...boomer goes the dynamite (not sure if that is a genx or boomer or zillenial meme joke but what evs)...not sure what it is about life that makes us worry so much about our ends but i sure do wish we embraced them more...if you were born thinking Elvis was risque we probably don't need your fingers risking business...i love old people...they should help me with my stories and regale me with theirs...but instead they keep demanding to be seen...we see you...now see us...now go take a driving exam and prove you can still see...looking forward to being older and having some younger tell me to see the nile...
I think Joe Biden was deposed, not a willing retirement. If so Obama, being the first and oldest of the X'ers, demonstrates that Boomers will have their power stripped from them by X'ers who resent the Baby Boomer's foolishness. Then they'll tell everyone how great the Baby boomers were as they retired peacefully, unplugged plug in hand.
Love this. If you compare US and UK law firms, partners located America never seem to retire. I still haven’t understood why. Perhaps power is like a youth elixir? Or maybe it comes down to the American dream: make as much money as you can.
I’m also wondering whether, if as floated, we legislate in the UK to lower the age of voting from 18 to 16 if that will coincide with, and support, a shift in where decision-making (and the impacts of it) resides in a place that more fairly represents society.
Thanks Eric. That's an interesting about law firms in the UK vs US. America seems to be behind others in sunsetting our elders. I don't know if it's greed or fear of ageism, but I do believe it's holding us back.
When I was researching how I would turn this into a political program, I read that Scotland, Brazil, and Austria have lowered their voting age to 16. I'm skeptical and haven't seen any studies on what kind of impact this has had, but I'll be curious to see where the UK proposal on this goes.
Perhaps the strongest criticism to be leveled at Boomers is for cannibalizing succeeding generations in order to maintain disproportionate positions in areas ranging from careers to housing. This has contributed to everything from collapsing the birthrate to elite overproduction to productivity stagnation. Boomers stepping back will also be in elite interests. Populism is the last offramp before the freeway splits into real authoritarianism, be it leftwing or rightwing. Too many well educated people with remaining great potential are stuck on the sidelines, and the US runs the risk of going the way of Southern Europe if it doesn't finally move forward while there's still some room to maneuver.
Thanks Jarlis. I agree boomers have hoarded resources, though I didn't touch on that as much. I wrote this with boomer establishment powers as my intended audience. My sense is that they get it and are ready to be more proactive. (Better late than never)
The data doesn’t show this—it shows American’s median age is older than it has ever been, and the age of congressional leaders (and Presidents) have paralleled this. This is not the definition of a gerontocracy—government ruled by elders—but a function of population distribution. Birth rates are down—from the 1950s it has dropped from 24.26 to 1978 it bottomed at 14.75 per 1000 people in America before slightly increasing, it is currently 12.09 per 1000 people. When the data is viewed as just women between 15-44 years old the curve is different but the decline is the same 56 per 1000 women today vs 122.9 per 1000 women in 1957. And the death rate has been dropping since 1950, with a slight rise during Covid but a return to dropping rates. Statistically this means the average age in the US will continue to increase—until the under 45 get out of themselves and decide to commit to raising families. This doesn’t make a gerontocracy when the majority is ‘older’ —this means a country is safe, durable, and stable. People can live on and don’t die in masses before they turn 30. At the same time those of us below the average need to take responsibility for the impact our actions have on our country—because it won’t be too long until we are above the average (a decade or two is not that long). Will we then accept being displaced as irrelevant simply because we crossed a statistical threshold? (The average won’t increase as fast as we age.). Why should we advocate for displacing others now?
The data absolutely shows America’s elderly political leadership even relative to other developed countries with similar demographic patterns. Demographic trends are part of the story here but there are many other issues driving this. You are welcome to have a different opinion on what to do about it, but it’s probably not worth continuing a conversation with someone who cannot acknowledge objective reality and strawmans my argument.
President Biden as an example for the point “younger people “ needing to be given/take the opportunity for leadership is kind of laughable since all US presidents are ‘younger people’ by about a decade or more. The pitting of age groups against each other is a naive bias used to manipulate people—don’t fall for it or use it.
Rarely does a foolish young person become a wise elder, and a foolish old person wasn’t a wise young person and became foolish with years passing. Age tends to condense character. Remember other countries have so much respect for elders that some worship ancestors—America has developed a current culture of consuming and disposing of people who are not considered valuable that there are few, if any, boundaries of respect left in this culture . Your post—intentionally or not—promotes this and assumes ‘youth’ inherently means innovation. Older people will clutch whatever they have that gets them respect and youth is a comparative term. To a 25 year old, a 45 year old is really old, and the 25 year olds feel they are the disruptive youth, the 45 middle aged at best. People die of old age conditions at 60–15 years older than 45. And people hold onto jobs and titles because they define themselves and their identity through these. (Without them who are they?). But in comparison to the oldest president ever to hold office a 45 year old is a young child with less than half the experience since primary school. Don’t get hung up on age groups—build and support solid character based on principles, these are timeless. Always have been, always will be.
It’s good to view people as individuals rather than generational stand-ins, but wholesale denying we have a gerontocracy problem is foolish and delusional.
Sadly, too many Boomers are going to exit only by dying.
True
...boomer goes the dynamite (not sure if that is a genx or boomer or zillenial meme joke but what evs)...not sure what it is about life that makes us worry so much about our ends but i sure do wish we embraced them more...if you were born thinking Elvis was risque we probably don't need your fingers risking business...i love old people...they should help me with my stories and regale me with theirs...but instead they keep demanding to be seen...we see you...now see us...now go take a driving exam and prove you can still see...looking forward to being older and having some younger tell me to see the nile...
This made me think of the 80s song, "Pop goes the world."
Reading glasses make it easier to see what's close and harder to see beyond that. There's a Fis-style metaphor in that.
Thank you for all of your feedback and support.
Amen!
I enjoyed this non-political take on this thoroughly political event. Thank you!
Thanks. orthogonal political approaches are underrated in my view.
I think Joe Biden was deposed, not a willing retirement. If so Obama, being the first and oldest of the X'ers, demonstrates that Boomers will have their power stripped from them by X'ers who resent the Baby Boomer's foolishness. Then they'll tell everyone how great the Baby boomers were as they retired peacefully, unplugged plug in hand.
I do like the meta narrative of Gen X seizing power :)
Love this. If you compare US and UK law firms, partners located America never seem to retire. I still haven’t understood why. Perhaps power is like a youth elixir? Or maybe it comes down to the American dream: make as much money as you can.
I’m also wondering whether, if as floated, we legislate in the UK to lower the age of voting from 18 to 16 if that will coincide with, and support, a shift in where decision-making (and the impacts of it) resides in a place that more fairly represents society.
Thanks Eric. That's an interesting about law firms in the UK vs US. America seems to be behind others in sunsetting our elders. I don't know if it's greed or fear of ageism, but I do believe it's holding us back.
When I was researching how I would turn this into a political program, I read that Scotland, Brazil, and Austria have lowered their voting age to 16. I'm skeptical and haven't seen any studies on what kind of impact this has had, but I'll be curious to see where the UK proposal on this goes.
Perhaps the strongest criticism to be leveled at Boomers is for cannibalizing succeeding generations in order to maintain disproportionate positions in areas ranging from careers to housing. This has contributed to everything from collapsing the birthrate to elite overproduction to productivity stagnation. Boomers stepping back will also be in elite interests. Populism is the last offramp before the freeway splits into real authoritarianism, be it leftwing or rightwing. Too many well educated people with remaining great potential are stuck on the sidelines, and the US runs the risk of going the way of Southern Europe if it doesn't finally move forward while there's still some room to maneuver.
Meanwhile, enjoy your California trip.
Thanks Jarlis. I agree boomers have hoarded resources, though I didn't touch on that as much. I wrote this with boomer establishment powers as my intended audience. My sense is that they get it and are ready to be more proactive. (Better late than never)
The data doesn’t show this—it shows American’s median age is older than it has ever been, and the age of congressional leaders (and Presidents) have paralleled this. This is not the definition of a gerontocracy—government ruled by elders—but a function of population distribution. Birth rates are down—from the 1950s it has dropped from 24.26 to 1978 it bottomed at 14.75 per 1000 people in America before slightly increasing, it is currently 12.09 per 1000 people. When the data is viewed as just women between 15-44 years old the curve is different but the decline is the same 56 per 1000 women today vs 122.9 per 1000 women in 1957. And the death rate has been dropping since 1950, with a slight rise during Covid but a return to dropping rates. Statistically this means the average age in the US will continue to increase—until the under 45 get out of themselves and decide to commit to raising families. This doesn’t make a gerontocracy when the majority is ‘older’ —this means a country is safe, durable, and stable. People can live on and don’t die in masses before they turn 30. At the same time those of us below the average need to take responsibility for the impact our actions have on our country—because it won’t be too long until we are above the average (a decade or two is not that long). Will we then accept being displaced as irrelevant simply because we crossed a statistical threshold? (The average won’t increase as fast as we age.). Why should we advocate for displacing others now?
The data absolutely shows America’s elderly political leadership even relative to other developed countries with similar demographic patterns. Demographic trends are part of the story here but there are many other issues driving this. You are welcome to have a different opinion on what to do about it, but it’s probably not worth continuing a conversation with someone who cannot acknowledge objective reality and strawmans my argument.
It’s your page—you’re entitled to tilt at the windmills if you want.
President Biden as an example for the point “younger people “ needing to be given/take the opportunity for leadership is kind of laughable since all US presidents are ‘younger people’ by about a decade or more. The pitting of age groups against each other is a naive bias used to manipulate people—don’t fall for it or use it.
Rarely does a foolish young person become a wise elder, and a foolish old person wasn’t a wise young person and became foolish with years passing. Age tends to condense character. Remember other countries have so much respect for elders that some worship ancestors—America has developed a current culture of consuming and disposing of people who are not considered valuable that there are few, if any, boundaries of respect left in this culture . Your post—intentionally or not—promotes this and assumes ‘youth’ inherently means innovation. Older people will clutch whatever they have that gets them respect and youth is a comparative term. To a 25 year old, a 45 year old is really old, and the 25 year olds feel they are the disruptive youth, the 45 middle aged at best. People die of old age conditions at 60–15 years older than 45. And people hold onto jobs and titles because they define themselves and their identity through these. (Without them who are they?). But in comparison to the oldest president ever to hold office a 45 year old is a young child with less than half the experience since primary school. Don’t get hung up on age groups—build and support solid character based on principles, these are timeless. Always have been, always will be.
It’s good to view people as individuals rather than generational stand-ins, but wholesale denying we have a gerontocracy problem is foolish and delusional.