Why do I hate the 1970s so much?

[jamespowers]

Am I the only one here who kind of digs the lte sixties.

Probably.
I happen to have some ties from the 70s I want to get rid of. Interested? They are "creative, but still pretty simple, dark colors, modish etc."

 

[RedPop4]

Some excellent points, James and Doran. A lift of the cigar, to you.
The WW II generation and my parents' generation....born in the early 30's....knew what it was to be without, and how to save and make do to have it built up. Their kids, they indulged (as if I'm not.....but I digress) so they wouldn't have to live hand-to-mouth like so many of their parents did. And we see where it's got us.

The Black Panther episode, and the blind support they got from the "vanguard of the Movement" and that uncritical attitude are really what put Horowitz over the edge.

 

[reetpleat]

The complete opposite is true of my grandparents. I am ten times better off. [huh]
Quote the source so I can understand where that is coming from.

Sorry, a book long gone. I should clarify, he is talking about the generation that became adults after ww11. So when he says grandparents, he is talking about the grandparents of maybe teens and early twenties.

Kind of a slightly before and early baby boom I guess. Can't remember the name of the book though.

I would certainly be true of my parents. Not that they live extravagantly, but it seems like it was easier to get ahead just by working hard and retiring with a million dollar home and alot in the bank and a pension. I know wealth s being created everyday, but a working man has to go above and beyond these days to get anywhere.

 

[jamespowers]

Some excellent points, James and Doran. A lift of the cigar, to you.
The WW II generation and my parents' generation....born in the early 30's....knew what it was to be without, and how to save and make do to have it built up. Their kids, they indulged (as if I'm not.....but I digress) so they wouldn't have to live hand-to-mouth like so many of their parents did. And we see where it's got us.

The Black Panther episode, and the blind support they got from the "vanguard of the Movement" and that uncritical attitude are really what put Horowitz over the edge.

Thanks.
I know what you mean about the WWII generation indulging their kids and the results. :eusa_doh:

 

[jamespowers]

but a working man has to go above and beyond these days to get anywhere.

And your grandparents didn't?! You forget about the Depression they went through, the World War, the Cold War and working during a time before OSHA and other work environment improvements. They worked hard and died early because of it. My grandfather worked in a foundry for decades before getting emphysema and dying at 70. My grandmother worked two weeks days/two weeks alternating nightshifts at Gerber's for decades as well. Her house was always immaculate, her husband and son came home to home cooked meals. The washing, cooking, cleaning, dusting, mopping and ironing also got done on that work schedule. They earned everything they got through hard work. Tell me where you have people doing that kind of hard work today---or even who would actually do it for the pay they were getting?
They were going above and beyond every single day. That's how they got somewhere. My grandmother always used to say: "Hard work never killed anybody." From what I see today, it just might. :eusa_doh: To say any less is an affront to their(all people of that generation really) memory and hard work. :kick:

Regards,

J

 

[reetpleat]

And your grandparents didn't?! You forget about the Depression they went through, the World War, the Cold War and working during a time before OSHA and other work environment improvements. They worked hard and died early because of it. My grandfather worked in a foundry for decades before getting emphysema and dying at 70. My grandmother worked two weeks days/two weeks alternating nightshifts at Gerber's for decades as well. Her house was always immaculate, her husband and son came home to home cooked meals. The washing, cooking, cleaning, dusting, mopping and ironing also got done on that work schedule. They earned everything they got through hard work. Tell me where you have people doing that kind of hard work today---or even who would actually do it for the pay they were getting?
They were going above and beyond every single day. That's how they got somewhere. My grandmother always used to say: "Hard work never killed anybody." From what I see today, it just might. :eusa_doh: To say any less is an affront to their(all people of that generation really) memory and hard work. :kick:

Regards,

J

That is just it. During the depression, or the gilded age, the disparity between rich and poor was quite great. We seemed to be moving in the direction of a change there, with many more people doing better throught the fifties and sixties due to technology and such. But now we are shifting back the the big separation between the haves and the have nots.

Is that a good thing that people have to work hard for little again?

 

[John in Covina]

Is that a good thing that people have to work hard for little again?

**********
Upward mobility tends to be a matter of education. Most of the computer geeks that are making swell bucks today in a variety of corporations got college degrees in computer science from all sort of state colleges and are doing pretty good in spite of being from typically poor families. Education is often the key element that allows for rise in position in most coporate fields. Lack of education tends to keep the position low unless one personally goes out on their own to make their own company.

If one chooses the wrong job and expects it to support a family, it is not the job's fault or the company's fault. An employee always has to make his or her own needs their own consideration. Never expect a company to keep your well being first, that is your responsibility. When cars came on the scene and the buggy whip manufacturers were failing, it was the time as a worker to consider changing fields and maybe getting training or education to better ones self.

To remain in a field that is designed to be a stepping stone to other things is ones own limiting influence.

 

[RedPop4]

To remain in a field that is designed to be a stepping stone to other things is ones own limiting influence.

That's wise, too bad those who constantly cry for an increase of the minimum wage can't seem to understand this.

 

[Diamondback]

If one chooses the wrong job and expects it to support a family, it is not the job's fault or the company's fault. An employee always has to make his or her own needs their own consideration. Never expect a company to keep your well being first, that is your responsibility. When cars came on the scene and the buggy whip manufacturers were failing, it was the time as a worker to consider changing fields and maybe getting training or education to better ones self.

SHACKED by the gentleman in Covina. Basic Econ 101 stuff at work.

My question: "Where has the responsibility gone?"

 

[jamespowers]

My question: "Where has the responsibility gone?"

Put that too music with a bunch of hippies singing and you have the answer.

 

[Diamondback]

Put that too music with a bunch of hippies singing and you have the answer.

Oh, OUCH! Two-thirds of a pun, sir!

 

[jamespowers]

Oh, OUCH! Two-thirds of a pun, sir!

Where has all the responsibility gone, long time passing?

Where has all the responsibility gone, long time ago?

Where has all the responsibility gone?

Gone to young hippies, every one!

When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn?

 

[Diamondback]

Bad yolk! Rotten egg!lol

 

[Marc Chevalier]

An employee always has to make his or her own needs their own consideration.

Employees are doing this now more than ever. It's what leads them to go from company to company, jumping ship as soon as a better opportunity arises.


Funny thing is, corporations publically decry this "lack of loyalty" and "overweening sense of entitlement." Nonsense! After all, as John correctly points out, "an employee always has to make his or her own needs their own consideration." And if Google offers an employee a better package than Microsoft does, then the employee should quit Google post haste.

.

 

[Senator Jack]

Why should employees be loyal? If they thought they could put two more cents in their own pockets, management would fire a twenty year veteran and then have security escort him to the door.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

If they thought they could put two more cents in their own pockets, management would fire a twenty year veteran and then have security escort him to the door.

And this happens all the time. My dad was loyal to his company; guess where that got him. His son will not make the same mistake, and no company should expect it. They can have my work, but they'll never have my trust.

.

 

[Diamondback]

From the flipside, why should corporations be loyal? Ya invest mega$$$ in training someone to do their job right, only to have 'em devote more time to their Amway distributorship or their stock portfolio, or to have 'em go over to that joint across the street that's willing to offer more upfront rather than an incentive-plan that rewards performance.

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter who started it, but the vicious circle of disloyalty has been started, and it's going to take something spectacular to break it. Maybe a shift to more like the Japanese management style, where business relationships are seen as things to be carefully nurtured over the long haul, even across generations...

More unfortunately, business is too close to politics for comfort (I changed to a history major because of being sick and tired of the politics of business), and we're getting fftopic: from Mr. Doran's original intent.

 

[Senator Jack]

After 337 posts, we should be off topic. Corps started it. Labor didn't coin the term 'downsizing', management did.

 

[John in Covina]

There is a difference certainly between say a family run business and a corporation that is publicly traded. What takes place supposedly in the name of the stockholder can be truly shameful. But it is like a voracious machine for which the bottom line is the only thing when it comes to stockholders.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

From the flipside, why should corporations be loyal?

They aren't! So no one is loyal to anyone. For the most part, today's employees (rightfully) don't feel any sense of loyalty to corporations, beyond the effort that can win them the most money and benefits. Most of today's corporations (rightfully) don't have any sense of loyalty to employees, beyond the effort that can extract the most work out of the worker. And this is 'as it should be.' Individualism following its logical course.


I have no sympathy for most companies that complain about their workers' "disloyalty."

.