The Gaming Den

So. Unemployment for working-age Generation Y/Millenials is seriously more than twice as much as Gen X/Baby Boomers/Silent Generation (though this group is almost phased out of the economy anyway)... what kind of social ramifications will that have do you think?

when we eat the boomers, we will have to make the stew last twice as long

They are already calling it the Lost Generation.

You see, people need to hit employment benchmarks at the expected ages. People don't hire 40-year old recent lawschool grads or 40-year old people looking for an entry-level graphic designer job. They don't let those people intern.

So when the economy comes back, those people are going to come back and say "yeh, I was unemployed for seven years." They are not going to get hired. There are already stories of companies saying "No unemployed need apply."

The social stigma of long-term unemployment is going to haunt the Lost Generation forever.

And what will that lead to?

Lago PARANOIA wrote:And what will that lead to?

Long-term underemployment, lower Social Security revenues that might be enough to run out the coffers faster than the 30-year deadline we have right now, rising crime and shadow markets, lower birth rates as tons of people don't have families, and the death of the middle class.

I mean, there are already reality TV shows of parents throwing out their 30-something children that can't get a decent job.

It will also end the American nuclear family. Give it a few more years and people won't blink when you mention that three or four generations of a family lives in one house.

Basically, see current Eastern Europe or current China for a preview.

I have noticed that as a nontraditional student, I don't get the same things that traditional students get.

For example, at the college I was going to finish my bachelor's degree in, the ONLY degree that a non-traditional student can get is a Bachelor's of Adult Education. I could do the exact same courseload that a chemistry major or a biology major, or a business major, and it will just say "Adult Education" on the degree. It's utter bullshit.

Although I am going to make the most of what I have from now on (which is beer and video games, followed by an evening of internet pornography), there will always be a part of me that will utterly RAGE at the fact that I'm a retail slave until the day I die, regardless of how hard I work, what degrees and licensing I attain, and regardless of how many years I put into what I'm doing.

The Internet is seriously one of the greatest blessings of the modern era when it comes to raising the quality of life, and I'm not gonna lie: the endless vistas of essentially free pornography is a significant component.

I agree. There was a time not too long ago where I had no pornography. Those were dark times indeed.

K wrote:It will also end the American nuclear family. Give it a few more years and people won't blink when you mention that three or four generations of a family lives in one house.

That was like 10 years back.

Today the problem is that the language doesn't even have words for the multi-generational quasi-family quasi-romantic relationship groups that inhabit most houses.

And instead I have to provide paragraph long summaries to introduce and explain the living situations of my friends and family.

So make a word or phrase for it. When someone asks you about it, give them the word/phrase like it's something they should already know, and when they ask what that means, give the paragraphs-long explanation. From then on, they will know what the word means. Odds are, someone else's word or phrase will catch on instead of yours, but in the meantime you will save yourself a lot of effort.

I'd recommend "extended family" as opposed to "nuclear family," or possibly "clan living." Maybe just because I really like the word "clan."

It will also end the American nuclear family. Give it a few more years and people won't blink when you mention that three or four generations of a family lives in one house.

Proposed captions for the thumbs up images:

Reagan: Up yours.
Clinton: This is pretty cool.
Bush: I've got a thumb!
Obama: Like this?

they didn't have one for hw

No no, Bush is like "So this is how artists do that painting thing."

This is close, but not quite for HW

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_vbrMa5TSSdY/S ... h+1988.jpg

"Heeeeeey...."

So, regarding the London rioters, is the government planning on--you know--DOING anything or are they hoping that this will all blow over and then it'll be business as usual? You can't exactly handwave a 40% youth unemployment rate.

The Tories are backing plans to cut benefits and evict families with looters in them from public housing. They also want the power to cut social networking at will.

So basically they want a full-on disenfranchised shadow underclass that periodically lashes out in order to distract from the dismal economic situation.

Britain sounds like it'll be a fun to place to be in the near future.

Chamomile wrote:Britain sounds like it'll be a fun to place to be in the near future.

Expect the Sex Pistol's Anarchy in the UK to become the new remix hit.

K wrote:The Tories are backing plans to cut benefits and evict families with looters in them from public housing.

Fifteen years ago, that could have been the gist of a "Bit of Fry and Laurie" sketch. It really is that fucked up and ridiculous. And yet here we are.

They also want the power to cut social networking at will.

Because it worked so well for Egypt, right?

K wrote: So basically they want a full-on disenfranchised shadow underclass that periodically lashes out in order to distract from the dismal economic situation.

I agree that the first time it happens sympathies will go towards the government that created the conditions, but don't you think that after the second or third time that happens (especially after extremely unpopular crap like rioter eviction and social networking dismantling) people will start to, you know, blame Tories?

How long will it take for it to happen two or three times?

Lago PARANOIA wrote:And what will that lead to?

Lots of lawsuits, since it is illegal to age-discriminate against people 40+.

Lago PARANOIA wrote:

K wrote: So basically they want a full-on disenfranchised shadow underclass that periodically lashes out in order to distract from the dismal economic situation.

I agree that the first time it happens sympathies will go towards the government that created the conditions, but don't you think that after the second or third time that happens (especially after extremely unpopular crap like rioter eviction and social networking dismantling) people will start to, you know, blame Tories?

When have the objective facts ever harmed a conservative political or social movement?