Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 

TLD

687 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 152


  Reply # 1204571 27-Dec-2014 16:59
Send private message

Fred99:

Careful with the stereotyping - not all young adults are like that.


Fair point.  :-(






Trevor Dennis
Rapaura (near Blenheim)

1245 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 137


  Reply # 1204645 27-Dec-2014 21:00
Send private message

mudguard:
I know of students loading their interest free loans with latest smart phones and cups of barista coffee.


I'm not sure how easy it would be to get a high end smartphone, I haven't been a student for some time but course related costs used to be an easy $1000. However if they're drinking coffee instead of Double Brown or eating two minute noodles, what does it matter?


Yep agreed, hence my statement that there is nothing wrong with the concept. Sovereignty over purchases is ideal for capitalism, as a student I worked part time and saved for a phone that could record notes and annotate but certainly it wasn't at any point an entitlement or validation of existence.

As Fred99 pointed out, it is a form of stereotyping certainly I saw it among my peers, many I have come across words to the effect: "I don't need to worry about the size of my loan because when my parents kick the bucket I'll just sell the inheritance and pay it off"

In a way I was thankful for exposure to all sorts of views as approaching the three zero

11900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1204677 27-Dec-2014 23:00
Send private message

scuwp:
Geektastic: I'm not sure I quite understand the question you are asking to be honest.


Thanks goodness, I thought is was just me!   No idea at all what the OP is asking or saying.  Maybe it's too much Christmas Cake...?


I know. It is a different language.

I more or less gave up trying to communicate with the 'young' when they started inserting 'like' as every third word in a sentence so that they all sounded like vacuous Valley Girls. It has only got worse since then!

The older I get, the more I understand the aphorism "Stop the world, I want to get off!"





13141 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6164

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1204721 28-Dec-2014 07:23
One person supports this post
Send private message

Personally I dont give a toss about fitting in with convention and being like the rest of my generation or doing what is age appropriate. I get on with enjoying life while I have and make the most of today and what I have or can buy.
I don't care about what others think of me and yes oh no I wear sneans.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


11900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1204997 28-Dec-2014 16:01
Send private message

KiwiNZ: Personally I dont give a toss about fitting in with convention and being like the rest of my generation or doing what is age appropriate. I get on with enjoying life while I have and make the most of today and what I have or can buy.
I don't care about what others think of me and yes oh no I wear sneans.


After I Googled 'sneans' so I knew what it was...I have to admit that even at 46 I live in sneans. Is that a crime, then?

Even my smart shoes for visiting clients are black leather trainers with goretex liners...

I have not reverted to my youth and returned to Converse All Stars though as they don't come in wide fittings. It's a bummer as I saw some excellent Batman ones the other day!







638 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 124


  Reply # 1205033 28-Dec-2014 16:57
Send private message

Yes it is a crime! It's like seeing white socks under dress or suit pants!

13141 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6164

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1205050 28-Dec-2014 17:28
Send private message

Geektastic:
KiwiNZ: Personally I dont give a toss about fitting in with convention and being like the rest of my generation or doing what is age appropriate. I get on with enjoying life while I have and make the most of today and what I have or can buy.
I don't care about what others think of me and yes oh no I wear sneans.


After I Googled 'sneans' so I knew what it was...I have to admit that even at 46 I live in sneans. Is that a crime, then?

Even my smart shoes for visiting clients are black leather trainers with goretex liners...

I have not reverted to my youth and returned to Converse All Stars though as they don't come in wide fittings. It's a bummer as I saw some excellent Batman ones the other day!




The so called fashion police deemed it a crime. I don't give a toss what the fashion police think I wear what is comfortable.
I do draw the line at Ugh Boots, onesies and budgie smugglers low riders though.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


7393 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3863


  Reply # 1205168 28-Dec-2014 22:07
3 people support this post
Send private message

“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”

[Socrates]

636 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 218


  Reply # 1205177 28-Dec-2014 22:47
Send private message

Fred99: “Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”

[Socrates]


nice one - i always take what the older generation say about the younger generation with a huge bag of salt (and im now 45 so i guess that makes me older than many...)

ones past is often seen through rose tinted glasses

and our grand parents generation said similar (negative) stuff about our parents generation - and on it goes....



21463 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4362

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1205207 29-Dec-2014 00:14
3 people support this post
Send private message

I actually find the reverse, the older generation, the ones that have created this mess are the ones that are acting the most entitled.

Its all about them. That will affect my property value, I worked for 40 years, I deserve that, blah blah.

Never mind that their university if they even went to it was pathetically easy compared to what is taught now. They act as if people are wasting their time on social media etc when they are quite happy to get on the phone to each other parroting on about what other people are doing and whos in hospital with what problems.

So no, selfish entitlement is not something that is limited to the younger generations.




Richard rich.ms

221 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 81


  Reply # 1205269 29-Dec-2014 08:37
Send private message

Flat screen TVs and mobile phones are frequently given by the older generation as proof of the "need it now" generation.

Back in 1983 a Thorn Precision 21" CRT TV (one of a handful of TVs available in NZ because of import restrictions) were around $1200, or $4000 in today's money.  Land lines were around $20/month, $70 in today's money.  Wages increased by a factor of 4 in that time.

My figures above are approximate, but my point is back in 1983 very few people considered having a TV or a phone as being extravagant.  The true cost of these has actually fallen over the years, or if you want to spend the same amount you get a lot more for your money.

In 2014 owning a flat screen TV or a smartphone is apparently the reason why the younger generation can't afford properties.  Nothing to do with average housing prices increasing over double what wages/CPI did in the same period, needing to pay off a student loan for the first several years of working and so on. 

Here's the site if you want to try plugging some figures in yourself.

/ben


4090 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 733

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1205276 29-Dec-2014 08:59
Send private message

portunus: My figures above are approximate, but my point is back in 1983 very few people considered having a TV or a phone as being extravagant.  The true cost of these has actually fallen over the years, or if you want to spend the same amount you get a lot more for your money.

In 2014 owning a flat screen TV or a smartphone is apparently the reason why the younger generation can't afford properties.  Nothing to do with average housing prices increasing over double what wages/CPI did in the same period, needing to pay off a student loan for the first several years of working and so on. 


This is exactly what I've been thinking for a long time. These days a reasonable TV costs the equivalent of less than two weeks' rent; an iPod costs the equivalent of less than one week's rent.

If grumpy old people think that young people are going to immediately improve their financial situation by not owning a TV or an iPod then they are clearly out of touch with reality.

11900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1205785 29-Dec-2014 22:38
Send private message

portunus: Flat screen TVs and mobile phones are frequently given by the older generation as proof of the "need it now" generation.

Back in 1983 a Thorn Precision 21" CRT TV (one of a handful of TVs available in NZ because of import restrictions) were around $1200, or $4000 in today's money.  Land lines were around $20/month, $70 in today's money.  Wages increased by a factor of 4 in that time.

My figures above are approximate, but my point is back in 1983 very few people considered having a TV or a phone as being extravagant.  The true cost of these has actually fallen over the years, or if you want to spend the same amount you get a lot more for your money.

In 2014 owning a flat screen TV or a smartphone is apparently the reason why the younger generation can't afford properties.  Nothing to do with average housing prices increasing over double what wages/CPI did in the same period, needing to pay off a student loan for the first several years of working and so on. 

Here's the site if you want to try plugging some figures in yourself.

/ben



The reason most of them cannot afford houses is because they do not earn enough money, not because they have a TV.





1 | 2 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.