What did the baby boomers accomplish besides fighting in Vietnam and presiding over the general decline of the US in the 1970s-1990s? They still have their final act of bankrupting the stae left, true, but I'd argue they've done more than their share already.

Decline of the U.S. in the 1970's-1990's?

What a bizarre claim. By every measurable standard, the U.S. was a far, far better, richer place in 2000 than in 1970, and occupied a more significant and more secure position in the world.

I sometimes worry that the demographic of places like HN is shifting young enough that statements like yours can actually seem authoritative. Even someone merely old enough to have been paying attention from 1990 to 2000 would realize that "general decline" is an absurd description.

Technology has undoubtedly improved, but most other elements of society have gotten worse. I'm 34, and first hand there was a decline (other than technology) from 1990 to today, and from statistics (inequality coefficients, relative competitiveness, political system, etc) those trends accelerated rapidly in the 1970s and 1980s.

Let's put aside the longest peacetime economic expansion in U.S. history for a second. What about living in the U.S. in 2000 was worse than in 1990? Health care was better. Houses were bigger. Cars were both more luxurious and safer. Incomes were higher. Unemployment was absurdly low. The Federal budget was, through bipartisan efforts and a terrific economy, balanced for the first time in decades. The Cold War was over. Europe was uniting and Asia was exploding. More kids (and more significantly, more women) were going to college. Cities like New York that had been nearly given up to crime and decay had become vibrant and thriving again.

And frankly, 1990 had a lot going for it over 1980, too.

There are lots of overlapping trends, some positive and some negative.

The War on (some) Drugs (aka war on blacks/mexicans/chinese) really stepped up in the 1960-1990 period, so crime stats and general urban hell was at a peak during that period, and improved 1990-2010. It's unclear how much blame for that is on baby boomers. The continuation of the War on Drugs is undeniably a boomer thing, though. That alone is more than enough reason to be angry.

"White Flight" to the suburbs was mostly the parents of Boomers, so they were only indirectly involved, although they did also continue it through the 70s/80s/90s. Gen X and Gen Y are the dominant forces behind re-urbanization.

There are lots of awesome new technologies (I mean, even a 2013 car vs. a 2006 car is an improvement), but that's technological progress and relatively global, vs. US-specific. Yes, points for not actually causing global thermonuclear war or a collapse of the global economy. Microcomputers, cellphones, the Internet, medical advances, etc., all amazing.

The (re) emergence of China from ~1990, the end of the Cold War, and the rescue of India from socialism in the 1990s+ were undeniably great, but had little or nothing to do with US domestic policy. Reagan probably did accelerate things by up to a decade, but the 1990s were a case of mismanagement of the "peace dividend" and a bunch of emerging threats.

(1990 itself and 2000 are probably unfair years to pick, due to the bubble of 2000 -- 1991 vs. 2000 is a lot different from 1989 vs. 2001. I don't remember the exact details of the early-1990s recession or the early 1980s and which time periods were bad, but I do remember 1998-2001 and 2001-2003)

Women and racial/ethnic minorities did probably do better in the US fairly steadily year on year for the past 100 years. That's one big point.

On college -- look at the costs of MIT or UC-Berkeley in 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, especially vs. a feasible income for an 18-22 year old.

The big thing is the rise of inequality -- essentially everyone in hn is one of the winners or is credibly likely to become one, but for the bottom...50%? of the US, the odds of having a better life are lower now than they were in the past.

Incomes have risen, but inflation-adjusted income for the bottom half of earners has essentially been flat for 40 years.

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-household-incomes-a-42-yea...

What does that prove? You really think a 60th percentile-level household in 1970 was better off than a 40th percentile-level household today? I'd spot you a whole quintile.

And even without accounting for the difficulty in comparing like-to-like over 40 years of CPI indexing, or the change in the demographics of U.S. households, that median line still looks pretty good when you realize you're looking at a linear scale.

That's because, largely, they benefited from the work done prior to their gaining power (nation-wide new infrastructure, etc) and failed to reinvest in the same. Instead, we've seen an epidemic of deferred maintenance and a lack of capital projects. Of course everything is falling apart now!

This is not unlike managers who come in, strip R&D budgets, point to big profits and split before the inevitable crash. All they did was milk the cash-cow. It really is a well established phenomenon.

Right. "Management" people who adhere to that philosophy are glorified by the media, press, etc because they lack vision beyond quarterly results. The worship of short-sighted idiots like Jack Welch, Mark Hurd, Carly Fiorina and MBA-style methodology is destroying American competitiveness. Even Harvard Business School, of all places, says so: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/03/10/the-surp...

Ending the Cold War and the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction? Expanding and increasing civil rights for minorities and women? There are plenty of positive things that the boomers have done, but Gen Y seems to have it in for them without ever bothering to open a history book.

I'm an Xer, so I get ignored in this mudflinging, but once I listed these things along with some others in an argument with a Y, talking about who had it harder growing up. Her response? Yeah, but we had peanut-butter bans in schools. It's hard not to succumb to the stereotype that Ys are self-centred when you never hear one giving boomers props for the good things they did.

(also X, myself (1979, so kind of borderline, but enh)

Ending MAD was actually done by GI or Silent generation people (essentially, the last push in the 1980s), and the general implosion of the Soviet model. It's fair to give some credit for everyone who survived and didn't cause a war during MAD, but that's largely top political leaders (who remained older longer than the general population or most politicians, even) and top military leaders (who were probably 45-55 in the 1970s and 1980s, so kind of borderline as baby boomers). But a lot of the soldiers, engineers, etc. from 1970-1990 were undeniably baby boomers so they get credit for that.

There were plenty of good things done by the baby boomers (I'd say some environmental regulations, like clean air/clean water/ozone, have been incredibly good, and were largely a result of lobbying and organization by baby boomers in the 1970s). They didn't do as many good things per capita as would be expected, and they have done far more bad per capita than previous or subsequent generations.

Subsequent generations? Isn't it a bit early to be calling the report on their contributions?

"presiding over the general decline of the US in the 1970s-1990s"

Over half of the current Congress are baby boomers.

They were a pretty potent political/economic bloc even before that (from 1968 on), but yes, they now have the government officially too. The worst generation to walk the earth, IMO.

I've actually spoken to a number of baby boomers who have referred to themselves as The Worst Generation. Couldn't agree more.

Instead of asking what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country!

Actually, not a lot of major US airports were built after 1970. Denver International Airport is the only big one I can think of. NIMBY makes it really hard to build airports except in the absolute middle of nowhere, where there's no need.

they werent built, but they sure as hell were expanded upon.

>Anecdotally speaking, the infrastructure that came after 1970 consists of strip malls, suburban housing and airports. some highways were built in LA and San Jose.

That's not an anecdote at all, you're just apologizing for arguing from your experience and then doing it anyway.

Nitpick maybe, but I'm tired of this "anecdotes don't matter" when clearly they're important enough that we keep relying on them.