
The dominance of baby boomers is becoming total - randomname2
https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2016/march/1456750800/richard-cooke/boomer-supremacy
======
martythemaniak
I wonder if what we're seeing is a quantitative change leading to a
qualitative change.

It's undeniable that old people have always held power in society, from
hunting-gathering societies (various elders/shamans/wisepeople) through early
civilization (Senator comes from the Latin "senex" for "old". Senatus =
"chamber of old men"), though to today.

At the same time, their numbers (and effectiveness) were probably limited,
either by a more pyramidal population distribution and/or by lower life
expectancy (including duller minds in older age).

I think what we're seeing for the first time in history is a huge swath of
healthy, long-lived older people, throwing the relative balance way off and
leading to various situations we see across many different societies.

I like to sum it up as Boomers eating the young and I don't think things will
change until the numbers/demographics do, ie, Millenials will experience a
lost generation and things won't start to look good until we're well into
middle-age.

~~~
s_kilk
> we're seeing for the first time in history is a huge swath of healthy, long-
> lived older people...

Exactly, and they cast a disproportionately long shadow over society and
politics.

EDIT: just look at the recent Irish referendum on same-sex marriage. A vast
majority of the "no" votes came from the >60 cohort. I'll wager the age
breakdown of last weeks election would reveal a similar dynamic: the young
want change and meaningful progress while the old continue to vote for the
past, keeping our culture and politics firmly rooted in the early/mid 20th
century.

~~~
brightball
Not on the topic of SS marriage but just on the "young want change vs old vote
to continue the past" point.

As I've gotten older, one thing that I've consistently found is that the young
want change. Always. Regardless of whether it's beneficial, been tried before
and negative consequences were seen, would only benefit certain people or
negative outcomes long term are clearly visible: they want change for sake of
change.

Older people have a lot more experience in observing human nature. There is a
very big reason that the slogans around "Wisdom comes with age" and "Young
know it alls" have existed for so long. They've been observably accurate.

It's a lot easier to get people fired up about things that they don't
understand, because any contentious subject has two sides and the fire
generally shows that you only understand one of them.

“When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to
have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much
the old man had learned in seven years.” - Mark Twain

~~~
Lawtonfogle
>Not on the topic of SS marriage

But we shouldn't dismiss this. On the topics of racism, same sex marriage,
sexism... really any injustice of the past out there, the old tend to want to
hold on what was in the past regardless if it was good or bad.

To think that the old have a better grasp on things ignores all the times they
do not.

>There is a very big reason that the slogans around "Wisdom comes with age"
and "Young know it alls" have existed for so long. They've been observably
accurate.

It works 100% of the time when it works. The old have wisdom only if you
consider the cases they were wise. If you look at issues like racism or
homophobia, the young are the wise ones. Society advanced one funeral at a
time because the we lose their 'wisdom'.

If the young want change just for the sake of change, then the old want
stability just for the sake of stability.

~~~
hiram112
> If you look at issues like racism or homophobia, the young are the wise
> ones.

Maybe I'm getting older myself (30's), but the way that racism, homophobia,
etc. is being handled by the young is troubling at best, facist at worst.

A large majority of millenials support restrictions on freedom of speech when
it's considered hateful. What ever happened to 'sticks and stones...'?

Honestly, on this issue, I see millenials about as bat-shit crazy as the other
extremes - everyone's favorite uncle or old neighbor from the deep South,
stuck in the 1960's.

~~~
Lawtonfogle
>Maybe I'm getting older myself (30's), but the way that racism, homophobia,
etc. is being handled by the young is troubling at best, facist at worst.

What I see is the way that free speech is being handled when it involves
something offensive. But this is not something unique among young individuals;
all that is changed is the topics. Which generation was around when obscenity
was allowed as an exception to the First Amendment?

------
oliwarner
The strange thing is in other [especially European] countries, these post-war
"baby boomers" are falling apart at the seams and it's largely their parents'
fault. All because of food.

Parents of baby-boomers lived through war. Food was rationed. Luxury food was
_seriously_ rationed. Many grew up without processed fats like butter, or even
sugar.

The end rationing was a celebration and these parents wanted their children to
have everything they couldn't. Sugar. Fats. The new-fangled convenience foods
that came over with Americans post-WWII (operating bases, etc). As time went
on this junk food just became even more affordable.

The result is a demographic that has just _awesome_ levels of T2 diabetes,
obesity and coronary issues, as well as all the problems that have been
associated with these conditions (a fair amount of dementia).

In many cases, the parents who lived through the war are now caring for and
outliving their children.

~~~
mcv
That's not what I'm seeing. My impression is rather that the war generation
taught their values of not wasting food to their children, and every
generation, the lesson gets dilluted because the war is increasingly distant.
My baby-boomer taught me to not waste food, and I try to teach my kids, but I
also notice that my wife does not share this value. Maybe because her parents
grew up on a farm where food was less scarce? Or maybe it's simply different
families, different cultures.

In any case, I don't see high levels of obesity and diabetes in baby-boomers.
And I think it's more my generation and possibly later generations that eat
too much junk food.

~~~
oliwarner
Boomers' _children_ are slightly better. They haven't really known rationing
so aren't in the position where they really want to push "luxury" crap on
their kids. It's been a slow realisation but I think we're only just getting
to a point where as a population we understand that feeding children crap
means we get fat children.

Food waste is something slightly different but I agree, there's a very
consumerist approach to food these days. Most are disconnected from production
so don't care where it comes from, how much effort goes into it, how many
welfare sacrifices are make to get its cost down.

Fixing both of these issues is done by getting people making and eating real
food.

Re my original comments, OT is a geriatrician in England. She's seeing people
in their 60s and 70s who have had to move back in with their parents to be
cared for. You shouldn't be having geriatric issues until you hit your 80s.
She obviously doesn't have the direct experience of other generations but her
colleagues tell me this is a relatively recent thing, with this generation.

It'd be interesting to munge through a ton of medical data on this.

------
jondubois
I'm a Gen Y living in Sydney - I've been planning to leave for a while because
of the adverse conditions for young people here. Rent is very high, everything
is expensive, you get fines all the time for silly stuff like parking your car
facing the 'wrong' way, staying in a parking spot for 10 minutes too long or
not waiting for a full '3 seconds' at a stop sign, etc... Also, in some parks,
you can get fined for having a picnic without a permit. I had to pay a $300
traffic fine for driving in a 'bus-only lane' once. It's a police state.

Also, the tax system is complicated and favours people who own houses (In
Australia, you get tax deductions if you lose money on a rental property which
you own). There are actually a lot of (older) people in Australia who own like
10+ houses (with 10 mortgages) and rent them out to young people and get huge
tax deductions (and capital growth).

Older people own everything. To make it worse, the older generation in
Australia doesn't really want to invest in technology - They prefer just
investing their money into real estate (which has been growing an an
impressive rate year-over-year for the past 20 years or so).

The idea of 'investing in yourself' is mostly a foreign concept in Australia -
The only thing worthwhile investing in is a block of land with bricks and
concrete on top.

There are many people who dropped out of school, became construction workers
and bought a house on a mortgage and are now wealthier than most university-
educated students thanks to the insane real-estate growth and labour shortage
(due in part to tough immigration laws).

Some recent changes in laws suggest that conditions might be improving but
it's too late for me.

I'm looking forward to living in San Francisco - Yes the rent will also be
high; but at least it seems that everything else is cheaper, taxes are lower
and it's generally a good place to build a career in technology.

~~~
elthran
>I had to pay a $300 traffic fine for driving in a 'bus-only lane' once

I wouldn't say that's evidence of a police state - plenty of other countries
have bus lanes, and you'll be fined for driving in them - would you expect
otherwise?

~~~
mikeash
I'd certainly expect a fine, but $300 seems way excessive. On the other hand,
so does the phrase "police state."

~~~
elthran
On the topic of excessive fines - If a fine is meant as a deterrent, surely a
large, but not plainly ridiculous fine is a significant deterrent?

I think they need to be small enough that people can feasibly pay them, but
large enough that they can't just shrug it off

~~~
mikeash
The problem is that one man's "shrug it off" is another man's "we can't afford
to eat this month." And while you want to deter people, it's unfair to punish
someone severely for an innocent mistake that doesn't hurt anybody.

There was a lot of reporting on this sort of thing in the St. Louis area
following recent events in Ferguson. Poor people get ticketed for some minor
violation. They can't afford the fine when it comes due. The fine snowballs
with late fees and court costs, and soon they're facing jail time because they
committed some minor infraction, like failing to signal a turn, that half the
people on the road commit every day.

I think the proper answer is to adjust fines according to the person's income.
It's ridiculous to me that a person making $200,000/year will pay the same
fine for speeding as someone working minimum wage. Or, really, that the person
working minimum wage will likely pay _more_ , because the fees compound if you
can't pay right away.

~~~
jwhitlark
I think it was Sweden that scales fines based on annual income.

------
wheaties
I see lots of baby boomers trying to unload the business they've worked hard
at the past 30yrs, hoping someone can pay cash at 3x what they make from it.
Who can buy something that costs 250K if they've never had steady work let
alone the burden of student debt? Eventually even that market will "correct"
down to 2x or less.

~~~
pc86
I don't think this is unique to boomers.

They've spent decades building something - they're probably the people _least_
capable of objectively valuing the business. There's too much emotion tied
into it, especially if they're at a point where they could sell but are just
as happy to keep working, meaning the price needed to get them to leave goes
up.

It's not unique to business owners, either. One of the real estate websites
have a "Make Me Move" option, which is basically the homeowner saying what
number they'd need to pack up their shit and leave. It is consistently
180-200% the actual market value. To the point where you want to ask the
homeowners what exactly they're smoking that they think their house is worth
even close to that much money.

~~~
matwood
> It is consistently 180-200% the actual market value.

Market value is what it would take to have a buy/sell transaction on the
house. If there are no houses for sale in the neighborhood, everyones make me
move number IS the market value for the house/neighborhood.

~~~
leogiertz
Not really, market value requires a buyer too.

------
tunichtgut
This is such a good article. Its exactly the same in Germany.

Boomers are running the business. Young pp are worthless garbage. I heard
about some middle school teachers saying "young germans should be expelled
from all social security...".

Like weow...wait until these pp are old. Then its time for retaliations on the
great nazis-kid bastard generation.

~~~
tomp
No need for retaliation. The "old" are digging their own graves (no pun
intended), by not allowing the "young" to flourish - the younger generations
either migrate to countries offering better oportunities, or not work at all
because of excessive taxes. Eventually, who's going to take care of the old,
of their property, and pay their pensions?

~~~
venomsnake
> Eventually, who's going to take care of the old, of their property, and pay
> their pensions?

Robots.

~~~
tomp
That's a bet I would be willing to take. I consider it very unlikely that it's
going to happen in 30 years or less.

~~~
ccozan
Have you seen the latest robot from Boston Dynamics?

Here is Atlas:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY)

I don't think we need 30y for a real robot application for old people. This
could be in less than 10 years.

~~~
tomp
It's amazing. However, I don't think the problem is Robotics, I think the
problem is AI. Will robots be helping us in 20 years? Possibly. Will they
still need people directing them, supervising them, and doing the more
complicated tasks? I'm inclined to answer "definitely". But I'd love to be
proven wrong! :)

~~~
logfromblammo
Japan has a bit of a head start on this, recognizing early that it will soon
have a lot of old people and not enough young people to both take care of them
and keep the economy running. Honda's ASIMO is explicitly a mobility
assistance robot. Osaka U. Actroids mimic human appearance. Mitsubishi's
Wakamaru approaches the function of a receptionist.

So far, no robot seems even close to taking on the everyday tasks performed by
low-wage nursing home employees in the US. But take a look at "Babyloid" and
"Pepper". They are robots designed to socially engage with people, so they
don't get lonely and depressed.

Japan's elderly may soon be conversing with chatbots more often than living
people. Baby Boomers in the US had better take note.

~~~
tomp
> Japan's elderly may soon be conversing with chatbots more often than living
> people.

I'm not sure that makes sense - don't TV and Skype solve that problem just
fine? I mean, why would old people talk to robots instead of other old people
- unless they want to, that is, but then I'd guess this trend wouldn't (isn't)
be limited to just old people...

------
TheAceOfHearts
I really cannot fathom why we have these ridiculous last call laws. I'm living
in California, where it's illegal to sell drinks after 2AM. It's incredibly
frustrating. More than once I've been up late at night, and felt like cooking
something with wine, only to quickly realize: Oh, right, I can't go buy a
bottle of wine until 6AM... Because think of the children, or something like
that.

~~~
Kenji
I don't want to patronize you but is it really that hard to plan ahead enough
to be able to survive 4 hours of not being able to buy stuff?

~~~
brianwawok
Hey in Indiana I can't buy any booze on Sunday... if my weekly costco trip is
on Sunday and I am getting low on beer? NOPE NO BEER ON SUNDAYS MIGHT NOT GO
TO CHURCH

~~~
JoeAltmaier
I understand its more about keeping others (i.e. the booze store employees)
from being able to take Sunday off. Its a Labor party thing.

~~~
brianwawok
if that were true:

1) Why just close booze stores? Why not close restaurants or grocery stores or
any of the non-essential businesses on sunday?

2) What about a grocery store that is already open and staffed and has piles
of beer. What does not selling it do for the already working employees?

------
ajeet_dhaliwal
Everything besides the new laws about bars applies to London and the southeast
of England, UK. Remarkable how similar the situation is in these two
countries.

Could culture have something to do with this if they can avoid this cost of
living crisis in continental Europe and most of the US? Or may be they're
suffering there too. Only way to solve a lot of these issues is to be able to
work remotely and not have to live or buy in commuter areas.

~~~
mahranch
I think many of these problems could be minimized, mitigated or some
completely eliminated if millennials would actually vote. But they don't. And
I don't foresee that ever changing. It was the same problem with my
generation, gen-x (born in 1980 so I'm not quite a gen-x, not quite a
millennial). We just didn't vote. I don't believe the <30 crowd has ever been
a big voting bloc, at any point in U.S history.

Though, I noticed many of my facebook friends started voting once they hit
their early 30s. I think that's when people start to settle down in life and
either have the time to study/figure out politics, or get more interested in
it. It might be the time where their youthful naive idealism vanishes and they
realize that _true_ change is a slow process. They become more pragmatic and
more realistic. Much of their concerns tend to be more local/regional where
their votes actually hold some power. It's less about voting in a president
who can wave a magic wand and create their ideal utopia overnight and more
about voting in a local city councilman or state senator who will best
represent their interests. People they have actually met in real life and
shook their hands.

~~~
makomk
Here in the UK, the parties that millenials did vote for promptly went back on
the promises they made to get those votes.

~~~
Latty
No, what happened was they became the lesser partner in a coalition, and
delivered a lot from that position (the policies during that period were much,
much better than they would have otherwise been). The idea that somehow they
should have delivered on all of their policies from that position is
laughable. Would they have been better served not being able to influence
government at all? (This all goes to show how broken FPTP is, of course.)

Then, because of thinking like that in your post, people gave up on voting for
them, despite being the best possible representation.

------
CM30
And it's because of an unhealthy collision between two major trends in
society. Namely:

1\. Most more developed countries have an aging population, so the percentage
of baby boomers is much higher than it probably should be. This is due to
better conditions, better healthcare, etc, which leads to people living longer
and the population demographics skewing older. Either way, politicians tend to
support them, because they make up more of the population.

2\. Older people vote more (perhaps due to younger generations seemingly
losing all interest in politics or trying to change their situation in any
reasonable way), so politicians target them more. Combine with the aging
population mentioned above...

It's a pretty bad problem to have, and a perfect illustration of why a
population shouldn't be skewed too much towards any one demographic. And even
more problems are going to arise when more of this demographic start retiring
and the numbers of people working isn't enough to support it...

I have no idea how to solve this issue. Maybe mandatory voting would be a good
start, to try and encourage people to vote rather than mere discuss
politics/sign internet petitions? But it's still problematic, since you need
both political parties that fight for younger people's political views and
enough people to support said parties that the issues can't simply be ignored.

------
gradstudent
King's Cross is super dodgy, especially at night. It attracted drunks, deros,
druggies, prostitutes and other unsavory types. It was not a nice place to
visit and it had a reputation for violence.

The lockout laws have stopped the violence. They have also caused collateral
damage in the form of these closures.

So there you have it. Would you rather be safe out or cry over the closure of
a few late night businesses? Having experienced all sides of King's Cross, I
know which I'd choose.

~~~
pc86
It states in the article that violence had decreased 40% _prior_ to these
laws. Is that just a coincidence?

~~~
gradstudent
There was a general decline across the greater metropolitan area but, iirc,
King's Cross was a notable hotspot. The figures for violent non-domestic
assaults before and after the laws show a very sharp decline.

Here is one police comparison (there might be more recent data but it's hard
to search on a tablet):

[http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Pages/bocsar_news/Mapping-
the-i...](http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Pages/bocsar_news/Mapping-the-impact-
of-the-Sydney-lockout-laws-on-assault.aspx)

------
sbierwagen

      It praised the state’s “lockout” laws, which Baird’s 
      predecessor, Barry O’Farrell, had introduced in early 
      2014 in the wake of high-profile “one-punch” deaths. 
    

Huh?

Googling around, a "one-punch" assault seems to be some Britishism for an
assault on an unsuspecting person, where they're knocked out after a single
hit, and occasionally die. Most the results are for the new mandatory minimum
sentencing laws, but I can't seem to actually find the text of the law
anywhere.

EDIT:

    
    
      The result feels like a final victory in the battle 
      between Australia’s version of the cavaliers and the 
      roundheads, the larrikins and the wowsers.
    

Do we even speak the same language?

------
alistairSH
Is a 3am last-call a mostly American (USA) thing?

I've never lived anywhere that allowed purchasing alcohol all night long. I
read the article and thought to myself "Who the heck drinks after 3am
anyways?" Even through my teens and twenties, an all-night party was the
exception.

~~~
pc86
Most of the US is 2am. Some places are 3 or 4 (I think NYC is 4am?).

~~~
soylentcola
Last time I was out at bars in NYC it was 4am and I believe this is still the
case. DC is 3am, as is Hawaii, West Virginia, Indiana, and some places in
Illinois.

Parts of Alaska are apparently 5am and Louisiana has no official last call
from what I've read.

I'm sure there are some other cities or states with late last call
requirements but I'm only familiar with these ones. Occasionally in my city,
there are special exceptions like New Year's Eve where bars can stay open and
serve all night if they feel like it.

~~~
pc86
Louisiana is like the wild west of alcohol control. I'm pretty sure you can go
to a bar, get a drink to go at 5 am, and take it to another bar (while
drinking it on the street).

------
wilwade
I wonder if the idea of those in power (in this case a large voting block and
those directly in power) having more to loose plays out in changes in the
traditional balance between privacy vs safety/security?

------
walterbell
No mention of foreign investment driving up housing prices?

~~~
alistairSH
Is that really a problem outside of London, SF, and one or two other super-
appealing cities? Honest question, I have no idea.

~~~
blablablame
Lisbon, Porto and south of Portugal has seen a boom on foreign investment on
properties. There are locations that if you email the agency, the first thing
they mention is all the tax advantages of buying here for non foreigners.
There is a whole upscale market for non-residents to park their money in real
estate here.

~~~
expertentipp
When in Portugal I was really surprised to see most of the billboards in the
Lisbon airport to be in... Chinese, advertising properties and apartments for
sale. After some looking up I discovered that in Portugal one can acquire
residency only by buying a property expensive enough.

~~~
blablablame
Yep, they are called Golden Visas. If you buy a property more expensive than
500.000 Euros you may apply for it. There were a few nags and some corruption
charges a while ago so not sure what the current status is.

There is also some tax break that if you had no income in Portugal in the last
10 years, you are eligible for a very reduced personal tax rate if you move to
Portugal for X years so that also brings up rental and property prices.

------
pinaceae
So?

All the comments here read like those aren't humans, allowed to participate in
society just like anyone else.

And if they have more voting discipline and get what they care about, well,
whose fault is that?

Everyone will be old one day, then those bad, bad things will suddenly be
awesome again.

Guess you need to move into middle age to understand both side better.

------
bikamonki
And then there is the environment issue. Who invented the nature-destroying
economic system we now live in?

------
adrianlmm
This article could also be called:

"Millenials can't have fun w/o alcohol".

------
Nullabillity
I'm not going to cry over a couple of drunks who can't get their drugs quite
when it pleases them.

Initially the article seemed promising, but then it just devolved into the
usual lockout law garbage.

~~~
orf
You should be concerned about the total evaporation of nightlife in your
countries largest city. Your condescending comment and not understanding why
this is an issue shows your huge bias and highlights the points made in the
article even more.

~~~
eclipxe
Having grown up and currently living in a city with zero nightlife, what's the
big deal?

~~~
castis
It's not necessarily about nightlife, it's about being told whats best for you
and having it enforced.

