Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
More amazing teens!
#1
If there's hope, it lies in the proles, said George Orwell.

In fact, if there's hope, it lies in teenagers disgusted by the fuck-up we've left them with.

Here are a couple more of them:

https://www.inspiremore.com/teen-leaves-notes-on-bridge/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/25/swedish-student-plane-protest-stops-mans-deportation-afghanistan
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#2
There are enough of them with the brains to raise hopes for the future, not all of them promise a lot though.

What bothers me about the view that the future belongs to the youth is that too often it's used by the wrongly motivated types to use it as excuse to attack to the older members of society.
True there have been some 'boomers' who qualify as "greedy old cunts" as I seem to remember being used by TA ... but most of that generation are very far from predatory investors who have lined their pockets with their grandkids futures.

They don't deserve to be spoken of as a useless drains on health system who should "move aside" . The implications in that is taken quite harshly by grans who have dedicated their lives to leaving their descendents better off than they were.

If these paragons of the rights of youth said similar things about any other sector of society they would be called out as racists or whatever PC term applied.

But other than that, yes it's good to see some of them at least having a go at doing something material about promoting their beliefs rather than sitting whinging that somebody else should be doing it.

I particularly like the story of the notes on the bridge. Sometimes it only takes as little as a word or a smile in somebody's bleak world to change the mind, if only temporarily. Sometimes long enough for the mood to lift.
She has a good strike rate so far.
Reply
#3
(07-25-2018, 01:29 AM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  True there have been some 'boomers' who qualify as "greedy old cunts" as I seem to remember being used by TA ... but most of that generation are very far from predatory investors who have lined their pockets with their grandkids futures.

Except all the information available seems to show the vast increases in property prices being fuelled by Boomers buying investment property.

Those who did will be able to fund their kids and grandkids, but those kids whose forebears didn't buy investment property are in the crap. We've created a society where only the elite can buy a house, which is a 180-degree turn from what it was as late as the 1990s, when everyone could afford to buy a house.

(07-25-2018, 01:29 AM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  I particularly like the story of the notes on the bridge.   Sometimes it only takes as little as a word or a smile in somebody's bleak world to change the mind, if only temporarily.  Sometimes long enough for the mood to lift.  
She has a good strike rate so far.

Shit yes - one life saved would be amazing, but it looks like she's saved half a dozen so far.

Like you say, simple ideas are often best.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#4
The point is TA that the way the barbs are cast are at all people over the age of 65.  They lump them all together deserved or not.
Older people who simply own their own home, not a string of rentals, nor carry huge investments are accused of stealing the current gens' future!   They're told they're greedy for actually owning the house they finally managed to pay off.    Can't tell me that's a fair call TA.

Anyway, why is it so bad that we of that era sought to better our lot in life when the opportunity arose? 
Don't bother trying to convince me that these young pillars of principles wouldn't do exactly the same thing in a heartbeat!

Believe me mate, when we were buying and paying off houses none of us were rich!  In my neighbourhood when we were in our early 20s,  only bank managers and doctors even had cars.
 
There seems to be the perception among the younger gens that we suddenly found ourselves born into households rolling in dough and were  buying up realestate before we left school.  Not correct. 
(Some kids of today though are doing just that! the smartest ones .. how about having a look at them?  How about those in their own gen who are 'greedy cunts?'  )

Some, those boomers who could, may well have been doing it in later life because they took the opportunities.  But is that their fault?

Do you think it's the kids of today who will be at fault if by some economic miracle there are jobs to be had and better pay to be earned, that when they're old they find they own a house and a car? 
Will they then be the greedy old cunts who aren't handing over everything they worked for to someone else's offspring who were less lucky in their choice of ancestor, or governments?

Do these youthful gurus think all baby boomers were born well off??   No, they weren't.  None of my grandparents ever owned a house.  ever. they died penniless so no inheritance happening then.

But you now the story.  

It's another instance of overlooking a contradiction to suit the viewpoint.
Today's youth demand the same opportunities luckily afforded the 'baby boomers'.  They want the same ability to buy a house as we did.  

But they also resent the boomers ever having had that opportunity!
It was the opportunity for many boomers to spend their entire working life paying off those houses.  I didn't accumulate the deposit and buy, and start paying off  my house   until I was in my mid forties!   They demand to have one at 25!

Does only this current generation deserve to be that 'lucky'???

Will they undertake at some future date to hand over everything they've accrued to prove themselves better people than we are??

MMMmmmm?   Dya think?
Reply
#5
This isn't our fucking fault and it's not the younsters fault. This bullshit is what happens when 1% own most of everything there is to own. Oldsters who blame the young and likewise younsters who blame the old are both fucking wrong here.

The only way out of this mess is to redefine just exactly how much any one individual can gather and keep.


And that's never gonna frakkin' happen.
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#6
I'm not disagreeing with that limit being put on how much anyone can keep, the problem seems to be in getting acknowledgement that without at least some form of reward system being place no one will make an effort to do anything at all. It's setting the levels of rewards at their true and acceptable values that is the hard one to solve. Nobody will be happy with any of them.
Reply
#7
Yep. That's why it will never happen. Although I disagree with the piece of your reasoning about no one making an effort with limits placed on their rewards.

They can still have their rewards, just not so much as it fucks with the greater good.

Please, someone call me a Commie again. Smile
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#8
Does anyone really think about what they call people any more? It's just a reflex that if someone takes a different view they must be at the extreme end of whatever it is we think we don't like even if we don't really know what the hell is going on in between anyway.

It can be an interesting exercise trying to get the people throwing names to actually detail what exactly they do believe and what they've based their opinions on. You can safely bet that 99% of the time they have no personal experience of instances at all. They're just falling into line with the Twitterverse opinions of the day.

Ask them did they know that Adolf's Party was Socialist. It's a hoot.
Reply
#9
(07-25-2018, 02:31 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  The point is TA that the way the barbs are cast are at all people over the age of 65.  They lump them all together deserved or not.
Older people who simply own their own home, not a string of rentals, nor carry huge investments are accused of stealing the current gens' future!   They're told they're greedy for actually owning the house they finally managed to pay off.    Can't tell me that's a fair call TA.

No, but I have to confess I haven't heard anyone voice that opinion.

(07-25-2018, 02:31 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Anyway, why is it so bad that we of that era sought to better our lot in life when the opportunity arose? 
Don't bother trying to convince me that these young pillars of principles wouldn't do exactly the same thing in a heartbeat!

Of course they would - it's every critter's nature to grab whatever advantage they can.

The greatest irony is that the pigeons will all come home to roost when none of this generation wants to care for the Boomers as they age. They'll be spending all their money just to get their diaper changed.

(07-25-2018, 02:31 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Believe me mate, when we were buying and paying off houses none of us were rich!  In my neighbourhood when we were in our early 20s,  only bank managers and doctors even had cars.

No need to tell me - everyone thought we were Maoris when we went out in the car. My dad was very dark-skinned, swarthy type and the car we had in 1965 was a 1939 Oldsmobile.

Still, everyone did own a house. Kiwi governments set up lots of different ways to assist young people buy a house and the enormous majority of them did just that. The system meant the government basically paid people to buy. Everyone had a house with 1/4 acre section.

Not any more.
 
(07-25-2018, 11:18 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Ask them did they know that Adolf's Party was Socialist.  It's a hoot.

I use that when people tell me Stalin was a Socialist because they were called the USSR.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#10
(07-26-2018, 12:06 AM)The Atheist Wrote:  
(07-25-2018, 02:31 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  The point is TA that the way the barbs are cast are at all people over the age of 65.  They lump them all together deserved or not.
Older people who simply own their own home, not a string of rentals, nor carry huge investments are accused of stealing the current gens' future!   They're told they're greedy for actually owning the house they finally managed to pay off.    Can't tell me that's a fair call TA.

No, but I have to confess I haven't heard anyone voice that opinion.

It's been expressed loudly and often here, principally by the rather frenziedly zealous 'spokeswomen' from outfits like Get Up and from some younger louder Journalists from the Guardian! 
The ABC invite them to express those views  on their 'current affairs' panel shows.   Thanks a lot.
The sentiment is being picked up and expressed in Tweets which are also run along the bottom screen line of those type of shows.



(07-25-2018, 02:31 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Anyway, why is it so bad that we of that era sought to better our lot in life when the opportunity arose? 
Don't bother trying to convince me that these young pillars of principles wouldn't do exactly the same thing in a heartbeat!

Of course they would - it's every critter's nature to grab whatever advantage they can.

The greatest irony is that the pigeons will all come home to roost when none of this generation wants to care for the Boomers as they age. They'll be spending all their money just to get their diaper changed.

That was my motivation to become self sufficient in retirement.  I had no kids to change mine and knew i'd need to pay my way.  I think you'll find that many of the boomers thought they'd try and be self funding to avoid being a burden on their children,  only to find that the children don't appreciate that aspect of it all and are only interested in them dying off before they spend all the kid's inheritance!


Glad I didn't have any!  That would have to be the ultimate heartbreak.


(07-25-2018, 02:31 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Believe me mate, when we were buying and paying off houses none of us were rich!  In my neighbourhood when we were in our early 20s,  only bank managers and doctors even had cars.

No need to tell me - everyone thought we were Maoris when we went out in the car. My dad was very dark-skinned, swarthy type and the car we had in 1965 was a 1939 Oldsmobile.

Still, everyone did own a house. Kiwi governments set up lots of different ways to assist young people buy a house and the enormous majority of them did just that. The system meant the government basically paid people to buy. Everyone had a house with 1/4 acre section.

Not any more.

You probably had a better set up going than we did, we were late getting welfare and assistance packages going.
 

(07-25-2018, 11:18 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Ask them did they know that Adolf's Party was Socialist.  It's a hoot.

I use that when people tell me Stalin was a Socialist because they were called the USSR.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)