[quote=markmax33] . . . As much as I don’t care for what the babyboomers did for this country – sinking us into $16T in debt – I don’t think we should change the rules on them and sink all of their retirement accounts.
Yes Bernanke carried a gun and put it to their head. He price fixed the rate of return on their retirement and made them take a much riskier position to survive then they projected. Who else could have done it?[/quote]
markmax, I will beg to differ with you on this point only. If you are referring to “$16T” as “housing bailout” debt, I don’t think “boomers” were as major of a player (on the consumer end) of this debacle as were “Gen X-ers” with their inordinately high housing expectations (even for their first homes), as well as their overly high expectations for luxury and/or large vehicles and other consumer items.
In 2004, when the “millenium boom” was going into full swing, “boomers” were 40-58 years old. The older half (born 1946 – 1955) were 49-58 years old at that time and the vast majority of this demographic already owned their principal residence PRIOR to the millenium boom taking hold (and may have owned several properties in their lifetimes by then).
Except for two single women (one 64 yo and one 54 yo – both unsophisticated and grossly taken advantage of by mtg brokers), my personal experience during the “millenium boom” has shown me that the vast majority of underwater homeowners were in the very late boomer or “Gen X” demographic. These were the typical “school-attendance-area chasers” and neighborhood chasers who took out all forms of exotic purchase-money financing and ATM’d their principal residences to death (ostensibly to “keep up with the Joneses”), resulting in the level of distress in the RE market we see today.
About half the “early/mid boomers” I am acquainted with own their principal residences outright (read “free and clear”). Another quarter owes less than $150K on their principal residences. These homeowners’ principal residences are located all over SD Metro, East and South County in areas whose values vary wildly from one another.
Boomers, for the most part, did not grow up with many modern conveniences in their family homes and their family vehicles did not have the amenities they did 10-20 years later. Therefore, boomers’ expectations for their first and subsequent homes (as well as consumer goods) was/is far less than it is/was for the more “coddled” Gen-Xers.
Not trying to slam an entire generation here. I’m just stating that there is a vast difference in values between a typical early/mid boomer (now approx 57-66) and a typical Gen X-er (now approx 33-48).
The values difference is generational (mainly due to improvements in technology and urban sprawl), which caused Gen-Xers expectations to be MUCH higher than their predecessors.
“Boomers” (especially older boomers) are being given a “bad rap” by some as being irresponsible buyers/borrowers during the “millenium boom” when they only played a bit part in the “RE crash of 2008,” IMHO.
