GenX parents are noble

Well. I’m a GenX parent but I never thought of myself as being noble. But apparently some dude name Tim Daniel sees it that way:

Pursuit of Nobility author, Tim Daniel recently announced that he was renaming Generation X the Noble Generation. He’s taken his explanation one step further with a new assertion: Generation X parenting is noble parenting.

But what does Daniel mean by noble parenting?

Daniel believes that it will be up to Gen X parents to double-parent. You might think he means that both parents will be active in the lives of their children. But that isn’t what he means when he talks about double-parenting. Daniel says that Gen X will not only be responsible for raising their children and equipping them to thrive in the world, but also, Gen X will be responsible for giving birth and raising a new future for their children to inhabit.

Interesting. Seems accurate to me. Although I’m just not sure I’m comfortable with being called noble. Something about the term seems too, I don’t know… Boomer I guess. Also, I don’t feel noble being a parent. I just feel like it’s what I’m supposed to do.

What do you think?

Read rest of post here.

Just one answer is not the solution to every problem.

Here is an interesting article by Tamara Erickson about the greatest gift her father gave here, which was encouraging her to always consider others’ POV.

One of my most vivid memories of time spent with my father as a little girl was watching the evening news together. Each time, after Walter Cronkite confidently closed his broadcast with “And that’s the way it is,” my father would ask me one question: What do you think the “other guy’s” point of view would be? Night after night, he painstakingly pointed out the possibility of another perspective, in doing so giving me perhaps his greatest gift.

She makes an interest point regarding how Boomers may tend to view solutions in terms of one problem one answer whereas Generation X is open to the possibility of multiple solutions to a given problem. No single answer  is the correct one. What works, works.

Xers will work less for more

At least that’s the word according to this article.

Of course, it’s about Canada. So let’s hope what is true for Canada is true for the U.S. And why shouldn’t it be?

Some excerpts:

But from the perspective of members of Generation X – those roughly between the ages of 30 to 45 now, who will essentially be running the show when the boomers bow out – there’s a lot of upside to this. Perhaps it will result in a future where companies are pursuing them for employment, offering generous sums of money, and giving them the chance to call their own shots on when they work, how they work and where they work.

Sounds good to me.
“As these people [Boomers] in their 40s and 50s get older, you’re not going to get an offsetting replacement of young people,” Cross says.

Don Drummond, the outgoing chief economist at TD Bank Financial Group, calls this trend “unambiguously positive for the younger generation.”

Drummon predicts wage increase of up to 3% annually. Boo Ya!

Additionally:

Drummond also says there will be more in the way of flexible work conditions, particularly when one considers an important target for employers will be women with children. Child-care services that are subsidized by employers, he feels, is something that will become more common in Canada.

One would hope that U.S. companies would follow suit but I’m skeptical, and will take a wait and see attitude.
However, I’m more positive about….
….increased flexibility will be a key change in the employment structure of the future. This will result in more people being able to choose to work on a contract basis, part time, from home

I predict that more and more workers will be on contract, jumping from work place to work place, adding more and more to their skill set, making them very  nimble and diversified. And as the article states because of this new environment GenXers will have opportunities to control their own lives in ways Boomers never had. Finally, we get something Boomer don’t. Woo hoo!
Of course, there is not guarantee but lets hope that this is true:
“For Gen Xers, they’re going to write their ticket,” she said. “They can literally be able to say, ‘This is how much money I want to make,’ and the company will give them options on how they can do that.”

Speaking for myself, this would be a nice change to having to accept whatever is offered in salaries as well as raises.

There people who believe that this generational shift, from Boomers in charge to GenX (and to some extent Millennials), will cause a crisis. However, the article puts forth a contrary opinion, suggesting that the transition will be gradual and not a mass exodus, for a number of reasons.

There will be a down side too:

An inconvenient reality Gen Xers must deal with is the increased strain that will be placed on Canada’s social safety net as boomers become less of a lucrative tax base for government, while becoming bigger users of services such as health care.

And one has to assume that this will be as big, if not bigger issue, here in the U.S.

Also, not being able to fill job would likely keep the economy from growing at a rate it might otherwise.

What kind of advice does the article offer Generation X: “Don’t let the 50 and 60-year-olds screw it up for you.”

That’s the X factor isn’t it. You just never know what Boomer’s might do to make things more difficult than they have to be.

The article ends thusly:

“Many boomers still don’t feel balanced, and that’s because they continue to buy into this I’ve-got-to-work-hard thing,'” she says. “Both Gen X and Y are saying, ‘I’m not willing to put in the same hours you’ve put in to get those results. I want to get the results, and I’ll get them, but I don’t think I have to be at the office for 10 hours to get them.'”

Perhaps some Boomers will scoff at this. Let them.  I mean, I don’t know about anyone else but I am totally down with NOT working 10 hours a day. Ugh!

The Financial Lives of The Poets…

…is a title that I wished I’d thought of.

It’s a novel by Jess Walter, which I picked up based solely on the title. Not always the best way to select a book, but it worked out this time.

Story is about Matt Prior, a business reporter who ditches his job to start a web site devoted to poetry about finances — money-lit, as he calls it. Of course, the idea bombs. Matt runs back to his old job only to get laid off soon after with very little in way of severance. In addition, he’s got a massive balloon payment due very soon on his house and he suspects that his wife is cheating on him with an old boyfriend.

So what does Matt do?  He tries to become a drug dealer — just until he can back on track —  using his last 9 grand to buy pot. Yeah, sounds like a fool-proof plan, doesn’t it.

This book is at turns funny and gut-wrenching. I always cringe when I’m reading about a character who is fucking up but can’t seem to stop himself. I want to stop reading, look away, but I just can’t.

I like how Walter captures a sense of financial panic as Matt digs himself deeper and deeper into a whole.The crazy things people will do when it comes to money, eh.

I’m not often immediately intrigued by books about people’s money problems. I mean, who the hell wants to read about that. But something about this book was different. I wanted to read it. Maybe I’m just getting older and my concerns are different. Or maybe Walter is the kind of writer that writes in such a way that I’d follow him just about anywhere.

I plan to follow him into his other books, like The Zero, a National Book Award finalist, which I hope to read some time soon.

Because the main character, Matt, is age 46, I thought of this as GenX Lit, but there’s a cop who refers to Matt as a Boomer. I suppose the point is arguable, and ultimately beside the point.

Ellis article

Here’s an interesting article about Brett East Ellis and his new novel, Imperial Bedrooms, the follow up to Less Than Zero.

I’m eager to read this novel, having been an Ellis fan since Zero was published — what is it? Twenty-five years ago now…

Although many people aren’t Ellis fans. I was part of a Facebook thread in which several people made negative comments about the book. One said it was “creepy,” although I’m not so sure that is a criticism. In any case, it does not surprise me. Other articles have made similar comments. Also, come on, Zero was creepy, and this is the same author that wrote American Psycho for crying out loud.  Others commented that they would not waste their money on this book, much less read  it. Of course that is their prerogative. But I guess I just don’t get it. Fine. Take issue with a book and/or author, make all the criticism you want, but you can’t judge what you don’t read. I don’t know. Just seems kind of petty to me.

In any case, Ellis hardly seems to care.