Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 203 posts

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#131

Post by [deleted] »

BuckRogers wrote: post #24
dleslie wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the same boat, born on a cusp year of the two generations, and I have long felt like a surfer who is struggling to ride the crest of a wave but who knows that the crash to shore is fast approaching.

I think a lot of us are. My parents are Boomers and we were born between 78 and 82. Technically being born in 78 makes you GenX. Yet if you have a brother born only 4 years later, it's another generation? We had the exact same experience, Atari 2600 on a TV that is now weird to even think existed. No TV remotes, walk up and change the channel. Rotary phones, city directories and phone books. Need the time and temp? Y…

[deleted]

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#132

Post by ghaff »

CorvusCrypto wrote: post #54
bbcbasic wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stagnating wages, rapidly increasing house prices, bad terms for renters, increasing university costs. If I were 20 I'd consider working remote and just go live in a much cheaper country. You could get a boomer lifestyle yet!

God yes, this is a big issue. The rent in cities alone is enough to make me want to GTFO of US and go somewhere else.

The rent in a handful of cities. There are plenty of places in the US (both urban and not) where $1K or so per month will get a decent apartment. Yes, there is a lot of tech concentrated in the expensive cities but the same could be said of other countries like the UK. Of course, there are cheaper places in the world to live but then you may be looking at remote work or lower salaries and the same logic applies in the US.

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#134

Post by seanmcdirmid »

michaelchisari wrote: post #123
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say the republicans have even more factional problems than the democrats...tea party and trump, moderates, Cristian coalition, etc..! But since they don't control the White House, they are at least unified in there Obama hate, which is mostly how they are perceived.

You're right, the factional problems of the Republicans are huge this time around. But they weren't so much in 2008.

2008 basically started the tea party. I would also claim that Democrat factions were pretty subdued before 2008 as well.

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#135

Post by dredmorbius »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #125
pasquinelli wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What someone gets paid has to be, overall, less than what they earn, overall. Otherwise it'd be uneconomical for their employer.

Not sure what you mean by "overall," but isn't this trivially contradicted? Salesman A sells $100 of product @ 40% margin, bringing in $40 of "profit," and is paid $20. Salesman B sells $100 of product @ 40% margin, bringing in $40 of "profit," and is paid $41. The owner is up $20 from Salesman A, and down $1 from Salesman B, and can merrily continue overpaying Salesman B. "But no owner would do that because it's obv…

In theory: marginal productivity of labour.

E.g., you start adding and/or cutting sales, QA, and director positions and see how the organisational performance responds.

You'll also typically find (unless, say, you're a Google, Apple, Intel, and Cisco colluding with illegal mutual noncompete agreements on labour) that you're taking prices from the market on what people demand to be paid.

In practice, the information's far less clear, and rules of thumb or gut feels get invoked a fair bit.

But overall, yes: companies which are aiming for profitability have to balance their costs, including labour, with revenues.

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#136

Post by zamalek »

BuckRogers wrote: post #24
dleslie wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the same boat, born on a cusp year of the two generations, and I have long felt like a surfer who is struggling to ride the crest of a wave but who knows that the crash to shore is fast approaching.

I think a lot of us are. My parents are Boomers and we were born between 78 and 82. Technically being born in 78 makes you GenX. Yet if you have a brother born only 4 years later, it's another generation? We had the exact same experience, Atari 2600 on a TV that is now weird to even think existed. No TV remotes, walk up and change the channel. Rotary phones, city directories and phone books. Need the time and temp? Y…

> typical 20 year generational divide is broken

I completely agree. Born in Zimbabwe in '87, where things (including culture) have always been a little behind - up to and including my childhood including rotary telephones, watching 9/11 on a black-and-white TV and a VIC 20. Keeping in mind that poverty is distinct to debt, I haven't been directly impacted by the debts on the previous generation and genuinely have no idea what other millennials are going on about (although I am slowly warming up to their struggle).

At the very least the formal ranges of generational divides seem to only strictly apply to developed countries.

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#137

Post by michaelchisari »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #134
michaelchisari wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, the factional problems of the Republicans are huge this time around. But they weren't so much in 2008.

2008 basically started the tea party. I would also claim that Democrat factions were pretty subdued before 2008 as well.

The Tea Party didn't get a legislative hold until the mid-term elections, when Obama lost his Democratic majority.

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#138

Post by imtringued »

haywirez wrote: post #75

There are mitigating strategies that we can use to our advantage. Rejecting car & home ownership culture, enforcing various frugal lifestyle patterns (cook and eat home, body weight exercise), cheap travel (couchsurfing/airbnb), geoarbitraging income can do wonders on a personal level. There are several changes on the horizon that could cause interesting ripples soon - for example, what happens when mobile solar powe…

Home ownership is a great asset if you're using the home yourself. On the other hand a car is a actually a liability that depreciates over time requiring inspections in regular intervals, compulsory car insurance and a parking lot at both the departure location and the destination.

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#139

Post by [deleted] »

ktRolster wrote: post #92
aioprisan wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the past administrations faced such partisan Congresses, they've only gotten more extreme over the years.

None of the past administrations faced such partisan Congresses, This is unthinking lack of research. You only need to go back to Clinton to find a congress that vociferously was against him, to the point they impeached him. Clinton handled it because he was very good at handling compromise and the politics game.

[deleted]

Re: Millennials 'set to earn less than Generation X'

#140

Post by seanmcdirmid »

michaelchisari wrote: post #137
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2008 basically started the tea party. I would also claim that Democrat factions were pretty subdued before 2008 as well.

The Tea Party didn't get a legislative hold until the mid-term elections, when Obama lost his Democratic majority.

The tea party was energized by 2008, they had to wait until the next election to take power.
Post reply on HN