Oh hey, it's that comic. Was wondering what it was.
However, as accurate as it is for the overly ambitious (an old saying I had about the social media part was that 'millionaires are overrepresented on the internet'), I feel it (and a lot of people online in general) are a bit confused about how many young people/generation Y folks/millenials/whatever else are super ambitious.
Because I don't think the large majority of young people are all as ambitious as the media likes to make out. I feel a large percentage of them are pretty content with a comfortable life in the suburbs with 2.5 kids and a dog. They're either happy with their decently well yet convenient job or would be quite happy to get one so long as it pays for a beer or two at the weekend.
What I do think is that the 'super ambitious' image is itself filtered by most writers working in a tech or media bubble. Of course they think younger generations are incredibly ambitious and not happy with anything less than being millionaires; they're working in industries where those who go into them have that mindset.
Just keep in mind there still are a decent amount of people who just want to have an enjoyable life with a steady paycheck rather than to gamble everything on the hopes of becoming the next Mark Zuckerberg.
While I think the infographics of that article are pretty accurate, I believe that this article doesn't benefit from the recent focus on income inequality and the massive schism of the 1% of the 1% from the other 99.99% of the population.
I agree that expectations are a little unrealistic, particularly with anyone born after the early 90s, but also for many born after the late 70s.
However the quality of life, slack time, and slack resources for happiness that other generations did experience during periods of prosperity are measurably lacking today.
It is not unrealistic to feel unhappy about this; but what continues to amaze me is how ignorantly and emotionally many vote. Blatantly ignoring candidates who's platforms are arguably better able to deliver successful change in favor of candidates who sell them an easy bubble of illusions.
When it comes to economics one can find a plausable theory from a Nobel Prize winner to fit numerous competing platforms.
And social science isn't as solid as that.
I would say there are more equivocal problems than unequivocal and society looks for a leader to make gut feeling decisions. The only discriminator is the success of previous gut feeling decisions or even "it went wrong but it sounded good".
However, as accurate as it is for the overly ambitious (an old saying I had about the social media part was that 'millionaires are overrepresented on the internet'), I feel it (and a lot of people online in general) are a bit confused about how many young people/generation Y folks/millenials/whatever else are super ambitious.
Because I don't think the large majority of young people are all as ambitious as the media likes to make out. I feel a large percentage of them are pretty content with a comfortable life in the suburbs with 2.5 kids and a dog. They're either happy with their decently well yet convenient job or would be quite happy to get one so long as it pays for a beer or two at the weekend.
What I do think is that the 'super ambitious' image is itself filtered by most writers working in a tech or media bubble. Of course they think younger generations are incredibly ambitious and not happy with anything less than being millionaires; they're working in industries where those who go into them have that mindset.
Just keep in mind there still are a decent amount of people who just want to have an enjoyable life with a steady paycheck rather than to gamble everything on the hopes of becoming the next Mark Zuckerberg.