Poll: What generation are you?

What's your generation?

  • Greatest Generation 01-27

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • Silent Generation 28-45

    Votes: 5 1.3%
  • Baby Boomers 46-64

    Votes: 273 70.2%
  • Gen X 65-80

    Votes: 105 27.0%
  • Millennials 81-96

    Votes: 5 1.3%

  • Total voters
    389
  • This poll will close: .
and paying cash for a new Cadillac convertible when they were 30. Nevermind the fact that Cadillac didn't even MAKE convertibles by the time the typical Boomer turned 30! The end of the line, 1976 Eldorado convertible started at around $12,000, and you didn't have low-interest, long term loans in those days. In those days, if you bought a new Cadillac, you were pretty well-off.

Cadillac did dabble with convertible a bit later on, with cars like the '84-85 Eldorado (done by an outside source), the Allante, and that thing they had a couple years based on the Corvette. But I can guarantee very few 30-year olds were buying those, either. And by the time that Corvette-based thing came out, a 30-year old was Gen-X.

I also seriously doubt too many people bought a 4-bedroom house at the age of 30.
Interesting to me that you used the car analogy. About 2 weeks ago I started an "age poll" on one of the high performance vehicles sites I frequent. Out of the almost 400 votes so far, I was surprised that there were several there that "claimed" they were under 25 and owned one of the vehicles. (These things are not cheap - maybe daddy's money?) Even more surprising was there was almost an equal number that said they were 86+. (Glad to see it but, Wow) As "I" expected, most were in the 36 to 45 age group followed by the 46 to 55 folks. Those two age groups made up ~60% of the owners.
 
Last edited:
Baby boomer by what has become the standard for the years... but when the term was first coined it cut off early (1959 or 60 IIRC)... Because it was defining the boom in kids born to families returning from WWII. My dad didn't serve in WWII, but served in Korea. I've always related more to Gen X than to boomers... but the chart says boomer.

My kids love saying "ok boomer"... which is probably another reason I don't like the label.

My husband, almost 10 years older than me, qualifies as boomer by every definition. His dad came back with a purple heart from WWII, married his mom, and, being good Catholics, had 6 kids in short order.

I think boomers have a bi-modal distribution (early corhort vs late cohort) with a bit of a gap in the middle.

I tend to relate more to the late cohort boomers than the rest of the GenXers (of which I typically am a member) -- but my birthdate was close to the cutoff so this makes sense.

-gauss
 
The millennials are an echo of the baby boom, and although other countries have a small echo, the US has a strong echo in our very productive millennials.Good for the retiring baby boomers.
 
I missed it in the thread, but there is someone on here that is either nearing their 100th bday or past it?
 
I missed it in the thread, but there is someone on here that is either nearing their 100th bday or past it?
According to the poll results, there is at least one.
 
Last edited:
Same here. A good generation to be part of.
While there have certainly been good developments, too many of today’s ills trace to the boomer generation IME. I am sure some boomers will be the first to disagree…and couldn’t be convinced otherwise - I’ve had those encounters many times.

The boomers have committed “generational plunder,” pillaging the nation’s economy, repeatedly cutting their own taxes, financing two wars and entitlements with deficits, ignoring climate change, inadequate progress on racism, presiding over the death of America’s manufacturing core, and leaving future generations to clean up the mess they created. Not to mention a more divided nation than we’ve had since 1860 thanks mostly to boomers. “OK Boomer” is well deserved IME, I’ve used it with cohorts myself…YMMV.
 
Last edited:
^^^^^
Plenty of "ill's" to go around for each generation. IMO
 
^^^^^
Plenty of "ill's" to go around for each generation. IMO
Of course. So it comes down to net improvement versus net decline. Boomers have made more worse than better IMO.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I am in GenX but I would not put all the blame on the baby boomer generation. The greatest generation gave us above ground nuclear testing and other fun stuff.
 
A couple of possible explanations.
  • Boomers have had more time (think 1980s) to acquire wealth than GenX'ers
  • Boomers were more likely than GenX'ers to have access to DB pensions
  • There were far more boomers than GenX'ers
  • Perhaps many who join and are active continue to be active here
  • Without access to DB Pensions and Retiree health care, it is much easier to "take a gap year or two" vs. running full steam to ER.
  • Younger Generations have had the message pounded into them by pop media "You won't be able to ever retire!" longer

It will be interesting if there is a significant upswing in Millennial/GenY participation here going forward.

Just speculating here....


-gauss

It was mainly the Millennials and Gen-Z I was thinking about, not so much Gen-X. I expected Gen-X to be behind the Boomers, for the reasons you mentioned.

However, I'd imagine many people found this group, because they had fantasies about retiring early. Thus, they first stumbled upon it while they were relatively young, still working, but wanted to get out of the workforce early. For instance, I first joined in 2005, when I was 35. I honestly wouldn't expect to see many Gen-Zer's on this site, but considering that a good deal of the Millennials are now in their mid/upper 30s and even 40s, I would think there would be a few of them, at least, representing.
 
Interesting to me that you used the car analogy. About 2 weeks ago I started an "age poll" on one of the high performance vehicles sites I frequent. Out of the almost 400 votes so far, I was surprised that there were several there that "claimed" they were under 25 and owned one of the vehicles. (These things are not cheap - maybe daddy's money?) Even more surprising was there was almost an equal number that said they were 86+. (Glad to see it but, Wow) As "I" expected, most were in the 36 to 45 age group followed by the 46 to 55 folks. Those two age groups made up ~60% of the owners.

Another car-related one I like to call people out on is when they talk about how cheap cars were back in the day, and hear about how you could get a brand new car in '57 for under $2000 or whatever. While you COULD do that, as the cheapest Ford/Chevy/Plymouth models were around $2K or a bit less. Or a Studebaker, that literally had "Scotsman" in its name, so that should be a clue right there. But, the way people tended to equip the cars, they were a LOT more than that.

And I literally have receipts on this one, as I have a bunch of old paperwork on most of the cars my paternal grandparents ever bought. One of them was a brand new 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 Victoria 4-door hardtop. Look it up in an old car encyclopedia, and its base MSRP was around $2400. However, as equipped, my grandparents' was around $3500. A lot of these young-uns forget that stuff like an automatic, power steering/brakes, radio, heater, sometimes even backup lights were all optional back then. And then, stuff like 2-tone paint, and whitewall tires, which you see on most 50's cars at classic car shows, were extra-cost as well. Granddad also sprung for the larger 312 V8, which also added a few bucks to that price.

These young-uns might still try to say that $3500 was still cheap for a car. But adjusting for inflation, that's about $38.5K today! And that's still for a car with no a/c (that would've pushed it to around $4K, as a/c was plaything for the rich back then), crank windows, manual door locks. No tilt wheel. No cruise control. A solid bench seat with only a fore/aft adjustment. An AM radio with one speaker. No airbags, no abs, and the only thing resembling "safety" would be how far back the steering box was mounted (the further back, the less likely to get speared by the steering wheel in a front-end collision), and whether the car was equipped with optional lap belts and a thin vinyl padding over the metal dashboard.
 
Proud Gen X'er here. The independent/latch-key generation. Most are also pretty tech savvy since we grew up with its development.
 
I'm a boomer, born in 1958. I looked up the demographics, and I can see why they made the breaks where they did based on the total births. But the first boomers that turned 18 years old in 1964 had a very different life than the last boomers born in 1964 that turned 18 in 1982. So, I think breaking that group into two makes a lot of sense from a social perspective. 1946 - 1956 and 1956 - 1966 from a social viewpoint would probably work better.
From about 1973 - 1983 a lot of things changed in the US. From 1970 - 1980 was the battle against inflation. It peaked about 13.5%. Makes this recent inflation seem pretty tame. It was auto emissions time. Unleaded gas drama, goodbye horsepower. Auto safety time. Remember first plastic bumpers and all the drama over using seat belts. I saw my first desktop computer at work in 1983. Japanese auto invasion. All American jobs would go overseas. Etc...
 
Middle baby boomer (went to high school on double sessions, as the county struggled to build new schools to accommodate us gazillions of teens), but I identify more with the later baby boomers, and feel socially out of place with people even 5 years older than I am. Their notions of women's roles, in particular, seem so much more conservative than mine.

I distinctly recall trying to buy my first house, at age 28, and the agent telling me that prices were rising weekly because "the baby boomers are driving the prices up." So even she didn't put me in that generation.
 
There are an awful lot of crazy generalizations in this thread. Classifying groups of people is fraught with difficulties.
 
We are, as usual, answering from our own place in life, as seen through our own individual lenses.

There are an awful lot of crazy generalizations in this thread. Classifying groups of people is fraught with difficulties.
 
I'm not really happy with the "boomer" label either. I guess "Generation Jones" is an improvement.

The "baby boom" happened when the soldiers returned from WWII and started doing what comes natural. That was something like 1946.

1964 was 18 years later. That's a pretty long gestation period. I'm not buying it.

The latter half of that range often labeled "boomers" doesn't really have much in common with the mass-produced children born right after the war.

But I get it. It's easier to categorize everyone into a neat 20-ish-year "generation." I would imagine everyone chafes at being pigeon-holed into whatever group they're placed in. Just like with horoscopes, people are much more complex than the date they were born.
 
Just like with horoscopes, people are much more complex than the date they were born.

Oh, no. Horoscopes are completely scientific and perfectly accurate. Else how could they be printed in the newspaper?
 
Oh, no. Horoscopes are completely scientific and perfectly accurate. Else how could they be printed in the newspaper?

+1

And Zodiac classifications are more accurate than age groupings.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom