[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

Millenials still had cause to buy into the Regan-era story of hard work and hyper capitalism leading to a glorious future for the common person. Zoomers have never been able to buy into that lie because they were born into a world where it is so obviously untrue.

[DrThunder]

Zoomers aren't even old enough to determine that yet. They're in their early 20's at most and no one that age has the experience to definitively say anything regarding this.

The alternative to hard work is doing nothing and that certainly will get you no where at all. The idea that a younger generation might have had it slightly better (which I think is pretty subjective anyway, previous generations have all had their fair share of bad shit) so you won't do anything to get ahead is just asinine.

[red-iron-pine]

> The alternative to hard work is doing nothing and that certainly will get you no where at all.

This is a false dichotomy. I put in a solid 40-50 hours at work. If I have to put in double that just to stand a shot -- not get, but have a shot at -- the lifestyle that my parent's had while only putting in 40 hours a week, then the system has failed me.

And that was 40 hours a week with one person working and the other staying at home.

No one is suggesting you get to have stuff for free, but it is painfully clear that even with dual incomes the average American is failing to maintain their parents' standard of living.

It's a broken system, and the Zoomers can easily see that -- they've had smartphones since they were like 8.

[DrThunder]

No, your argument is a straw man. I'm not referring to your personal work ethic here. The general idea that you will get ahead by doing less is just bullshit. You seem to have a narrow focus on the white collar workplace as it pertains to you. I'm speaking about life in general.

"It's a broken system, and the Zoomers can easily see that -- they've had smartphones since they were like 8."

If you're referring to the poor decision making on raising kids with smartphones I'd agree with you, but that's a lack of good parenting and bad moral judgement. It has nothing to do with capitalism or modern work ethic.

The irony and cognitive dissonance in this statement. That means by every economic measure they were doing quite well at age 8. Did boomers get cell phones when they were 8? How about survivors of the Great Depression... do you think they had anything close to the equivalent of a cell phone at the time? The other issue here is that you believe constant negative influx of media as always truthful.

The issue with you is that you assume that a generation having slightly less than the previous means we need to scrap the whole system and it doesn't work. You need to put some things in perspective and maybe realize that the life you had growing up was WAY above average so a slight decline to a lifestyle that's still magnitudes better than what the average world citizen deals with isn't all that big of a problem. There are generations and generations of people that died to give you what you got, went through world wars, civil wars, great depression, pandemics. I'm sure they'd have loved to be "slaving away" in your climate controlled office environment with a smartphone.

"And that was 40 hours a week with one person working and the other staying at home."

You can blame feminism for that. It tricked the average woman into thinking they would have more meaning working in an office 40 hours a week than they would doing the most important job in the world... raising kids. It turns out that when everyone starts having a higher average family income, the market adjusts to that. And, the staying home and raising kids part is key, they weren't just sitting at home doing nothing while their partner worked.

[namaria]

You're putting forward a false dichotomy. Not buying into the ethics of 'work hard for a company, they make money, you make money and that is a self evident net positive' is quite reasonable. There is no need to resort to name calling for people who don't buy into this narrative. There is quite a lot more to live, and to being a good person, then pouring your all into paid work. And it is plain to see there was a nice party from 1960 to 1980s and we're the cleanup crew. A working person could support a family, buy a home before 30 and have hobbies 50 years ago. Now that sounds like a bad joke.

[DrThunder]

You're putting forth a strawman. Where did I mention anything about a company??? Who did I call names?

"A working person could support a family, buy a home before 30 and have hobbies 50 years ago."

Try not living on the coast near your favorite coffee shop and you too can achieve this. It's almost like those generations didn't expect to have a beach front condo in LA with every tech gadget available.

That's because one person worked. What do you think happens economically when both parents in a family start working? This is basic economic principle.