ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, June 19, 2016

The distrustful youth

The Pew Center fails to note the significant conclusions in its own poll on trust in government:
Historically, there have been only modest generational differences in trust in government. Over time, the trajectory of these attitudes has been similar across generations.

As noted, young people are slightly more trusting in the federal government than older people. Currently, 25% of Millennials (ages 18-34) say they can trust the federal government just about always or most of the time. That compares with 19% of Gen Xers (35-50), 14% of Boomers (51-69) and 16% of Silents (70-87).

In 2009 and 2010, the differences across generations were somewhat larger: In August 2009, the three-point moving average of trust in the federal government among Millennials was 36%, compared with about 20% across older generations.

In the early 1990s, Gen Xers – whose oldest members were then in their early 20s – expressed somewhat greater trust in government than did Boomers and Silents, but these differences have diminished over time. Similarly, there were, at most, small differences in trust between Boomers and Silents in the 1970s and 1980s. Most important, the steep downward slide in trust in government that occurred in the 1970s was seen among both Boomers and Silents.
Look at the chart to the right. Notice the very steep slide that began in 1965 for the Silents and 1970 for the Baby Boomers. What is relevant is not how a very old Silent or an old Boomer's opinion compares to a young Millennial's trust in government, but rather how those opinions compare at similar ages.

The Silents' trust in government peaked at 82 percent, the Boomers' at 73 percent. The famously cynical GenXers trust peaked at 58 percent, and the supposedly naive Millennials peaked at 62 percent right in the patriotic aftermath of 9/11. The oldest Baby Boomers were 48 years old before they reached the level of cynicism about government that the Millennials have already reached.

This is particularly significant considering that the Millennials are much more racially mixed, so white Millennials are, developmentally speaking, far more suspicious of government than were white Baby Boomers.

Labels: ,

127 Comments:

Blogger JACIII June 19, 2016 8:24 AM  

Finally, something we can appreciate in millennials. Growing up in a subtler than envisioned 1984 did not have the desired effect.

Anonymous Icicle June 19, 2016 8:26 AM  

The government mannnn... the government...

*hits bong*

Blogger Jim June 19, 2016 8:27 AM  

Any opinion on whether or not it's significant that the major slide begins with the massive growth of government itself? The Great Society legislation of the mid 60's? I wonder what this would have looked like in the first 1/2 of the 20th century.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein June 19, 2016 8:28 AM  

I trust them to lie, obfuscate and fuck things up.

Born in 1965.

Blogger Shimshon June 19, 2016 8:38 AM  

That chart is inspiring!

Blogger Worlds Edge June 19, 2016 8:52 AM  

In the early 1990s, Gen Xers – whose oldest members were then in their early 20s –

My understanding is that the last year of the Baby Boom was 1964. Meaning the oldest Gen Xers would have been at least 25 in the "early 1990s," however defined. Probably older. Minor point, but this was irritating given the way such bright lines are being drawn in this piece.

FWIW, the first instance I can recall of a "Generation X" being applied to a group of people was by Canadian author Douglas Coupland. He was speaking of himself and his pathetic friends, of course, in an exceedingly annoying novel. Coupland was born in 1962, and probably had the 1970s punk group -- the one that brought the enormous talents (/s) of Billy Idol to the world's attention -- somewhere in the back of his mind as well.

Blogger Worlds Edge June 19, 2016 8:54 AM  

In the early 1990s, Gen Xers – whose oldest members were then in their early 20s –

My understanding is that the last year of the Baby Boom was 1964. Meaning the oldest Gen Xers would have been at least 25 in the "early 1990s," however defined. Probably older. Minor point, but this was irritating given the way such bright lines are being drawn in this piece.

FWIW, the first instance I can recall of a "Generation X" being applied to a group of people was by Canadian author Douglas Coupland. He was speaking of himself and his pathetic friends, of course, in an exceedingly annoying novel. Coupland was born in 1962, and probably had the 1970s punk group -- the one that brought the enormous talents (/s) of Billy Idol to the world's attention -- somewhere in the back of his mind as well.

Anonymous aero June 19, 2016 8:59 AM  

This boomer has less trust in polls then my ZERO percent trust in the government.
I don't need a poll to tell me that the majority of people don't know they are being screwed over my the government.

Blogger Kryten 2X4B 523P June 19, 2016 9:00 AM  

Interesting how that graphs nosedives after 1964 - wonder what could have happened then?

Blogger Lazarus June 19, 2016 9:05 AM  

The event may have been nov. 1963, the effect began to show in 1965



JFK assassination aftermath

I've heard several progressives claim that the saddest outcome of the Kennedy assassination and the investigation (or lack thereof) produced a permanent distrust and shattered the American people's confidence in their own federal government.

Blogger dc.sunsets June 19, 2016 9:07 AM  

One of Socionomics' tenets is that the final move in an Elliott Wave impulse (the fifth wave) occurs amidst dramatically weakening underlying fundamentals.

It is patently obvious that the financial boom of the last 41 years (begun at the Dow's low in 1971) masked a crushing decline in social trust, along with skyrocketing measures of social pathology (and we won't even mention the folly of mid-1960's public policies that afflict us today.)

The times in which we live are a phenomenon with no historical precedent. We know of no human system that appeared to defy gravity (natural limits) for longer, stacking its house of cards higher, embedding more brittleness and inability to adjust to inevitable change.

In the last (smaller scale) boom-bust of the 1920's/1930's relatively fewer people lived urban lifestyles. The masses of people now are ill-prepared to survive even an end to the welfare/warfare state.

Anonymous aero June 19, 2016 9:09 AM  

When you look at census data the baby procreation boom started in 1939 and ended in 1959. The blame the baby boomer crowd uses what ever dates they feel make their case to blame baby boomers. This is your tactic of SJW

Blogger Kryten 2X4B 523P June 19, 2016 9:22 AM  

@10

I was wondering if that may have been a trigger event, and the downslide continued with the escalation of the Vietnam War. Wonder if the civil rights act also played a part.

Blogger James Dixon June 19, 2016 9:24 AM  

> When you look at census data the baby procreation boom started in 1939 and ended in 1959. 

The boomers themselves are the ones who claim 46-64.

Anonymous Ryan June 19, 2016 9:27 AM  

When I see these types of polls, I always wonder what the result would be if broken down by gender.

Male boomers were watching the Vietnam war unfold, wondering if they were going to get caught up in it (drafted and killed) while the girls were twirling their hair and comparing lip gloss colors.

Today, the young men are looking at an employment wasteland, wondering how on earth they can support a family, while young women get excited with the idea of spending their earned income tax credit windfall each spring. (manna from the govt heaven)

Different perspectives.

Could be the former men distrusted govt (90%) while women trusted it 10%; and today it is men distrust 60% (women 40%) with the results being about the same on average.

A herd of mixed wildebeests & zebras have an average of 4 legs, but they are quite different critters, once looked at in separate groups.

Anonymous aero June 19, 2016 9:30 AM  

Long ago it was said there's nothing new under the sun. just are vanity and our iniquities Today it seems like there's a whole lot more vanity and acceptance of iniquities as normal behavior.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx June 19, 2016 9:35 AM  

At first glance it looks like the dollar purchasing-power chart. Or maybe Twitter stock or Scalzi web traffic. Not a very attractive investment.

At what point did trust in the Soviet Union government plumb these depths? 1988?

Anonymous aero June 19, 2016 9:36 AM  

James Dixon Said
The boomers themselves are the ones who claim 46-64.
Please give proof that boomers picked those dates

Anonymous aero June 19, 2016 9:39 AM  

There are a awful lot of boomer that are SJW and will make stuff up

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx June 19, 2016 9:39 AM  

aero wrote:... The blame the baby boomer crowd uses what ever dates they feel make their case to blame baby boomers. This is your tactic of SJW

Incoming boomer bashup in 3... 2... 1...

Blogger VD June 19, 2016 9:41 AM  

When you look at census data the baby procreation boom started in 1939 and ended in 1959. The blame the baby boomer crowd uses what ever dates they feel make their case to blame baby boomers. This is your tactic of SJW

You're a complete moron. And, on top of it, you're a liar. Don't comment again on this thread or your comments will be spammed.

Blogger John Saunders June 19, 2016 9:42 AM  

The "Cultural Fifties" (approx 1946-'64) came to a close 1964-'65, and America went insane. The Kennedy assassination is probably the proper transitional event, not insinuations of the Civil Rights Act of '64 or the Immigration Act of '65, and IIRC David Horowitz has identified 1965 as when his radical phase kicked into overdrive. No surprise that the graph peaks in 1964 for the Silent.

Just look at the James Bond movies for the transition. "Thunderball" (1965) is still set in the cultural '50s, "You Only Live Twice" (1967) runs to Japan to film, and Hollyweird finally embraces the cultural shift with "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" (1969).

Blogger Tank June 19, 2016 9:44 AM  


This is particularly significant considering that the Millennials are much more racially mixed, so white Millennials are, developmentally speaking, far more suspicious of government than were white Baby Boomers.


Well, they do have a lot more government, and a lot more info about government, from a lot more sources, than we Boomers had. There was no internet, and no talk radio (well, very little) to listen to. We had Cronkite and Brokaw to tell us about the government.

Still, lots of us have been pretty "doubtful" about it for many years.

Blogger Arthur Isaac June 19, 2016 10:09 AM  

This fits with their hero generation designation as predicted by Strauss and Howe in "The Fourth Turning". And this secular cycle crisis is running late.

Blogger David-093 June 19, 2016 10:17 AM  

Boomers ended in 1960, X started in 61, and Millennials started in 82. They keep using the 46-64 timeline bc that's the baby boom itself, which means nothing.

Blogger David-093 June 19, 2016 10:19 AM  

@24

It's actually running on time. The alt-Right is exactly what you'd expect from a rising hero-generation (Millennial) rebellion in a secular crisis, and this crisis will be a long one.

Blogger Rusty Fife June 19, 2016 10:34 AM  

aero wrote:When you look at census data the baby procreation boom started in 1939 and ended in 1959. The blame the baby boomer crowd uses what ever dates they feel make their case to blame baby boomers. This is your tactic of SJW

It's not about you.

The book "Boom, Bust & Echo" had a different take on the generations observed environment. Instead of the centering the generational effects at the peak Boomer magnitude; he looked at the change in magnitude (population slope).

The Boomers who were born on the rising slope had it good, those on the falling slope had it bad. I think this might be why all the later Boomers take so much offense at being lumped in with the early ones; NABALT, heh.

Not being a Boomer, I don't have a dog in this fight.

Anonymous CC June 19, 2016 10:37 AM  

Those graphs are really damning, nevertheless, they are very encouraging. Is that why the Pew Centre won't state the obvious? So they don't have to ask the question "why do people trust the government less and less?" That would make an interesting article.

Anonymous BGKB June 19, 2016 10:46 AM  

I trust them to lie, obfuscate and fuck things up.

I trust I will be audited by someone who can not figure out the result of multiplying 3 rolled six sided dice in their head.

"The Fourth Turning".

Their theory assumes that all of history has not been people like (((Soros))) backstabbing economies and looting the hard assets. These elite (((looters))) have a stunningly simple MO that they repeat seemingly non-stop. Destroy a nation and its economy, and then swoop in and collect hard assets on the cheap, usually with easy money due to proximity to central bankers. The goal that these connected money men want is a publicly sanctioned private looting.

Blogger Cinco June 19, 2016 10:51 AM  

A parasite need not trust its host.

Anonymous Bowman June 19, 2016 10:54 AM  

So basically age doesn't matter, State-controlled education does, for about 5 to 10%.
Still good it is at an all time low.

Blogger Nick S June 19, 2016 11:04 AM  

There are more significant conclusions being missed. Timing is everything.

Blogger dc.sunsets June 19, 2016 11:05 AM  

I find it most interesting that the collapse in trust of government coincided with the federal Leviathan arrogating to itself control of citizens' lives down to the level of dictating how much water is used by a toilet.

Trust collapsed while
Central control, planning, regulations, statutory laws, snooping, elimination of financial and increasingly personal privacy and legally mandatory enabling of perversions grew like an aggressive carcinoma.

I cannot reconcile these trends.

Blogger exfarmkid June 19, 2016 11:06 AM  

27. rusty fife: "
The Boomers who were born on the rising slope had it good, those on the falling slope had it bad."

"baby boomers" vs "baby busters". It's always funny how proposed reforms to things like social security always exempt people born before 1956. Not that I'm cynical or anything......

Blogger dc.sunsets June 19, 2016 11:09 AM  

Utopian cultists saw in Uncle Sam a way to force Mankind into God's image; it never occurred to them that their prescription, overwhelming COERCION, was like putting everyone in prison as a means to stamp out crime.

Blogger S1AL June 19, 2016 11:10 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger seeingsights June 19, 2016 11:11 AM  

This is my view on Generations:

Born 1945-1965 Boomers
Born 1965-1985 Gen X
Born 1985-2005 Millenials

I don't start Gen X birth in the early 1960s. Although those born in the early 1960s do seem less insufferable than their older boomer peers.

Blogger S1AL June 19, 2016 11:12 AM  

"Boomers ended in 1960, X started in 61, and Millennials started in 82. They keep using the 46-64 timeline bc that's the baby boom itself, which means nothing."

You do realize that most of these dates are arbitrary nonsense, right? It's easy to make an argument for generations spanning a shorter period of time. If you cut boomers at 60, you get X at 61-75ish and Silent at 76-90ish. This is much more in line with who raised will and the prevailing attitudes towards things like divorce and abortion.

Blogger S1AL June 19, 2016 11:13 AM  

*who raised whom

Blogger John Saunders June 19, 2016 11:17 AM  

@32 Nick S: There are more significant conclusions being missed. Timing is everything.

Care to explicate?

Blogger Dirtnapninja June 19, 2016 11:18 AM  

My Dad used to joke that a Gen Xer was anyone who, as a child ever stood in line to play Pac Man.

Anonymous JI June 19, 2016 11:24 AM  

It's also possible that government has just become less trustworthy over time.

Blogger Rusty Fife June 19, 2016 11:24 AM  

exfarmkid wrote:27. rusty fife: "

The Boomers who were born on the rising slope had it good, those on the falling slope had it bad."

"baby boomers" vs "baby busters". It's always funny how proposed reforms to things like social security always exempt people born before 1956. Not that I'm cynical or anything......


Here's the yearly birth numbers; yeah 1956 is an interesting cut off.

http://www.bbhq.com/bomrstat.htm

Just like a flat GDP is very different from a rising or falling GDP (which is tied to working population). It is the change in population that is formational, not so much the magnitude.

On the trust in government issue; it is surprising how closely correlated the attitudes are between generations.

Blogger Elder Son June 19, 2016 11:27 AM  

So, does this prove that the elders still have some influence on their posterity, who still hold on to a pinch of hope and change? Of course, you will note that the Millennials are still wildly out of sync with their forebears.

Now, back to #ReasonsWhyILoveMyself on a Friday night no less.

Blogger Phil Mann June 19, 2016 11:30 AM  

The conventional wisdom (which may or may not be true) was that millions of horny servicemen returned from the war in 1945, and after years away from their women, were more than eager to make up for lost time. The results of that first started showing up in 1946. (Remember, this was before the pill, Griswold and Roe.) Add roughly 18 years to raise a child to adulthood and you get 1964. I doubt there was anything sinister in the definition.

The Boomers who were born on the rising slope had it good, those on the falling slope had it bad.

The early boomers did have it nice. These were the guys that could pick up a nice house for $20,000, sell it ten years later to the younger crowd for a quarter million, and then pat themselves on the back for being some sort of financial geniuses.

The guys five to ten years older have been a royal pain in the ass ever since I was 8 years old. (Hilliary and Bill Clinton epitomize those bums.)

Blogger Elder Son June 19, 2016 11:42 AM  

These were the guys that could pick up a nice house for $20,000, sell it ten years later to the younger crowd for a quarter million, and then pat themselves on the back for being some sort of financial geniuses.

That is just stoo-pid. Because when I buy silver for 3 an ounce, and sell it to a millennial for 17 an ounce. I'm being mean!

Blogger Nick S June 19, 2016 11:50 AM  

Care to explicate?

Not really interested in performing a pointless exercise in futility.

Anonymous BGKB June 19, 2016 11:51 AM  

Great government work, Orlando sand nigger nightclub shooter threatened to kill a cop & his family in 2013, FBI dropped case. https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/17/good-grief-in-2013-orlando-terrorist-threatened-to-kill-florida-deputy-and-his-family-fbi-dismissed/

Anonymous Gen. Kong June 19, 2016 12:00 PM  

JI:
It's also possible that government has just become less trustworthy over time.

Ask Nate to explain the 'Chemical War' of the 1920s to you sometime if you think that's so. Just for fun, look up the Wickard decision of the Supreme Council of Blackrobes from the early 1940s sometime. The regime situated in Sodom-on-Poromac has the right to forbid you to grow food on land you own to feed yourself and family - because interstate commerce. Still the "law of the land", BTW.

Blogger Elder Son June 19, 2016 12:01 PM  

According to FBI, their first contact with shooter was 2013. According to several regulars at homo-bar, the shooter started visiting homo-bar in 2013.

Also note shooter was vetted by FBI, DHS, and G4S.

Also note, that the "police heroes" were told to stand-down for 3 hours before engaging shooter.

The FBI admits that they had FBI supplied informers on the shooter.

This is just another one of those "investigations" allowed to go live.

Anonymous Gen. Kong June 19, 2016 12:04 PM  

@BGKB:
I'm frankly surprised he wasn't hired to the FBI's grand vizier for Florida. His daddy worked for the CIA apparently.

Blogger The Other Robot June 19, 2016 12:15 PM  

Nick S makes a stupid statement:

There are more significant conclusions being missed. Timing is everything.

Then says "Not really interested in performing a pointless exercise in futility" when asked to explain.

Please explain, Nick S. Maybe it is not pointless. Perhaps some of us will get it.

What did you mean? Was it just more worthless posturing on your part?

Anonymous BGKB June 19, 2016 12:19 PM  

Philly has so driven off white people & businesses that its trying to get money from the food stamp system, to pay for its pensions.

http://www.theburningplatform.com/2016/06/17/30-blocks-of-dog-shit-sugar-taxes/

His daddy worked for the CIA apparently.

I posted a link before with a picture of his daddy visiting HilLIARy's secretary of statism office.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx June 19, 2016 12:22 PM  

Spartacus xxxxx wrote:At first glance it looks like the dollar purchasing-power chart.

At what point did trust in the Soviet Union government plumb these depths? 1988?


Putting trends lines on the chart shows an interesting date just up ahead. For 2001 to present, trust in .gov crosses zero around 2019-2021. Going from 1964-presnt doesn't really change that picture.

Blogger rumpole5 June 19, 2016 12:47 PM  

"Boomers had it good" -- There is not a one of the Millennials who would like living in the 60s. Life was dirty, dull, and boring. I would much rather live as a teen now.

Blogger Elder Son June 19, 2016 1:00 PM  

Life was dirty, dull, and boring.

Maybe you were/are boring.

Heck, my friends and I had a blast in the 60's and 70's. But then again, we were FREE-RANGERS and didn't have to worry about being coddled and put into a bubble because skeered of life.

Blogger Salt June 19, 2016 1:01 PM  

@10 We knew the Warren Report was bullshit.

Blogger Nick S June 19, 2016 1:10 PM  

What did you mean? Was it just more worthless posturing on your part?

Encouraging people to look past their confirmation bias is not worthless. Some people will get it and others won't. I'm not interested in arguing with idiots who will never get it and I'm not the least bit concerned about what you or anyone else thinks of me.

Anonymous Jack Amok June 19, 2016 1:13 PM  

Rumpole5, I know boomers are perpetual teenagers, but the rest of us realize you eventually have to grow up. When you do, being able to get a job is nice.

Blogger rumpole5 June 19, 2016 1:15 PM  

Also, Remember that we have four levels of government that can function independently of each, and a de facto citizens militia. If a hydrogen bomb wiped out Washington DC, and the northeast, we would still have State, County, and City governments, and the militia.

Blogger VD June 19, 2016 1:21 PM  

Not really interested in performing a pointless exercise in futility.

Then stop making baseless assertions you're not willing to defend. Otherwise, we'll simply say "you're wrong" and leave it at that.

Blogger David-093 June 19, 2016 1:24 PM  

"You do realize that most of these dates are arbitrary nonsense, right?"

Ask me how I know you have no idea what you're talking about.

"It's easy to make an argument for generations spanning a shorter period of time."

Those are called waves, not generations. 20-30 years has always been the length of a generation, going back thousands of years. Strauss and Howe got most their ideas from the pre-Roman Etruscans, who believed that history was cyclical based on a human life. As they put it, history is more of a spiral than a circle.

"If you cut boomers at 60, you get X at 61-75ish and Silent at 76-90ish. This is much more in line with who raised will and the prevailing attitudes towards things like divorce and abortion."

There is more to a generation that a single event. It's biggest influence is simple cause and effect stemming from political, religious, and social events occurring during their childhood to young adulthood. How they react to these events determines their collective personality and memories, which affect the younger generation raised after them and the generation they themselves raise.

OpenID countenance June 19, 2016 1:26 PM  

Vox, notice that the biggest slide comes in the core birth years of our generation, 1965-1980. I take that as part coincidence and part cluster.

Anonymous gxg June 19, 2016 2:02 PM  

I'm Gen-X. When I was in my twenties, adults (meaning WW2 white people) were in charge. My grandparents were responsible, married, savers with a strong moral compass. Yes, their generation wasn't perfect, but they did inspire trust. They were K-selected adults.

Who's in charge now? Baby Boomers. During my twenties, I just assumed that my parents' generation would eventually grow up. But they didn't. With some exceptions of course, they're perpetual rabbity teenagers. And now they're in charge.

We'd be fools to trust them. So are we dealing with trust-issues? Or recognition that our government is no longer trust-worthy because a different caliber of people are in charge?

OpenID countenance June 19, 2016 2:22 PM  

I wrote this last year, for whom it may concern:

https://countenance.wordpress.com/2015/10/29/field-guide-to-modern-generations/

Blogger The Other Robot June 19, 2016 2:24 PM  

I tried to think of a model of what could be going on to see what the data suggests.

Now, if the model is that over a person's lifetime they lose trust in the government, but that the next generation starts at a default high level of trust, we should see a sawtooth pattern across each of these groups (boomers, gen-Xers etc) as each year's cohort, when it arrives, pulls average trust up a bit while all previous years cohorts are pulling it down. Eventually, in a steady state we should see the level of trust being static as the really old ones who have the lowest trust die off and their replacements having much higher levels of trust.

However, that is not happening here, and it is clearly visible in the charts showing each of the groups.

Perhaps my model is wrong. Comments welcome.

Blogger The Other Robot June 19, 2016 2:32 PM  

Seen on Vox's twitter page:

Happy Father's Day! Let us all commit to expect fathers to be equal caregivers & just as competent in the home as mothers are in the office.

I think she knows something about how competent women in the office are not.

Blogger The Other Robot June 19, 2016 2:41 PM  

Perhaps she hasn't heard of affirmative action. Not just for blacks.

Blogger S1AL June 19, 2016 2:53 PM  

"There is more to a generation that a single event. It's biggest influence is simple cause and effect stemming from political, religious, and social events occurring during their childhood to young adulthood. How they react to these events determines their collective personality and memories, which affect the younger generation raised after them and the generation they themselves raise."

Which is why the selected number from 20-30 is arbitrary. The notion that 1980-2000 (or further, in some cases) is in any way a cohesive cohort is wholely ignorant of the conditions and events during the formative years of that span.

Blogger The Other Robot June 19, 2016 3:07 PM  

Russia's possible new automated tanks might be causing the US Army to demand new tanks.

Perhaps they can add an autoloader to go with the red pumps that the crew will be required to wear.

Blogger James Dixon June 19, 2016 3:09 PM  

> Please give proof that boomers picked those dates.

The media has been proclaiming those dates most of my life. Which generation has been running the media the last 40 years or so?

Blogger The Other Robot June 19, 2016 3:10 PM  

Which (((generation))) has been running the media the last 40 years or so?

FIFY!

Blogger Robert What? June 19, 2016 5:13 PM  

Boomers have a very schizophrenic viewpoint of government. On the one hand they are distrustful of it. On the other hand they think it should control everything.

Anonymous Mr. Rational June 19, 2016 5:14 PM  

Kryten 2X4B 523P wrote:Wonder if the civil rights act also played a part.
The CRA made Blacks untouchable, which set the stage for the race riots a few years later; government handled those very poorly.  So, almost certainly yes.

Blogger Sagramore June 19, 2016 5:22 PM  

@2 "If they are lying about pot, and this newly released breif shows tgey have been all along, what else are they lying about?"

There is a serial scammer in Vancouver that looks just like Tan Mom pushing old "pot makes you infertile" hasabra this weekend to make herself relevant.

Anonymous litdog June 19, 2016 5:23 PM  

Expressed “trust in government” is an imperfect — if not useless — measure of attitudes toward the proper size and scope of government.

The great dip beginning in 1965 coincided with LBJ’s Great Society and the Viet Nam war. Leftists were incensed that the US was fighting Communism instead of supporting it a la WWII, and they were dissatisfied that the “Civil Rights” agenda was not immediately and thoroughly integrating every school, corporation, church, and neighborhood in America.

The Right was dissatisfied for nearly the opposite reasons as it realized that all of the major institutions of society were falling under Cultural Marxist control.

The Pew data predict and explain practically nothing other than the very thing they measure: propensity to express dissatisfaction with government. High trust in government correlates strongly with flag waving. Low trust in government correlates strongly with political snark.

It’s no coincidence that the Saturday Night Live brand of comedy originated in the low-trust 1970s. But does snark and irreverence help us predict anything other than a taste for coarseness over subtlety?

Ralph Nadar was a darling of the SNL crowd, and he even hosted the show. Much like Bernie today, he represented their low-trust point of view. But it had nothing to do with transferring power from a corrupt government to an oppressed people. Instead, it was more like seizing power from a Stalin who could merely kill millions and handing it to a true believer like Trotsky who could really chase down the last White guy.

Anonymous Jill June 19, 2016 5:27 PM  

As somebody else pointed out, the oldest gen-xers were not in their early 20s in the early 90s. I've noticed a trend to make gen-x a smaller group than it actually is. I don't know why--no conspiracy theories from me, but there it is.

Blogger Sagramore June 19, 2016 5:27 PM  

@6 Younger than Morrissey, Older than Macaulay Culkin is gen-x.

I don't recall if McRapey was ever militant about dates from the usenet days, but we usuaully reverted to Strauss and Howe definitions.

Blogger James Dixon June 19, 2016 6:51 PM  

> I've noticed a trend to make gen-x a smaller group than it actually is.

The boomers can't admit that there's anything good that doesn't belong to them.

Blogger James Dixon June 19, 2016 6:52 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Were-Puppy June 19, 2016 6:53 PM  

That compares with 19% of Gen Xers (35-50), 14% of Boomers (51-69) and 16% of Silents (70-87).
---

I'm so confused. I thought it was boomers who were irritating, but it's the Silents that are the ones...

Blogger Were-Puppy June 19, 2016 7:41 PM  

My cryptic comment, I thought I had been talking to boomers recently, but they are silents.

Blogger Rusty Fife June 19, 2016 8:20 PM  

Were-Puppy wrote:My cryptic comment, I thought I had been talking to boomers recently, but they are silents.

This is why I suspect the pop. slope is important, not the magnitude.

Anonymous Confused Boomer June 19, 2016 8:43 PM  

The boomers can't admit that there's anything good that doesn't belong to them.

Have you heard Bruce Springsteen? Man, I could just listen to him forever.

Blogger rumpole5 June 19, 2016 9:35 PM  

Well, there was the lake cottage, the speed boat, the catamaran, (and that night under the stars anchored on the sandbag) My '66 GOT, girlfriend's TR4A, and that summer in Puerto Vallarta, when we rode the horses down the beach and forced that little river. But the REST of the 60s were really dull and boring!

Blogger IreneAthena June 19, 2016 9:39 PM  

Since the chart makes no reference to race, and especially since Millennials are such a racially mixed group, how can one infer from the chart anything about specifically white Millennial attitudes? Whites have plenty of reasons other than immigration policy to mistrust the government, as do non-whites.

QUOTE:The oldest Baby Boomers were 48 years old before they reached the level of cynicism about government that the Millennials have already reached.
This is particularly significant considering that the Millennials are much more racially mixed, so white Millennials are, developmentally speaking, far more suspicious of government than were white Baby Boomers.

Blogger rumpole5 June 19, 2016 9:45 PM  

There are a lot of good things that don't belong to Boomers -- I have a Japanese car that never breaks down and gets over 40 mpg. You can have the 60s, shallow music, Pettycoat junction, Mayberry and Aunt Bea, and all. I like living right now, and if I could jump 50 years into the future I would do it.

Blogger IreneAthena June 19, 2016 9:47 PM  

@85 Oh, come on, rumpole5. July 20, 1969? Seeing pictures of the Earth taken from space, and then men's footprints on the moon, wasn't that wonderful? I often feel sorry for people who were born after the sixties, because there is no event that will draw the family around the tee-vee that will top that one for sheer joy. We watched rockets going up. They watched towers coming down.

Blogger IreneAthena June 19, 2016 9:48 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger James Dixon June 19, 2016 9:54 PM  

> Have you heard Bruce Springsteen? Man, I could just listen to him forever.

The Bruce Springsteen who now thinks politics is more important than music? Yeah, he's a full fledged boomer alright.

> There are a lot of good things that don't belong to Boomers -

Of course. But try getting a boomer to admit that. Everything anyone else has done is a pale imitation of what they did. Just ask them.

Blogger rumpole5 June 19, 2016 10:13 PM  

The 60's were memorable, but everything was harder, except getting into the courthouse or onto a plane (which no one did anyway). That TV had 3 channels, in fuzzy black and white, that went to a test pattern at 11pm. Everything almost everywhere except in large cities was closed by 10pm. In summer most of the country sweltered in sleepless nights too hot to sleep. No A.C. in most cars either. They broke down all the time and had about 3 good years. Fresh foods were seasonal. Now you have your choice of any fresh food, any time you like, You've never spent a sleepless night because of the weather, you have more information in your hand than the Ptolemy Kings had in Alexandria. Except in the worst ghetto s, you drive down wide landscaped blooming streets past splendid well appointed buildings. Anyone who thinks that the physical condition of any city (outside of ethnic ghettos) was better in the 60s than now has a poor memory.

Anonymous Discard June 19, 2016 10:15 PM  

90. James Dixon: I'm a baby boomer, I'm told. No, we did not give ourselves that name. Older people, likely professional demographers, coined the term. Blame them.

So, go ahead and ask me if everything done by other generations is just a pale imitation of what we did. Go ahead, ask me.

Anonymous Discard June 19, 2016 10:33 PM  

91. rumpole5: We had enough to eat. We had books to read. We had guns, motorcycles, beer, and sex. We had friends and family. Jobs for everyone. We had a White country too. What we've gained since then is mostly convenience. Fresh fruit in the winter instead of canned peaches, and fact checking with smart phones instead of looking in the encyclopedia. Trivial.

Blogger IreneAthena June 19, 2016 10:35 PM  

OK, Rumpole I admit I'd miss the AC. But this guy does have a few good points about the good ol' days.

Blogger Elder Son June 19, 2016 11:06 PM  

Well, there is Vox's blog, which I do appreciate. But some of you actually live here.

Millennial achievement: https://www.bing.com/search?q=millennial+achievement&FORM=AWRE

And I do get that Millennials are being educated by Boomers and X'ers. And I do my very best to undo what my grandchildren get crammed into their heads.

X'ers have made some "good things" worth noting. While the rest are still wah-wah-wah!!!

Blogger Were-Puppy June 20, 2016 12:07 AM  

Will the last boomer to check out please turn off all the 1970's rock drug organs.

Blogger Were-Puppy June 20, 2016 12:16 AM  

Looking at the chart again, it looks like the Silent and Boomers trust plummeted until maybe 1980. Then it went up somewhat.

Some of that probably had to do with the crappy Jimmy Carter years, and Reagan becoming president in 1980.

Then the Gen Xers appear right at the last year of Reagan? And it's all down hill from there :P

Blogger Bibliotheca Servare June 20, 2016 12:33 AM  

Pardon the inanity, but: ditto. Born in the early nineties. (Also pardon the lack of specificity, please. I prefer to leave a little ambiguity for the benefit of the SJW'S who are fond of stalking.)

Blogger dfordoom June 20, 2016 12:46 AM  

It was the mid-70s oil crisis and economic disaster that changed everything as far as generational attitudes are concerned. If you reached adulthood prior to 1973 (in other words you were born from around 1935 to around 1954) you grew up in a world where prosperity and economic security were taken for granted as things that would go on forever.

If you reached adulthood after 1973 (in other words you were born from say 1955 to 1964) you experienced the shock of a world where prosperity and economic security could never again be taken for granted. Prosperity did eventually return but economic security did not. And that sublime confidence in the future was gone forever.

The huge generational gulf is between those born 1935-1954 and those born after 1955. It's a gull that makes any other recent generational gulf seem insignificant. The issues that matter to people are the bread-and-butter issues. Will I be able to get a job? Will it be a secure job? Will I be able to afford to get married, buy a house, raise kids.

The late boomers (1955-1964) share GenX's contempt for the early (1946-54) boomers but we also extend our contempt to the second wave of the Greatest Generation (1935-45) who are practically indistinguishable in attitude from the early boomers.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx June 20, 2016 12:49 AM  

James Dixon wrote:>
> There are a lot of good things that don't belong to Boomers -

Of course. But try getting a boomer to admit that. Everything anyone else has done is a pale imitation of what they did. Just ask them.



Cool man, you're totally right, you know? I hadn't really thought it through before but, yeah, everything else really is a pale imitation of what we boomers have achieved. And look what happens when we try to rise you up on our groovy high. You can't even handle your LSD, man. Was it the set? Tried to toughen you up with the free love and latch key business, but nooo. You had go all crybaby boo hoo hoo. Where's my mommy? Where's daddy? Please.

But the best news of all? We're going live on as eternal teenagers for another hundred fucking years just so we can do the boot-stampin' twist all over your cynical, whiny slacker faces. Peace & Love.

Blogger Elder Son June 20, 2016 12:49 AM  

X'ers and Millennials are still above the slopes and crests, but there is hope. Maybe.

Blogger weka June 20, 2016 1:06 AM  

@99
Agree. Would add that the USA is the only place where early boomers are still electable. Cameron and Key are late boomers. Trudeau, the putz, is a Gen X.

The Gen X elite, who avoided the pain, are truly noxious. Lots of time for most Gen Xers (generation Jones ie born 1960), but that generation of SJW, well the vintage was simply bad.

Moreover, Trudeau and his friends are doubling down on big momma state. That never ends well.

Anonymous Jack Amok June 20, 2016 1:27 AM  

The thing that stands out to me are the spikes that coincide with wars we (thought we had) won. "Look at that - the government was able to win a war and protect us against third-world loons! Hey, government's okay after all."

Followed of course by "Hey, look at that, the government f'ed up, threw away the victory, and squandered all the sacrifices our soldiers made. They're morons after all..."

Victory and defeat in war are hard things to fake. People put a lot of stake in them.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx June 20, 2016 1:30 AM  

dfordoom wrote:It was the mid-70s oil crisis and economic disaster that changed everything as far as generational attitudes are concerned. If you reached adulthood prior to 1973 (in other words you were born from around 1935 to around 1954) you grew up in a world where prosperity and economic security were taken for granted as things that would go on forever.
...

The late boomers (1955-1964) share GenX's contempt for the early (1946-54) boomers but we also extend our contempt to the second wave of the Greatest Generation (1935-45) who are practically indistinguishable in attitude from the early boomers.



Notes. You're on to something. 1973 is not a bad call. The Strauss & Howe frame doesn't work all that well within the individual generations. There was a sea change in the early '70's that affected young adults (mid-late-boomers) differently FROM other age groups. That was when the group psychology decisively shifted (was shifted) from "greatest" to "guilt". This business about one generation resenting others is a childish model, a diversion.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx June 20, 2016 1:52 AM  

Spartacus xxxxx wrote:dfordoom wrote:
...

The late boomers (1955-1964) share GenX's contempt for the early (1946-54) boomers but we also extend our contempt to the second wave of the Greatest Generation (1935-45) who are practically indistinguishable in attitude from the early boomers.


Notes. You're on to something. 1973 is not a bad call. The Strauss & Howe frame doesn't work all that well within the individual generations. There was a sea change in the early '70's that affected young adults (mid-late-boomers) differently FROM other age groups. That was when the group psychology decisively shifted (was shifted) from "greatest" to "guilt". This business about one generation resenting others is a childish model, a diversion.


Notes2. There was a sea change around 1971-1974, with a build up to it in the years prior, which then led us directly to Peak SJW. There was a sea change around 2014-2017, with a build up to it in the years prior. In the psychological respect, this period is the other side of that period.

Blogger Kona Commuter June 20, 2016 3:53 AM  

I love bashing Boomers on threads :-P

I'll trade internet, smart phones, low interest rates, tenuous employment opportunities and negative wage growth for affordable housing, secure employment options, inflation busting year on year pay rises, non-SJW dominated politics.

I'll admit that the lack of the draft is something I appreciate.

Full Disclosure I'm in Australia where just about everyone is anti-gun & can't extend that line of thinking to the government. Seriously, a person can be trusted with a machine gun if he's in the Army, can kill people he doesn't know whilst in the Army. But the minute he's off base he can't be trusted with a semi-auto and there's hell to pay if he defends his family.

True story - a soldier in a garrison town had the Police called on him under the "man in the streets with a gun" because he was running with full kit carrying a CRUDE "gun" made out of pipes in the shape of a gun. He was arrested. A garrison town, full of soldiers, running in full kit has some f-ing R-tard calling the cops! I recall that town (I'm an ex army brat) having some guy shoot a Magpie with a shotgun in a suburban street with the punishment being the Police telling him not to ever do it again.

Blogger Kona Commuter June 20, 2016 3:58 AM  

Sorry here's a link to that Soldier being arrested for carrying a replica firearm http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/12/02/13/21/schools-in-lockdown-amid-unconfirmed-reports-of-armed-man

Blogger James Dixon June 20, 2016 4:17 AM  

> 90. James Dixon: I'm a baby boomer, I'm told. No, we did not give ourselves that name. Older people, likely professional demographers, coined the term.

Where did I say they did?

> So, go ahead and ask me if everything done by other generations is just a pale imitation of what we did. Go ahead, ask me.

I don't need to. I was born in 58.

Blogger James Dixon June 20, 2016 4:21 AM  

> The late boomers (1955-1964) share GenX's contempt for the early (1946-54) boomers but we also extend our contempt to the second wave of the Greatest Generation (1935-45) who are practically indistinguishable in attitude from the early boomers.

Bingo.

Blogger rumpole5 June 20, 2016 11:18 AM  

Look. The 60s and 70s were what they were. The general principle in my experience is that everything that does not involve "security" issues was less convenient, more expensive, more clunky and slow, in the past than it is now. Another example: We used to stand in line at the tag office to pick up a new car tag every year. At some point, someone, (maybe a GenXer!) figured out that you could just affix a mail out decal to the same tag/plate for several years! Viola! Thousands of wasted precious Saturday hours saved. Another example is ATMs and Scanning self checkouts in stores. Those save thousands of hours not waiting in line. Everything is easier by far now. The only exception is security nonsense. THAT has gone backwards and wastes more time.

Blogger Nick S June 20, 2016 12:39 PM  

Then stop making baseless assertions you're not willing to defend. Otherwise, we'll simply say "you're wrong" and leave it at that.

Very well. This is pretty simple. As adults we've all forgotten what we instinctively knew as 3 year olds was the most powerful and important question of all. Why?

Are Boomers, Xers and Millennials genetically predisposed to to particular behavioral characteristics or are their behavioral characteristics the result of environmental pressures? And, if you conclude they are due to environmental pressures, do the generations predisposed to more favorable behavioral characteristics owe it to more favorable environmental pressures that were conducive to developing those characteristics. Look at the timelines and and ask why. What is more relevant to how those opinions compare at similar ages is why they compare the way they do. I submit more significant conclusions can be drawn by more closely comparing environments in which those opinions were developed at similar ages.

Blogger Akulkis June 20, 2016 1:06 PM  

@58

What did you mean? Was it just more worthless posturing on your part?

Encouraging people to look past their confirmation bias is not worthless. Some people will get it and others won't. I'm not interested in arguing with idiots who will never get it and I'm not the least bit concerned about what you or anyone else thinks of me.



Oh, Nick's a secret genius. He is, he is.

Blogger IreneAthena June 20, 2016 1:10 PM  

{If anyone has time after engaging with Nick S, I am still curious about @86.}

Anonymous Discard June 20, 2016 1:15 PM  

110. rumpole5: I remember when you could stand in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles with all the other White people and chat up a pretty girl who had no tattoos or nose rings. And if you exchanged numbers with the pretty girl, she did not text you six times a day, or even expect you to call her more that twice a week.

Life was better then. The country was White, you could buy an M-1 carbine through the mail, and pretty women did not mutilate themselves. Good jobs were easy to come by, setting up your own business did not take a year of waiting for permits, and if you shot a Dindu who attacked you, the cops said "good job".

It really depends on whether you prefer comfort or freedom. That's too bad, we might of had both.

Anonymous Discard June 20, 2016 1:25 PM  

108. James Dixon: I stand corrected, with respect to the naming of my generation. I had conflated you with another commenter.

And you still haven't asked me if everything done by other generations is just a pale imitation of what boomers did. Or was that just BS?

And why are the '58ers so special that they are exempt from the general animus directed at boomers? Are they sort of like Wiggers, denying their true identity in order to get on with what they see as the stronger group?

Blogger tublecane June 20, 2016 2:51 PM  

@38-It is arbitrary nonsense, yes. Except that the Silent generation had a couple of shared national experiences in the depression and the war, and that the Baby Boom was a genuine demographic phenomenon. But that's even stretching it. Babies are being born all the time, and there's no clear chronological division between them.

That being said, there's no good, argument for shortening generation spans. You play with the very definition of a generation when you don't allow enough time for children to grow up and produce offspring. 14 years is technically long enough, but almost no one has a baby that young. If anything generations should be longer, because people are taking longer to have their first kids.

You're not alone in this confusion over what constitutes a generation. My own cousin tried to argue that we're from different generations because she's five years older top Han me and I wasn't familiar with whatever pop cultural thing we were talking about. My cousin!

Blogger Nick S June 20, 2016 3:17 PM  

Oh, Nick's a secret genius. He is, he is.

Depends on your metrics, but it's no secret, oh wise holder of a degree in Armchair Psychology from Self-Help U.

Blogger LP9 Solidified in Gold! Rin Integra June 20, 2016 7:00 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger James Dixon June 20, 2016 9:14 PM  

> And you still haven't asked me if everything done by other generations is just a pale imitation of what boomers did. Or was that just BS?

You apparently didn't parse my response. Why do I have to ask you when I can answer myself?

> And why are the '58ers so special that they are exempt from the general animus directed at boomers?

They're not.

However, if you're in the claimed boomer generation range yourself, then dfordoom summarizes the antipathy between the so called late boomers and the early boomers quite well.

Anonymous Discard June 21, 2016 12:36 AM  

119. James Dixon: You are trying to evade your own BS. Not all boomers deny the achievements of gen X or millenials, despite your claim.

And how is it that I've never noticed this supposed antipathy between late and early boomers, despite being born a party to the alleged dispute? I suggest that you not try to make such large generalizations from your squabbles with your big brother.

Blogger dfordoom June 21, 2016 3:16 AM  

That being said, there's no good, argument for shortening generation spans.

You don't need to. But what does make sense is revising the cut-off points. Those born between 1935 and 1954 have a hell of a lot in common in terms of outlook, attitudes and even cultural tastes. This was the generation that gave us Woodstock, the Beatles, hippies, the Summer of Love, long hair and the beginnings of the Sexual Revolution. This was the generation that produced John Lennon and Germaine Greer.

The generation born from 1955 to 1974 gave us Bowie, disco, punk rock and the 80s as the Decade of Greed.

There were also technology differences. The 1955-74 generation grew up taking things like home video for granted and they embraced personal computers.

Blogger James Dixon June 21, 2016 11:40 AM  

> Not all boomers deny the achievements of gen X or millenials, despite your claim.

Where did I say they did? I said "just ask one". It's called rhetoric. Our gracious hosts has been offering clinics on it for some time now.

And playing the odds, sure there are special snowflake boomers (since by the boomer designated definitions I am one I can hardly deny their existence), but if you do ask one the odds are that you'll get exactly the response I noted.

Blogger James Dixon June 21, 2016 11:48 AM  

> And how is it that I've never noticed this supposed antipathy between late and early boomers, despite being born a party to the alleged dispute?

I have no idea. Maybe you're just not very observant? It was widely recognized amongst my college cohorts, as well as my wife's.

> I suggest that you not try to make such large generalizations from your squabbles with your big brother.

I don't have a big brother, so your attempted rhetorical attack falls flat. :)

You are correct that I'm generalizing, and that for any individual case the generalization might not be true. But stereotypes exist for a reason, and the boomer stereotypes are well earned. And having been drafted into their generation by the elder boomers, I'm fully qualified to say so.

Anonymous Discard June 21, 2016 2:20 PM  

James Dixon: Save your rhetoric for the SJWs. To thinking men it's just bullshit.

"College cohort". I see. I misplaced the source of your discontent. It wasn't a big brother that scarred you so, it was an upperclassman.

Blogger James Dixon June 21, 2016 5:21 PM  

> "College cohort". I see. I misplaced the source of your discontent. It wasn't a big brother that scarred you so, it was an upperclassman.

Again, your rhetorical jab doesn't land. That's not surprising though, the boomers never have understood.

Blogger llewlem888 June 22, 2016 3:14 PM  

Very interesting illustration. This 90's kid who's never trusted the govt had been pondering this problem for years. You have any sources I could read up on?

Anonymous Discard June 22, 2016 9:02 PM  

James Dixon: It's said around here that you can't reason someone out of a belief that they didn't reason themselves into. Most likely true, but you can amuse yourself at their expense.

So tell me, who are these elder boomers who "drafted" (your term) you into their generation? The ten year old who stole your candy in 1964? The college seniors in 1976? Wasn't it actually people born in the 1920s or earlier who came up with the term "baby boom"? Did they have a draft board?

In all the anti-boomer comments I've read on this generally anti-boomer blog, this is the first time that I recall anybody mentioning group animosity between those born before or after 1955. It brings to mind a White kid living in a ghetto who adopts Black ways to get along, a Wigger. "I ain't like those White (boomer) mo'fos, I be down wid the bros. Sheeeit!"

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts