r/SipsTea • • 21h ago

SMH The advice didn't age well.

Post image
30.8k Upvotes

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/treemann85 16h ago

Such a boomer take. We all have cell phones and tvs. Old and young rich and poor. Im an older millennial whos had good times and bad. I dont and have never used door dash or any delivery services. I dont have an Amazon account. I dont drink Starbucks or eat avocado toast. Im old enough to have lived during the boomers prime and watch Gen z enter adulthood. Life was absolutely easier to afford in the 80s and 90s than it is today. Baby boomers are the only generation in modern history to have life better than their fathers and their sons. I dont hate or blame boomers for how things shook out, but this delusion that some of them have about how newer generations have an easier life than them is infuriating.

2

u/PhilxBefore 12h ago

There are many bills that I simply cannot pay without an Internet connection or phone plan.

Connectivity is absolutely a utility now, and most jobs require you to have a phone number (mobile lines are usually cheaper than landlines now) and you have to have a reliable means of transportation (generally your own vehicle) to even be considered for the position.

Also, before the Internet, everyone ran on slightly different times. You could set your watch to the clock on the TV guide channel but it wasn't guaranteed that your boss or school has theirs synchronized so it wasn't really a ball-buster for people coming in a few minutes early or late.

I actually miss those days and I'm only 41

3

u/GERDY31290 12h ago

This is a point they often miss, internet and phone cost are an added cost of being a member of society. Not only have starting salaries not kept up with inflation but our wages are garnished another 10-15% by student loan payments and technology payments.

1

u/Altruistic_Brick1730 10h ago

Phone costs? You don't remember needing to pay for long distance? Using a pay phone where you have to constantly add money? Just paying to have a landline? Phone costs were always there.

1

u/GERDY31290 10h ago edited 8h ago

Yes but having a long distance phone plan wasnt necessary to participate in the economy. At worst a landline and call waiting. It wasnt even expected that everyone have a pager to economically contribute.

1

u/Altruistic_Brick1730 10h ago

WTF are you talking about? Having a long distance plan wasn't necessary to participate in the economy. And even if it was, what does that have to do with anything we're talking about?

2

u/GERDY31290 8h ago

Omg i typed it out wrong and read yours wrong lol

1

u/GERDY31290 8h ago

Having a cell phone and access to the internet is a necessary utility. Which is what was being discussed. It seemed like you were comparing long distance pricing to that.

1

u/Altruistic_Brick1730 10h ago

Also, no about the coming in a few minutes early or late. Most people had to punch a time clock. It was the timeclock's time you had to go by, not some arbitrary number. What world do you live in where you think bosses were cool with you coming in late because your times didn't sync?

5

u/AcademicChildhood161 15h ago

Boomers deny or retcon reality because they think their upbringing was rough, and believe that legitimizing the struggle of younger generations diminishes their own. Boomers like to be the special snowflake that are the only ones that struggled ever because they used rotary phones, while buying a house one year after high school graduation for a bag of wood chips.

1

u/Altruistic_Brick1730 10h ago

No, it's actually your generation complaining about the boomers. You realize how easy you have it nowadays?

1

u/ryancompte 14h ago

I’m an older millennial with three houses in multiple countries and just had dinner at a two star Michelin restaurant last night.

I grew up in poverty in rural Appalachia and have spent the last 30 years busting my ass and learning from older people instead of being jealous and bitter that they led good lives .

1

u/gunfirinmaniac 10h ago

And im the fking pope.

Boomers ruining shit everywhere i stg, yall even elected some demented moron who increased gas prices so we cant even drive to work

0

u/treemann85 13h ago

Bud, im not jealous or bitter and have an ok life myself. Im not complaining about my life. Im saying life was more affordable and easier to navigate 40 years ago than it is today. Boomers absolutely had better opportunities than the generations before and after them, and most of them refuse to acknowledge that. I dont even want or need them to acknowledge it, just stop telling me the reason I dont own a house is because I drink Starbucks and eat avocado toast. My father and I made/make about the same salaries adjusted for inflation yet he was able to afford our family home and I cannot....wonder why? Well its because the price of a home 40 years ago was roughly 4 years worth of an average salary whereas today, its roughly 8 years average salary...so that means, AFTER adjusting for inflation, the cost of owning a home has doubled since the 80s. Glad youre doing ok though

1

u/Altruistic_Brick1730 10h ago

Mortgage interest was also crazy high. Mine is 2.375%.

2

u/Just_Nobody9551 9h ago

Mine too. It’s like same as cash almost.

1

u/treemann85 10h ago

Thats true, I think my parents rate was close to 9% in 86 or 87 when they bought the house...the monthly payment was still only $345.

0

u/ryancompte 12h ago

If ifs and buts were champagne and chestnuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.

I’m glad complaining has got you the life you want. High five bro.

1

u/treemann85 11h ago

Ifs and buts? But nothing to say about the cost of housing doubling...gotcha. douchebag.

0

u/NiceGuy737 15h ago

4

u/Laphad 14h ago

-1

u/NiceGuy737 14h ago

Current housing affordability is 105.4. Houses are twice as affordable now as they were at the nadir in 1981.

3

u/RocknrollClown09 12h ago

Did you mean UNaffodable? Either typo or you're reading the graph wrong. A housing affordability index of 100 means that an average salary could afford a house. In 1981 it was 51, meaning half a normal salary could afford a house. Today it's saying a normal salary can afford a house, but I think that's Animal Farm levels of propaganda.

1

u/NiceGuy737 8h ago

No, the higher the affordability the more affordable houses are.

"How to Interpret the Index Score

  • Index = 100: A family with the median income has exact qualification to afford a median-priced home (their mortgage payment takes up right at the threshold of the qualifying ratio). [1, 2]
  • Index > 100 (e.g., 120): Affordability is higher than the baseline; a median-income family earns more than what is required to qualify. [1, 2]
  • Index < 100 (e.g., 85): Affordability is lower; a median-income family does not make enough to qualify for a traditional mortgage on a median-priced home. [1]"

2

u/Venik489 15h ago

What point are you trying to make here? Things are more expensive now, making relatively the same now doesn’t get what it did before.

2

u/Derptionary 14h ago

The graph is normalized to 2010 dollars so the amounts are the same for everyone.

3

u/Venik489 14h ago

Yes, it adjusts for inflation. That doesn’t mean everything costs the same relative to income. It means the dollar amounts are adjusted for overall inflation.
Housing, healthcare, and education can still become more expensive compared to what people earn, even if wages have gone up after inflation. That’s the whole point. Being able to afford more TVs and electronics doesn’t mean much when buying a house takes up a much bigger chunk of your income.