Why are Millennials more...Liberal?

[IronWing]

Rising Share of Young Adults Live in Their Parents’ Home



Dependent? A generation that is setting the record for refusing to leave their parent's home, dependent?

Uno

Now map that rise in living-at-home with the change in college costs. Then map it with the change in median wages for entry level jobs. There are good reasons for kids to live at home more than they used to.

 

[sm625]

Millenials are just so god awfully poorly educated. They know absolutely no history. They have no reason to mistrust government because they dont study history. They have no idea what they are asking for. But they dont know the market either. They dont know math, dont know science. They just know "selfie". It is clear that they have no interest or value in their own souls, and my only hope is that they do not drag the entire world down kicking and screaming with them. There are people around the world who actually care and have a work ethic and a will to learn new and useful things. These hard workers should not be burdened by the weight of all this ignorant trash that doesnt give a rats ass about anything but their iCrap.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

America is becoming nothing but whiners. You elect a president thinking your getting a deal and it actually makes things worse

And that's the issue... People nowadays vote for a president around what they get out of it. Increased welfare, increased free healthcare, gimme gimme gimme.

In reality a president should be voted in who is good for society as a whole.

It's a screwed up system, that caters heavily towards people riding the handout trains.

 

[Sonikku]

If millennials voted for the candidates working for corporate interest instead of being selfish and voting for self interest we'd be doing great.

 

[bradly1101]

Serious as a heart attack on Obamacare, dude. More liberal = more progressive = more dependent on government = less capable of self support and independent thought. Imagine a spider with all the freedoms and terrors inherent in being a free creature. Now imagine that spider evolving into a tick, dependent on its host for its sustenance. Is that evolution, or devolution?

With so much disdain for the poor, I know you can't be Christian or believe in the teachings of Christ, who told us to love and help the poor. He was all about sharing the wealth and condemned the greedy and prideful.

If He were to hear some of the comments around here I think He would say that we have lost our way.

Many, many, many 'poor' people work very, very, very hard at multiple jobs to try to support their families and still need help (foodstamps, subsidies - 'dependance') making ends meet. What do you say to them? FU?

Oh the horrors of having to lean on another, and being generous to them. The horror!

When I have trouble with American policies, people here usually tell me to move to another country.

 

[Zaap]

Awwww, the poor poor government is just being like Jesus...

 

[poofyhairguy]

If millennials voted for the candidates working for corporate interest instead of being selfish and voting for self interest we'd be doing great.

Um, for the most part millennials don't vote. Something much more important than their views is how disenfranchised they are with the political process:

Young Americans hold the president, Congress, and the federal government in less esteem almost by the day, and the levels of engagement they are having in politics are also on the decline.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...al-washington-obama-approval-political-apathy

 

[bradly1101]

Awwww, the poor poor government is just being like Jesus...

It goes all ways. We help the rich even more, with tax loopholes, subsidies, etc. I wonder if those who hate assistance to the poor, hate assistance to the rich nearly as vehemently. Or are they 'more deserving'?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I've always had an interest in this question. Just to be extremely general, I'd posit the failure of Government and distrust of religion, coupled with the conservative attempt at legislating morality is the leading likely cause.

I also think that not having a secure financial future, or feeling secure about it, could also cause uneasiness and distrust. Heck, my wife and I were somewhat discouraged from buying a house because we were simply unsure about how we'd fair economically in the next 10-15 years from now.

Any thoughts?

It isn't that big of a mystery. As our world modernizes, fewer and fewer people need a religion to explain natural phenomena, and people don't want religious zealots ordering the government into their bedrooms.

In other news, they've seen how the free market has resulted in a concentration of wealth amongst a small percentage of people and they've seen the number of middle class white collar jobs (as a percentage of the population) decrease to be replaced with low-wage dead-end service industry jobs.

Some of them are even aware that other nations have superior (evil socialized) health care systems and that our quasi-market health care system is an expensive failure.

Good for them if they're turning way from the Tea Party 'Tards. The Republican Party is the Party of Big Government in the Bedroom.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Marketing. The democrats are marketing geniuses. Forget all the doom and gloom, the government offers themselves to you. Vote democrat and get your own teat!

The Democrats have done an awful job of marketing if that's the message you think they're sending.

However, the Republicans have done a worse job by dressing themselves up as Chrisitan zealots. "We are the party of Rick Santorum ("Senator Butt goo"), Sarah Palin ("the retard"), and Michelle Bachman ("the moron")." "We are the party that opposes abortion, birth control, gays, and marijuana." "We are the Party of Big Government in your bedroom."

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

simple.
gen X parenting coddled the crap outta their children, never instilling personal responsibility which leads to them expecting handouts and entitlements which means leaning liberal and voting D.

 

[MrPickins]

simple.
gen X parenting coddled the crap outta their children, never instilling personal responsibility which leads to them expecting handouts and entitlements which means leaning liberal and voting D.

Life must be easy with such a simplistic view of the world.

 

[Zaap]

It goes all ways. We help the rich even more, with tax loopholes, subsidies, etc. I wonder if those who hate assistance to the poor, hate assistance to the rich nearly as vehemently. Or are they 'more deserving'?

The government doesn't do jack shit for the poor except fool them into voting in droves for corrupt morons who then turn around and bail out their billionaire buddies.

Trying to make this into a bible thumping guilt trip *sniffle* "bend over for big govt fatcats pretending to give a fart about the poor while making everyone poorer but themselves and their uber rich buddies... like Jesus would...!!" is just the lamest attempt at an argument.

So OF COURSE it gets trotted out here a lot.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

On what basis do you assert that young techie geniuses are "conservative"?

They fall under the, "I've got mine, F-you!" category. Since they are the ones who made it and were able to get established before it became real difficult for new college grads to find jobs in their fields, they're susceptible to believing that taxes on people earning $500,000/year are a threat to their $80,000/year incomes.

 

[lotus503]

I actually had a conversation with my best friends 19yo son about politics and government recently.

The general feeling is that government is corrupt, bought and paid for by special interests and there is very little hope of changing that. He and he says his friends have more overall humanitarian leanings and liberal leanings, but from a philosophical standpoint rather than partisan standpoint. He isn’t looking at it from a governmental perspective. When he identifies as liberal he is comparing his world view to other overall, government isn’t really in the equation.

In his eyes republicans and democrats are both worthless, conservatives and conservative principles are outdated and dogmatic, he also understands that “liberals” have some odd ways of thinking and approaching issues, but they seem to be more inclusive of everyone than conservatives.

I was actually surprised at how much consideration he has given it, when I asked him does he consider himself a republican/ conservative liberal or democrat he said none of that shit, it comes down to the issues people face and why they face them.

He said being dogmatic for the sake of needing to belong is ridiculous.

I left the conversation having some hope for the future

 

[Ns1]

The government doesn't do jack shit for the poor

don't forget the monthly checks.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

LOL That is almost profound.

The "They are poorer than their predecessor generations at the same point in their life cycles....." answers much. If one is succeeding, then ceding the fruits of one's labors to government looks increasingly like a bad idea. If one is failing, then ceding the fruits of one's labors to government in return for virtually anything looks like a winning proposition.

The quote about "How can I climb the ladder of prosperity" rather than "How can I bring the ladder down to me" paints a strawman. The concern is not that ladders cannot be climbed. The concern is that there are not enough ladders available.

The "no-think" free market dogmatists love to portray those who oppose mindless capitalism as being evil socialists who just want to steal money from producers and give it to themselves (moochers and looters). It's much easier to paint your adversaries as evil socialist moochers and looters rather than to actually debate them.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

It's obvious that humans are evolving.

Evolving...towards having a Third World world. Instead of the world having pockets of middle class prosperity, the entire world will become third world in nature with a small percentage of people being rich and with the difference either merely subsisting or serving as de facto slaves for the rich.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Interdependent. We always have been, other than in Ayn Rand novels & some Western Movies.

It's even more pronounced the more specialized skill sets become.

What's really pathetic is that humanity has not evolved philosophically. The average human IQ is such that people can only conceive of "full individualism" or "full collectivism" without being able to contemplate the possibility of mixture of individualism and collectivism--individualism in some aspects of human life and collectivism in others. You're either an advocate of laissez-faire capitalism or an advocate of totalitarian socialism in the free market morons' eyes.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Millenials are just so god awfully poorly educated. They know absolutely no history. They have no reason to mistrust government because they dont study history. They have no idea what they are asking for. But they dont know the market either. They dont know math, dont know science. They just know "selfie". It is clear that they have no interest or value in their own souls, and my only hope is that they do not drag the entire world down kicking and screaming with them. There are people around the world who actually care and have a work ethic and a will to learn new and useful things. These hard workers should not be burdened by the weight of all this ignorant trash that doesnt give a rats ass about anything but their iCrap.

Don't fall for that crap. Every generation since ancient Greek and Roman times has thought that the next generation was worse than the previous generation. If we looked, I'm sure we could find plenty of smart and worldly Millenials and plenty of ignorant and stupid Boomers and members of the "Greatest Generation".

 

[WhipperSnapper]

America is becoming nothing but whiners. You elect a president thinking your getting a deal and it actually makes things worse

The Americans who staged the Revolutionary War were also "whiners". If they weren't whiners they would have just shut up and showed subservience to the King. There's nothing wrong with protesting injustices.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Many, many, many 'poor' people work very, very, very hard at multiple jobs to try to support their families and still need help (foodstamps, subsidies - 'dependance') making ends meet. What do you say to them? FU?

Some of them even have college degrees...possibly in STEM fields.

SHHHH! You're not supposed to talk about stuff like that! You could hurt the free market morons' delicate little ear drummies.

 

[werepossum]

Rising Share of Young Adults Live in Their Parents’ Home

Dependent? A generation that is setting the record for refusing to leave their parent's home, dependent?

Uno

LOL What's that "Toys-R-Us" song? I won't grow up . . .

Now map that rise in living-at-home with the change in college costs. Then map it with the change in median wages for entry level jobs. There are good reasons for kids to live at home more than they used to.

That's surely part of it, but a lot of twenty-somethings and thirty-somethings actually decent to good jobs. They simply prefer buying toys to paying rent.

And that's the issue... People nowadays vote for a president around what they get out of it. Increased welfare, increased free healthcare, gimme gimme gimme.

In reality a president should be voted in who is good for society as a whole.

It's a screwed up system, that caters heavily towards people riding the handout trains.

True. I can still recall a lady in the debates asking "what are you going to do for people like us?" when her household income was in the 70s. The correct answer should have been "Not a damned thing, your household income is 150% of mean and anything government takes to redistribute would be taken from people like you." Neither candidate was willing to do other than promise goodies.

 

[Exophase]

Older people are likely to have saved more money so have more spending power, while younger people will be less afraid of losing what they have. Similarly, older people will have more career stability, younger people will have more options.

Older people are more experienced, younger people are more open minded.
Older people are more cynical due to experiencing more of life's problems, younger people are more naive.
Older people are more set in their ways, younger people are more impressionable.
Older people spent the formative years of their childhood further in the past. As societal trends slowly change, the more out of touch those formative norms will be.

Younger people have always been more progressive. The article says that people are now more progressive at a certain age. Maybe what's been changing is what it means to be young. Life expectancy goes up, retirement age has gone up, average age to marry and have a child has gone up, people are going to and graduating college later and people are leaving the household of their parents are later.

It's interesting for me to look at it, since I'm 30 years old but am way more liberal now than I was 10 years ago. But that's almost entirely due to a gradual departure from religion. I also live in a multi-family house (that I partially own) with my (unemployed) mother on another floor/apartment, but also my girlfriend, a friend, and a tenant renting the first floor. I have money, but I don't really spend it.

 

[werepossum]

With so much disdain for the poor, I know you can't be Christian or believe in the teachings of Christ, who told us to love and help the poor. He was all about sharing the wealth and condemned the greedy and prideful.

If He were to hear some of the comments around here I think He would say that we have lost our way.

Many, many, many 'poor' people work very, very, very hard at multiple jobs to try to support their families and still need help (foodstamps, subsidies - 'dependance') making ends meet. What do you say to them? FU?

Oh the horrors of having to lean on another, and being generous to them. The horror!

When I have trouble with American policies, people here usually tell me to move to another country.

Disdain for the poor? I grew up poor as a church mouse. Until I was in elementary school, our bathroom was down the hill and across the garden, our bathtub was a galvanized tub either in the yard, in the kitchen, or in front of the potbelly coal stove in the living room, depending on temperature. My father worked for minimum wage, my mother stayed home with me. Meat was something we ate at holidays; we ate oatmeal, pinto beans and corn bread, what we grew and canned, mostly potatoes, turnip greens and okra.

When I was old enough to start school, my mother too took a job at minimum wage in a drugstore. She always asked for extra work, and after demonstrating a fantastic work ethic eventually became a bookkeeper. From there she continued in accounting, taking an entry level job at the county department of education, and ended up as the school system bookkeeper. From there she was offered a job as the county financial director for the simple reason that her department was the only one in the county not paying fines for failures in accounting.

My father worked for his father, who owned an auto parts store. Far from being a fat cat, he too started at menial jobs, but eventually learned enough to feel comfortable running his own store. He convinced a rich man to go in half - John would provide the money and do the books, my grandfather would run the store. John took a salary; my grandfather took the same salary, but only if the store produced that much profit. John called that the best investment he'd ever made and it took about half a century to convince him to be bought out.

This is what poverty should cause - hard work. If you think people are worse off now than fifty years ago, you're simply insane. I was the kid whose shoes had holes in them, whose clothes were often homemade and like as not shiny from wear - but always clean. You're asking me to feel sorry for poverty in hundred dollar tennis shoes, carrying smart phones, watching cable TV and playing on their XBoxes? Chance not. American poverty today is American prosperity fifty years ago.

The quote about "How can I climb the ladder of prosperity" rather than "How can I bring the ladder down to me" paints a strawman. The concern is not that ladders cannot be climbed. The concern is that there are not enough ladders available.

The "no-think" free market dogmatists love to portray those who oppose mindless capitalism as being evil socialists who just want to steal money from producers and give it to themselves (moochers and looters). It's much easier to paint your adversaries as evil socialist moochers and looters rather than to actually debate them.

When you move on from "there aren't enough ladders, so government should just provide me the rewards of climbing it since we can't all succeed" to something like "there aren't enough ladders, so I'll have to work extra hard", call me and we'll debate.