen, what dad had achieved meant that it didn't make sense to me that he'd have side jobs. Discussing what it was like, growing up in a single parent family during the depression where the whole family worked at whatever they could did a lot to explain why there were the side jobs.


Cheers


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eclectic21 said:


> My former co-worker is having to cancel a bunch of credit to get approved. That's despite having 1.3x the remaining mortgage in cash, plus other assets and over 3x the assets between non-registered and registered accounts.


Yeah, because that's how the qualification ratios work.
I'd suggest getting rid of credit you don't need anyway. I don't understand why people have these huge credit reserves. Do you really expect to have to buy an emergency Porsche, on credit, and can't wait a few hours to get the loan approval?

If you have the cash, pay it off.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

It doesn't make sense though.

The credit they are asking him to cancel is credit he either uses sparingly or that is paid off every month. When everything is completed - they are giving him significantly _more_ credit than he has now.

I'd have thought they be more concerned about how liquid the cash was than the credit but that's what they are focused on.


Cheers


*PS*
IIRC they have asked him to cancel $30K of credit so that they can give him the mortgage plus $120K of credit.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

MrBlackhill said:


> If you are super happy and passionate by your job, if it's your vocation, then I'm happy for you and I totally respect that.
> 
> If that's not the case, but you still work long hours, then please watch one of these two videos or ideally both.


I hate my job and work 100 hours a week.

I watched both videos just because you took the time to post them. They seem nice, in theory, but work still needs to be done. It is true that it should not be a reflection of who you are, but it is also true that for the majority of people... Work is simply a means to an end.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> Work is simply a means to an end.


What is your mean to an end which require 100 hours of work per week?


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

MrBlackhill said:


> What is your mean to an end which require 100 hours of work per week?


I hope to retire around 45.
So that I don't have to work until I'm 65 lol.

If I can keep it up for 13 more years, all else being equal, I will be extremely well off at 45 and would never need to work again if I didn't want to.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eclectic21 said:


> It doesn't make sense though.
> 
> The credit they are asking him to cancel is credit he either uses sparingly or that is paid off every month. When everything is completed - they are giving him significantly _more_ credit than he has now.
> 
> I'd have thought they be more concerned about how liquid the cash was than the credit but that's what they are focused on.


Because the lending requires a certain debt ratio.
I'm not sure if it is strictly required under legislation, or just something that has become standard, but I find it interesting that all the first line lenders use the same formulas.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> I hope to retire around 45.
> So that I don't have to work until I'm 65 lol.
> 
> If I can keep it up for 13 more years, all else being equal, I will be extremely well off at 45 and would never need to work again if I didn't want to.


As I understand it, you prefer 20 years of pure unhappiness and hard work (say from 25 to 45) with 20 years of financial independence (from 45 to 65) than having 40 years where you can enjoy life a bit everyday while progressively having more financial independence?

The years where I had to most energy were my 20s. I still have lots of energy in my 30s, but a bit less. And then a bit less when I'll be in my 40s and so on. As I understand it, you want to start truly living your life once you are 45. Isn't it scary? What if you become ill at 40? What if you die at 50? You are 32. At 30, your odds of dying within the next 20 years a 5% or 1 out of 20. At 40 years old, your odds of dying within the next 20 years are 10% or 1 out of 10.

I'm curious about how you see it, because I've polled people and usually they want more time now, not in the future, because the present is certain, the future isn't.

Say we have the normal person working 37.5h a week, 50 weeks a year, for 40 years, which means 75,000 hours.
Another person could work 75h a week over 7 days of 10.7h, 50 weeks a year, for 20 years, which means 75,000 hours. But that's 100 more days of work per year and much longer days.
Yet another person could work 33.3h a week over 4 days of 8.3h, 50 weeks a year, for 45 years, which means 75,000 hours. That's 50 more days of freedom every year. Can you imagine all what you could do with 50 days of freedom _this year_? You said you were impatient, why wait so many years to have more freedom when you could have more freedom today?
Most people would pick the last option, having a 4-day week, because you have more freedom to enjoy the present days of your life.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

MrBlackhill said:


> As I understand it, you prefer 20 years of pure unhappiness and hard work (say from 25 to 45) with 20 years of financial independence (from 45 to 65) than having 40 years where you can enjoy life a bit everyday while progressively having more financial independence?


Correct.

I would like to get it mostly over with so there isn't a looming cloud over my head of having to wake up every single Monday morning for the rest of my life.

And obviously the sooner you acquire money, the more you will have later.

You are right that the longer we are alive, our chances of continuing to be alive start to dwindle. Unfortunately, that is a risk. So, sure. Some people would say you should live in the moment. But it's not so easy to say when you are 65 and still working without as much money. Most people do in fact make it to 65+. 

And like you said... My energy at 65 will not be the same as now. I don't want to be working.

It is hard for me to enjoy the present knowing that I could be working and making money (think back to your Total Work videos you posted).

Also, the brain doesn't really care what you've done. It cares about what's coming. Sure, my trip to Australia was awesome and I had a great time, but I'm more concerned about when I can go back. It's not what I've done in the past that makes me happy in the present. It's what I'm doing in the present. I almost feel like living for the now is a waste. It's only fun while you're doing it, but sooner or later, the chickens come home to roost and you will be back at work again.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> And obviously the sooner you acquire money, the more you will have later.


Yes, money compounds, but this is still debatable though, because the younger you retire, the more money you need to fund your retirement. Also, you get taxed more. And depending on your job, your income also grows over time, so if you work more while you are young and paid little, it's not a big difference in money compared to working less while you are old and paid much more, though this last one may not be true for low growth jobs.



KaeJS said:


> Sure, my trip to Australia was awesome and I had a great time, but I'm more concerned about when I can go back. It's not what I've done in the past that makes me happy in the present.


Well, why don't you do it every year instead of wanting to maximize your work and savings and wait until you are 45? Instead, you could work decently, save decently and keep some money every year for a trip to enjoy every single year.

It may be me, but everything that I've done with my free time over the last 10-15 years (while working full time) has compounded in great memories and escape and helped my mental health, helped my energy, decreased my stress, decreased my tiredness, etc. It has also compounded into great new relationships.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrBlackhill said:


> It may be me, but everything that I've done with my free time over the last 10-15 years (while working full time) has compounded in great memories and escape and helped my mental health, helped my energy, decreased my stress, decreased my tiredness, etc. It has also compounded into great new relationships.


Reminds me of that old joke about a businessman vacationing in some tropical country and seeing a fisherman. He asks the fisherman why doesn't he start a business, get a loan for a boat and go fishing further from shore to make more money. The fisherman just asks, so then what? Businessman responds, then you'll make money, get rich and then you can retire early. Fisherman responds, but then what do I do when I retire? Businessman responds, you can do whatever you want, you can just fish to your heart's content. Fisherman simply responds, you mean what I'm doing now?


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

I’m not sure why people are so judgemental of people who want to retire early. On the plus side, i’d say i’m happier in my 40s then 30s so why not fire and take advantage of that. I don’t find my energy has decreased in my 40s at all. To each their own, i’m not firing myself but respect those that do.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

latebuyer said:


> I’m not sure why people are so judgemental of people who want to retire early. On the plus side, i’d say i’m happier in my 40s then 30s so why not fire and take advantage of that. I don’t find my energy has decreased in my 40s at all. To each their own, i’m not firing myself but respect those that do.


I don't know if people are that judgemental about it. I haven't read all the posts, but I always felt there is a need for balance. For instance, time is something that you can never get back. So if you were killing yourself for 10 years working 100 hr weeks, what about relationships? Or is one thinking that by the time one is FIRE they can simply make up for that lost time finding and developing a long-term relationship if one has limited experience and most of their life experience is just working at a job that they don't like for the sake of retiring early? The flip side of making FIRE your goal is that you can work and save all you want, but then if you get hit by a car would you regret anything?


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

I think only someone who has fired can say what they feel about it. If i were to think about fireing i would try to hear from people who have done it.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

latebuyer said:


> I think only someone who has fired can say what they feel about it. If i were to think about fireing i would try to hear from people who have done it, rather than from people in this forum projecting their own feelings about it.


It's totally up the each person to decide ...

front load your life (enjoy more things/time now by going into debt and hope to pay it off later)
a more balanced life (enjoy what you can afford now both with money and time wise)
back load your life (work many hours while young and hope it pays off later)

I know people in all those categories.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

cainvest said:


> It's totally up the each person to decide ...
> 
> front load your life (enjoy more things/time now by going into debt and hope to pay it off later)
> a more balanced life (enjoy what you can afford now both with money and time wise)
> ...


This sums it up perfectly. There is no right way or wrong way. We're all individuals.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I'm more afraid of regretting being old and not making more money when I could have.

I think people and relationships change. I wouldn't want to sacrifice my future wealth for the uncertainty of others.

Sounds a bit lonely, sure. But it's much easier to meet new people than create years of wealth instantly.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

It's up to each person to decide, but there is a wrong way though because science is pretty clear of the effects on health due to overwork.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

KaeJS said:


> I wouldn't want to sacrifice my future wealth


Not willing to sacrifice your wealth, but willing to sacrifice your health.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

MrBlackhill said:


> Not willing to sacrifice your wealth, but willing to sacrifice your health.


There is a study for everything and also arguments against them. KaeJS is doing what is best for his mental health. You have to be willing to accept that someone doing something different than the way you do it doesn't make it wrong.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Gator13 said:


> KaeJS is doing what is best for his mental health


Correction, KaeJS is doing what _he believes_ best for his mental health.

Though I accept his choices, he's a free man obviously. I'm just saying it's scientifically, statistically wrong.

As much as we should accept the free choices of people who invests in penny stocks.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

There are a lot of studies that argue both sides. A very individual choice.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

I'm impressed that anyone could work 100 hr weeks at any job... I'm not judging, but I couldn't do it. I worked a 72 hr week last month, which was literally six 12 hour shifts. Even seven 12's would be only a measly 84 hrs. 

I could understand someone who is self-employed working very long hours because at least you can set your own pace and take breaks when you feel it like for the most part.


----------



## latebuyer (Nov 15, 2015)

Some people like to work a lot. I know many people who work second jobs even though they don’t need the money. That’s not me, but some people definitely like it.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

nathan79 said:


> I'm impressed that anyone could work 100 hr weeks at any job... I'm not judging, but I couldn't do it. I worked a 72 hr week last month, which was literally six 12 hour shifts. Even seven 12's would be only a measly 84 hrs.
> 
> I could understand someone who is self-employed working very long hours because at least you can set your own pace and take breaks when you feel it like for the most part.


Yeah, some people exaggerate their estimations of how much they work. I've already done true 100h+ of work per week while working at the farm for my parents, but that meant doing nothing else than working, eating and sleeping. You definitely can't cook, can't go to the groceries, can't do laundry, can't do any other chores and hopefully you don't have too much commute.

I would wake up at 5h30 to eat then started working at 6h (luckily no commute, as it was at my parent's farm).
Then stopped for lunch from 12h to 12h30.
Then stopped for dinner from 19h to 19h30.
Then ended the day at 22h.
Then took a shower and went to sleep for 7h, from 22h30 to 5h30.

6h to 12h, that's 6h of work.
12h30 to 19h, that's 6h30 of work.
19h30 to 22h, that's 2h30 of work.

Total of 15h of pure work a day, times 7 days a week, that's 105h.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrBlackhill said:


> I'm just saying it's scientifically, statistically wrong.


Not sure you can say it is wrong for him unless you happen to have a study done on KaeJS himself.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

cainvest said:


> Not sure you can say it is wrong for him unless you happen to have a study done on KaeJS himself.


That's why I said it's _statistically_ wrong. The odds are against him, but doesn't mean it won't work out for him. I can only hope the best for KaeJS and that he'll be happy and accepting of his choices.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I worked 70 hours a week at my first job. Loved it!


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Depends on what your "job" consists of.

Laying bricks or working in an office.....are quite different forms of "work".

I worked rotating shifts and mandatory overtime for 25 years and the only thing "good" about it was the extra money.

When the company offered me an unreduced pension at age 55....I packed up my gear and said see ya.

If you like working lots of extra hours......go for it, but be aware that you will never get that time back......it's gone forever.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrBlackhill said:


> Yeah, some people exaggerate their estimations of how much they work. I've already done true 100h+ of work per week while working at the farm for my parents, but that meant doing nothing else than working, eating and sleeping. You definitely can't cook, can't go to the groceries, can't do laundry, can't do any other chores and hopefully you don't have too much commute.
> 
> I would wake up at 5h30 to eat then started working at 6h (luckily no commute, as it was at my parent's farm).
> Then stopped for lunch from 12h to 12h30.
> ...


I know people who did that for decades.
My grandfather did even in retirement in his 70's
We visited for a few weeks, he was up by 5am, and worked at something until 10 or 11

That being said, I find that after 11-13 hours in a day I'm not very productive, unless I dramatically change the task type.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Yup and now instead of having the husband working 100h while the wife is at home taking care of everything else, we have both parents each working 50h, which is basically the same.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Work time and personal time are being more intermingled for the purpose of "work-life" balance. I think depending on the individual they may end up working more than they are being paid. Work from home, flex time, hour banks, unlimited vacation are all presented as an employee perk when in fact they are mutually beneficial. The reality is that no employer provides a perk if it does not provide them with an advantage or savings. One of the most common phrases I hear in the workplace is your job is based on X hours a week and our hours of operation are from A to B. Working a 9-5 is almost extinct. I am not saying it is a bad thing as there are tradeoffs in every situation. However, companies know that most workers will do more than required for fear that their coworkers are doing more than they are and it will reflect poorly on them. I believe that competition has always been there but companies are getting better at leveraging it in all sectors.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

londoncalling said:


> Work time and personal time are being more intermingled for the purpose of "work-life" balance. I think depending on the individual they may end up working more than they are being paid. Work from home, flex time, hour banks, unlimited vacation are all presented as an employee perk when in fact they are mutually beneficial. The reality is that no employer provides a perk if it does not provide them with an advantage or savings. One of the most common phrases I hear in the workplace is your job is based on X hours a week and our hours of operation are from A to B. Working a 9-5 is almost extinct. I am not saying it is a bad thing as there are tradeoffs in every situation. However, companies know that most workers will do more than required for fear that their coworkers are doing more than they are and it will reflect poorly on them. I believe that competition has always been there but companies are getting better at leveraging it in all sectors.


Oh god... banking hours is the biggest scam. What your employer is really telling you is they only want your services when they are busy. As soon as things slow down, they tell you there's nothing to do, so take time off and use your banked hours. It works out cheaper than paying you overtime, and they don't have to find work for you when things are slow.

Employer: "If I pay you overtime you'll actually make less due to taxes."


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

Banking hours can be bad ... I wouldn't call it the biggest scam though. The new management where I worked in the '90's got rid of overtime, introduced banking hours and set the end of the month as when the bank totals were checked against a threshold. 

Banks with a larger total were reset to the threshold!!! 


IIRC, my co-worker said she was typically losing fifteen or more hours a month from her bank.


Cheers


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Eclectic21 said:


> Banking hours can be bad ... I wouldn't call it the biggest scam though. The new management where I worked in the '90's got rid of overtime, introduced banking hours and set the end of the month as when the bank totals were checked against a threshold.
> 
> Banks with a larger total were reset to the threshold!!!
> 
> ...


Ouch! I am not sure how that even complies with labour standards. In my province, the labour legislation allows for the banking of hours but there is a cap on when overtime rates would apply. I now some workplaces will set the same cap to avoid overtime pay. It also keeps budgets in check for operations. At a previous employer the in scope employees could carry forward holidays and sick leave. It became a nightmare when they would change departments and receive promotions as they would then want to take their leave at the new rate. Some managers allowed it and others did not. what a headache that became for the finance department and the managers who followed the rules.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

This is a very interesting interview with Scott Galloway. He talks about the decline in the American middle class but also about the huge wealth gap that has emerged between the younger generation (30s to 50s) and their parents. He says:



> _We need to level-up young people who have seen their wealth dramatically decline due to weaponization of government and the tax system by Baby Boomers_


He talks about how the tax and retirement systems have been structured to greatly benefit the Baby Boomers at the expense of younger workers. For example, extremely low capital gains taxes (a far better deal for asset accumulators than workers), and incentives for owners of real estate. And who owns stock assets and real estate? Well it sure aint a 35 year old today.

He also explains that it's not just because these younger people are young. You can compare the income of today's 30 year old to their parents at age 30, and it shows that young people today are doing worse than their parents did at the same point in life.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

This wealth gap will narrow for many when the previous generations pass. Unfortunately, that will be dependent on family circumstances. I agree that overall many North Americans are in a much different situation where there is growing disparity across the board. The spread between lower class and upper class is widening. In the 60s and 70s incomes did not vary as greatly by career (in nominal terms) and even lower-level jobs were sufficient to raise a family. It is not a coincidence that my wife and I chose to have a smaller family than those of our parents. The larger the family the more expensive it is to provide the same opportunities. Also, I will receive very little if any inheritance from my kin as it is split amongst several children and there is not much to pass down. I am ok with that as my parents made a lot of sacrifices for their children to get experiences and opportunities way above their income level. Along with a roof over our head and food to eat they ensured we had values, work ethic and a love of learning. I have told my mother on numerous occasions to splurge a bit here and there when she frets about replacing something she needs. However, as a child of the depression and raising a large family on a single income, it is near impossible for her to have a spender's mindset on anything that is not essential.

Added: Household Balance Sheet Report 2019 - Investor Economics I understand this link is 3 years old but the sentiment is the same.

By 2026, an estimated $1 trillion in personal wealth will be transferred from one generation to the next in Canada, the largest transfer of wealth in our country's history. This transition involves financial complexities for both benefactors and their heirs.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

londoncalling said:


> By 2026, an estimated $1 trillion in personal wealth will be transferred from one generation to the next in Canada, the largest transfer of wealth in our country's history. This transition involves financial complexities for both benefactors and their heirs.


Some are predicting how this will have massive impacts on markets as well

For example gold will be sold off. Probably everything will be sold off except real estate to buy real estate

If there's more than 1 heir maybe the real estate is refinanced or sold to split the equity


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

This is a more objective view of Capital Gains Tax and inclusion rates than pontifications from the likes of Galloway.. It has always been about supporting access to capital to spur economic growth. It is as important to CPP as it is to DB pension funds and individual investment portfolios. 

Capital gains taxation has actually increased over the decades from nothing in the 1960s to a taxable 50% inclusion rate in the '70s, to a cap on the lifetime capital gains exemption in the '90s. It has never been about 'giving the boomers' tax breaks. Whether the 50% inclusion rate changes over time is an unknown, but other than a few 'changes to a higher rate and then the lowering back to 50%', it has been steady for decades. The introduction of the TFSA will benefit millennials and Gen-Xers the most with their actuarial age longevity.

Constant attempts at generational polarization is unhealthy and disingenuous. Every generation has benefited from wealth transfers from one generation to another. The boomer generation benefited from some wealth transfer from the pre-boomers, Gen-Xers will benefit even more from their boomer parents, etc, etc.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> The introduction of the TFSA will benefit millennials and Gen-Xers the most with their actuarial age longevity.


I sure wish TFSA started earlier, a potential retirement savings goldmine.



AltaRed said:


> Constant attempts at generational polarization is unhealthy and disingenuous.


No doubt. It's sad that some just like to incorrectly assign blame and create divisions of hatred.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eclectic21 said:


> It doesn't make sense though.
> 
> The credit they are asking him to cancel is credit he either uses sparingly or that is paid off every month. When everything is completed - they are giving him significantly _more_ credit than he has now.
> 
> ...


Actually it does make sense.
If you can afford $200k of debt, and you have a LOC of $100k, it is only reasonable to extend you another $100k of credit.
It would be irresponsibel to extend that person another $130k, giving them $230k credit, which is beyond what they can afford.

If they want to borrow $130k from you, have them close off the unused stuff, then you can lend them the $130k, giving them total credit available of an affordable $200k.

FYI, "making sense" and me agreeing with it are different.

I personally think that the crazy debt ratios they consider "acceptable" are ridiculous.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Almost 3 months and 178 posts into this thread, no one is of GEN Z or at least 27 years old on this forum? Wow, believeable?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> Almost 3 months and 178 posts into this thread, no one is of GEN Z or at least 27 years old on this forum? Wow, believeable?


Bet. For real for real. No cap

There are no gen z on forums. They don't even know what a web forum is

They're all on discord, twitch and tiktok apps


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

m3s said:


> Bet. For real for real. No cap
> 
> There are no gen z on forums. They don't even know what a web forum is
> 
> They're all on discord, twitch and tiktok apps


So true, my kids think forums are for people older than those on Facebook. They come to read stuff here when I make them for discussion, but don't understand the point.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Plugging Along said:


> So true, my kids think forums are for people older than those on Facebook. They come to read stuff here when I make them for discussion, but don't understand the point.


Teaching your poor kids to study the ancient hieroglyphs to preserve our culture?

Do they ever say "for real for real. no cap"


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> There are no gen z on forums. They don't even know what a web forum is


That's BS ... it all depends on what they are after.
Tons of useful info on many forums, especially for vehicles but other things as well.



m3s said:


> They're all on discord, twitch and tiktok apps


Discord is good, I use it often.
Twitch and tiktok are for mindless entertainment and are noise buckets.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Plugging Along said:


> So true, my kids think forums are for people older than those on Facebook. They come to read stuff here when I make them for discussion, but don't understand the point.


I hate that Facebook has been able to entrench itself in the public's view as a place to do lots of stuff, including basic communication.

I wonder if those kids are going to regret this later in life when someone "mines" all their communications / biases / mistakes and puts it on public display, or uses it against them -- perhaps for their jobs. There's way too much private stuff on Facebook and that's not good. (but it's what advertisers pay for)

In my view the internet should be a mostly anonymous place. Forums like this let us do that, also in the old days people used USENET newsgroups and could use nicknames.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

james4beach said:


> I wonder if those kids are going to regret this later in life when someone "mines" all their communications / biases / mistakes and puts it on public display, or uses it against them -- perhaps for their jobs.


Naw she said forums are considered older than FB. Kids see FB as the social media for parents and grandparents

Kids are on apps that use pseudo anonymity. Snapchat started the trend where things automatically delete and other apps have that option

Good luck deleting your history from this forum. People should have control of their own content/data


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

It used to be a lot harder to post anonymously. You had to be looking over your shoulder all the time.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Gator13 said:


> It used to be a lot harder to post anonymously. You had to be looking over your shoulder all the time.


Trudeau is a real [beetle] [ibis] [ibis] [eye] [beetle] !


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

cainvest said:


> That's BS ... it all depends on what they are after.
> Tons of useful info on many forums, especially for vehicles but other things as well.
> 
> 
> ...


Discord really looks like a locked down IRC. 

As messy as it is, Facebook is actually a pretty good meeting place for informal groups.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Discord, Telegram and Slack is where a lot of groups and teams are coordinated now

Discord has a lot of functionality the others don't. You can build a lot of stats and feeds into channels.

If you notice when you google stuff now you get info from ancient forums. Because google doesn't index these discussions


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

It's interesting to watch tech culture evolve. My first encounters with discord a couple of years ago reminded me of my early adulthood using ICQ in the mid 90s. Obviously, there is a lot more one can do with discord but for me it was hauntingly familiar.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

londoncalling said:


> It's interesting to watch tech culture evolve. My first encounters with discord a couple of years ago reminded me of my early adulthood using ICQ in the mid 90s. Obviously, there is a lot more one can do with discord but for me it was hauntingly familiar.


I find that things don't really change much over the years. Facebook really looks a lot like MySpace, the same crappy and confusing pages with junk all over the place.

Like you say, a lot of the chats look familiar too. I was a heavy user of IRC and mIRC back in the day, it wasn't that different than Slack. The mIRC client was very user-friendly. And other chats such as MatterMost have been around for years.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

londoncalling said:


> It's interesting to watch tech culture evolve. My first encounters with discord a couple of years ago reminded me of my early adulthood using ICQ in the mid 90s. Obviously, there is a lot more one can do with discord but for me it was hauntingly familiar.


discord looks exactly like a stripped down & locked down irc.

as far as mIRC... yuck.
Never really liked it, but I also ran my session in a screen session so I could access it remotely.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> discord looks exactly like a stripped down & locked down irc.
> 
> as far as mIRC... yuck.
> Never really liked it, but I also ran my session in a screen session so I could access it remotely.


The military used mIRC and then built TransVerse chat client on that concept to replace it

Discord is just a different UI that was designed for gamers to also audio chat I think. But now you can have bots do all kinds of things inside if Discord. It's also integrated with crypto so users can verify wallets and NFTs for access or roles, quickly send crypto with commands etc. Was never intended for that originally but nobody is using mIRC for that

It's like when Larry King said the internet was no different than the TV or radio. Maybe from the perspective of someone who doesn't use it


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

m3s said:


> Teaching your poor kids to study the ancient hieroglyphs to preserve our culture?
> 
> Do they ever say "for real for real. no cap"


I have found forum to be really interesting the different views, and many I don't agree with, so have them read them with me and we discuss at home. 

They have said 'for real for real, no cap' but only to mock someone as a joke.

Last night I heard my oldest complaining that she hates doing adult things like applying for jobs and communicating with old people (teachers) because they only communicate it through email. She went on a rant on how email was archaic and that once the adults that send email retire, she won't have to check her email anymore.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I hate that Facebook has been able to entrench itself in the public's view as a place to do lots of stuff, including basic communication.
> 
> I wonder if those kids are going to regret this later in life when someone "mines" all their communications / biases / mistakes and puts it on public display or uses it against them -- perhaps for their jobs. There's way too much private stuff on Facebook and that's not good. (but its what advertisers pay for)
> 
> In my view the internet should be a mostly anonymous place. Forums like this let us do that, also in the old days people used USENET newsgroups and could use nicknames.


I had to go on FB because that was the only way updates would happen from my kids' gym and her team. It's actually not too bad. I don't post very much; my last picture was years ago. Kids don't use facebook now unless their parents make them to communicate with family (we don't). Snapchat, Instagram, discord are how they communicate. Though many kids believe that they control their data, which is still a problem.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Plugging Along said:


> Last night I heard my oldest complaining that she hates doing adult things like applying for jobs and communicating with old people (teachers) because they only communicate it through email. She went on a rant on how email was archaic and that once the adults that send email retire, she won't have to check her email anymore.


Funny

I have a new boss who says things like that. He was saying yesterday we use powerpoint way too much. My last job was using Slack, Teams and some homebrew chat app that didn't really catch on. It replaces a lot of emails

I know asia does a lot of business on mobile apps now. Kind of like Instagram and FB have some business here


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ + ^^ So how do kids "these days" apply for a job? According to post #195, can't be sending out cvs with emails, let alone snail mail. 

Or is it like post#196 description where the employer should be looking at the applicant's IG, TickTock, FB(old) (or whatever in-style) social media video and see the shakes, moves or butts as "eyes-evidence" of talents for hire!!!!?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ + ^^ So how do kids "these days" apply for a job? According to post #195, can't be sending out cvs with emails, let alone snail mail.
> 
> Or is it like post#196 description where the employer should be looking at the applicant's IG, TickTock, FB(old) (or whatever in-style) social media video and see the shakes, moves or butts as "eyes-evidence" of talents for hire!!!!?


I believe it's called LinkdIn beav although that's been around for 20 years now

I haven't applied for a job in a long time. I have seen job offers on Twitter, Discord, Youtube, podcasts, websites etc

Like anything the best jobs are found through networking and that includes the vast online social networking


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ + ^^ So how do kids "these days" apply for a job? According to post #195, can't be sending out cvs with emails, let alone snail mail.


LinkedIn, Indeed, online forms.

I've had 3 different employers over the last 10 years. Never had to send an email.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

LinkedIn has mostly become just another social media mess with an increasingly low signal to noise ratio like Twitter and FB. It was mostly professional for some time but lost its way and my account will be closed shortly. Indeed.com is the primary 'go to' place the best that I can tell.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

james4beach said:


> I hate that Facebook has been able to entrench itself in the public's view as a place to do lots of stuff, including basic communication.
> 
> I wonder if those kids are going to regret this later in life when someone "mines" all their communications / biases / mistakes and puts it on public display, or uses it against them -- perhaps for their jobs. There's way too much private stuff on Facebook ...


I've read of employers taking a pass on people based on what was found on FB or that the potential employee figured had been deleted from the internet. Our HR department staff has talked about such vetting of potential hires.

A friend involved in a car accident injury lawsuit where the insurance company wanted to cut rehab services early was advised by the injury lawyer to post nothing to the internet. Insurance companies can check where what seems innocuous can be used to argue the injury isn't real or has healed to the point of no longer needing services.

A few years ago, the US worked with Mexico to catch then extradite a fugitive based on the FB posts that were assumed to be untraceable.


Though as others have pointed out, for the younger folks - it may be something other than FB that could be an issue.

Cheers


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

Plugging Along said:


> ... Last night I heard my oldest complaining that she hates doing adult things like applying for jobs and communicating with old people (teachers) because they only communicate it through email. She went on a rant on how email was archaic and that once the adults that send email retire, she won't have to check her email anymore.


Maybe ... and may not.

I can recall decades ago how paper was going to disappear. 
Paper is still with us, despite those in charge changing generations.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

Interesting the mentions of LinkedIn and Indeed ... for the last round of hiring I was involved in, what came from them were people who failed the technical interview badly. The number one source was employees recommending people they had worked with at other companies and the number two source was a competitor to Indeed.


Cheers


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

If I send one of my contacts as a reference to my employer and they end up hiring it, my employer gives me a $2,000 bonus after 3 months.

I tried to send a few contacts of mine, but it turns out my employer had already gone through all of my LinkedIn contacts and were processing them, so I couldn't get the bonus.

I got my last job from a headhunter who contacted me on LinkedIn. With the tight job market, I get multiple job offers every single week through LinkedIn.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eclectic21 said:


> I've read of employers taking a pass on people based on what was found on FB or that the potential employee figured had been deleted from the internet. Our HR department staff has talked about such vetting of potential hires.


Yes that's the kind of thing that concerns me. People use social media very casually and post all kinds of things that can eventually get them into trouble.


----------



## milhouse (Nov 16, 2016)

The missus got her new job after being headhunted on LinkedIn. She was getting contacted by recruiters every so often on LinkedIn and went on a few interviews/information sharing sessions if just to network. 
My buddy who owns a business uses Indeed. 



Eclectic21 said:


> I can recall decades ago how paper was going to disappear.
> Paper is still with us, despite those in charge changing generations.


I agree paper isn't gone and I'll still write some stuff down or print a doc out. The missus doesn't trust me with our travel plans on my phone so she always prints out hard copies and brings it with us in a folder as backup.  
However, I've got to say that I was basically using almost no paper at work duing the last 5-10 years. It was so much easier taking down notes (if you can type I suppose) and then sharing that info with a lot of people, sending out minutes, transfering info into presentations, searching/referencing for historical information, etc. 



Eclectic21 said:


> The number one source was employees recommending people they had worked with at other companies





MrBlackhill said:


> If I send one of my contacts as a reference to my employer and they end up hiring it, my employer gives me a $2,000 bonus after 3 months.


+1 My old company was pretty big on employee external candidate referrals, offering decent referral bonuses too. I referred a few people into the company but I also grabbed former colleagues from old teams into the new teams I was on because there was internal competition between teams too.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ + ^^ So how do kids "these days" apply for a job? According to post #195, can't be sending out cvs with emails, let alone snail mail.
> 
> Or is it like post#196 description where the employer should be looking at the applicant's IG, TickTock, FB(old) (or whatever in-style) social media video and see the shakes, moves or butts as "eyes-evidence" of talents for hire!!!!?


Mine are just 14 & 16. So very entry level. For babysitting and community jobs, mine try to go through MY FB. For more formal like retail, it's all online portals. Some will require a resume upload. In other cases, it's directly through the company app or website. The other day a chain retailer was doing in person. You showed up with a resume and got an interview on the spot, but you had to go online ahead of time to secure a spot. My kid didn't know about as we were just shopping and the walk in spots were filled. 

I would say for other jobs that are not entry level, it's mostly linkedN or through the company portal or website. I dont' think the young kids are using linkedn right now. Definately not snail mail. The last few companie I worked at, any mailed CV got tossed as it had to go through the system. For retail, right now ever where is short staffed so I assume in person with a resume would be okay.


----------



## Retired Peasant (Apr 22, 2013)

james4beach said:


> Yes that's the kind of thing that concerns me. People use social media very casually and post all kinds of things that can eventually get them into trouble.


On the other hand, if you aren't on FB/twitter/whatever that can also be a red flag to employers.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Retired Peasant said:


> On the other hand, if you aren't on FB/twitter/whatever that can also be a red flag to employers.


I don't see how that's a red flag ... unless maybe you're applying for a job directly related social media.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

cainvest said:


> I don't see how that's a red flag ... unless maybe you're applying for a job directly related social media.


Nor do I. If anything, not being on any of those mediums suggests I could actually be more productive and efficient with my time allocations.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

A lot of companies nowadays have agreements that you can't disgrace the brand on social media

So it's probably a bonus if that can't find you online


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

m3s said:


> A lot of companies nowadays have agreements that you can't disgrace the brand on social media
> 
> So it's probably a bonus if that can't find you online


I agree with this. Look at how many people have run into trouble when online content from years past comes back to haunt them.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

It is incredible how stupid some people behave on social media. They essentially write their own obits.


----------



## bigmoneytalks (Oct 3, 2014)

Gator13 said:


> I agree with this. Look at how many people have run into trouble when online content from years past comes back to haunt them.


Bingo! All these people posting their funny tik tok videos about the stupidest things will circle back and would be quite embarrassing as they get older. I was stupid too when I was young, but luckily for me, we weren't videotaping each other.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

bigmoneytalks said:


> videotaping


I know what you meant but "videotaping" 

Remember those huge cameras that held the full size VHS "videotapes" back in the america's funniest home videos era

I just got a new phone that rivals those giant pro cameras in the palm of my hand but where's the tape go?


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

I just attended a presentation by a recruiter put on by a large international corporation today. The most important advice given in the presentation was "don't post content of you doing stupid stuff" followed by the second most important "if you are going to ignore the first bit of advice "make sure your settings are set to private" so they are harder to find when we do our social media check. As much as I abhor social media a positive social media presence can do wonders for a prospective employee.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> I just got a new phone that rivals those giant pro cameras in the palm of my hand but where's the tape go?


Tape secures the phone to the selfie-stick!


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

MrBlackhill said:


> If I send one of my contacts as a reference to my employer and they end up hiring it, my employer gives me a $2,000 bonus after 3 months ...


I can't remember if it was $3K or $5K I received ... though probation was six months so the recommended person had to pass probation before payment would be made.




MrBlackhill said:


> ... I got my last job from a headhunter who contacted me on LinkedIn. With the tight job market, I get multiple job offers every single week through LinkedIn.


Reminds me of when I had a head hunter leave a cold call on my new company voicemail ... after all of a week with the company.

About six weeks later it made more sense when the partner said that year, staff turnover had improved to 38%!!


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

londoncalling said:


> ... As much as I abhor social media a positive social media presence can do wonders for a prospective employee.


Sure ... if the job is related to SM somehow.

If not, at least at my company - having a reasonable SM presence keeps on in the running for the job. AFAICT, having a bad or questionable SM presence is what will have an impact (i.e. get one's eliminated).


Cheers


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eclectic21 said:


> Sure ... if the job is related to SM somehow.


Yeah in my field, I think we'd be immediately suspicious of anyone with too "big" or flashy a social media profile.

They'd come off as shallow, attention-seeking, with priorities in the wrong places


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

What I meant when I referred to positive social media presence was the converse side of those that post a life of debauchery. Showing themselves at a party that night and then calling in sick to work. Taking a day off to tend to a sick child and then showing pictures of themselves jetskiing at the lake. BAD. It happens all the time. I positive social media does not have to be flashy or overactive. Volunteerism, following certain interests, applauding others success without brazenness.

Essentially: don't post yourself doing stupid stuff or being blatant about highly controversial opinions. Everyone has a right to an opinion but that opinion should not be a direct contradiction to your place of employment (present or future). Right or wrong, attitude and image impact career success. I agree that a flashy or overwhelming social media profile would also be a red flag. Even though social media has been around a long time in many ways its etiquette and effects are still evolving.


----------



## Eclectic21 (Jun 25, 2021)

Thanks for the clarification.

As for SM's etiquette evolving - it seems more about the people using it. I have seen many of the missteps/assumptions back in the BBS days. SM has had a bigger reach for users and having employers pay attention to it though.


Cheers


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

londoncalling said:


> Essentially: don't post yourself doing stupid stuff


Around midnight there was a lot of yelling at the street level below my apartment building. I looked down and saw a group of teenagers fighting, with one kid getting punched and thrown around.

More than one of the kids had their phone out, presumably taking videos... seems like a strange thing to do. If they're friends of the victim they should try to stop the attack or intervene. OTOH if they're friends of the attackers (or part of the group), filming your crime and documenting your involvement is a pretty dumb thing to do.

In any case, I yelled at them, and told them to get off my lawn (so to speak), which at least interrupted the fight.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)




----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

londoncalling said:


>


I'm a boomer to those kids and even I watch gamers on YouTube somtimes  Just different games and gamers than PewDiePie

Lorde and MJ at the end was hilarious


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

m3s said:


> I'm a boomer to those kids and even I watch gamers on YouTube somtimes  Just different games and gamers than PewDiePie
> 
> Lorde and MJ at the end was hilarious


You're a boomer to someone who is 30. Lol


----------



## jlunfirst (1 mo ago)

late boomer. I actually feel privileged to have lived through significant social change for: women, minorities, sexual orientation plus life before and during the Internet.


----------



## jlunfirst (1 mo ago)

My youngest sister is Generation X. She is a decade younger than I. Her eldest daughter, Generation Z, shares the same birth date as myself. It's rather interesting to be a family where the oldest niece is 37 and the youngest nephew from another family is 13 yrs. old. This is not even from 2nd marriages. My baby sister had her lst child @38 yrs.


----------

