Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Spend, Spend, Spend: The New Model for Parenting

By Helaine Olen, AlterNet. Posted August 8, 2007.


In spite of being racked with debt, Gen X parents are increasingly pouring their paychecks into luxury items for their children that seem frivolous to the point of ridiculousness.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Helaine Olen

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Move over, Bugaboo. There's a new, high-priced stroller in town. Meet the new Maclaren. Souped up with leather seats and handle grips, its signature motif is a hand-stitched emblem made of nine-karat gold. It's price -- a mere $4,200. Interested parties ought to move fast: Maclaren has only manufactured 20 of these luxury perambulators, the better to promote their exclusivity and uniqueness.

While singularly ostentatious, a golden stroller is only a tiny piece of the $45 billion American children's luxury goods market, where parents routinely spend hundreds of dollars on kiddy goods that seem frivolous to the point of ridiculousness. A Coach leather diaper bag, $398. A sleekly designed baby bouncer, $200. A crib that looks more appropriate for a shoot in Architectural Digest than for use by an actual infant, $1,700.

What gives? After all, Wal-Mart and Target sell some perfectly acceptable cribs for around $100, and baby bouncers and diaper bags retailing in the low two figures are easy enough to find. Well, it's simple really. In a brand-obsessed society, parents are heading to the stores as a way of showing how much they love their children. But they forget that a society demonstrates the value of parents and their children not by how much equipment is available for them to purchase, but by how well they are taken care of when they need help. And by any standards, the United States is falling down on the job.

Marketers point out that Generation X, the age group that makes up the bulk of new moms and dads, have always spent their way into popularity. But as they simultaneously approach parenthood and middle age (the oldest Gen Xers turn 42 this year), instead of wearing Candies and Vidal Sassoon jeans to increase their social clout, they now purchase too-cool-for-school baby gear, hoping for the same result. "During the formative years of today's parents, family, religion and government programs were very weak. They had no support systems," demographer Ann Fishman points out. "And as a result, we have these young parents who want a strong family, love their kids, want to give them everything, but they don't know it doesn't mean stuff."

Instead of lobbying for a more family friendly environment, Gen X parents hit the stores, despite the fact that they carry 78 percent more debt than Baby Boomers did at the same age. But a cashmere sweater set for a newborn infant can't hide the fact that, in the United States, more than one in five children live in poverty. No $2,000 designer crib can make up for the fact we guarantee the elderly medical care, but not their children or grandchildren.

Handmade wooden toys don't make up for the modern workplaces, where the decision to procreate is considered on par with a decision to take up a time-consuming hobby, as numerous mothers, forced to "opt-out," can attest. And the latest prestige item -- a Mandarin-speaking nanny -- can't compensate for underfunded schools, with even well-heeled suburban districts routinely facing bruising battles over property tax rates and assessments used to pay for their youngest residents' education.

Of course, there has always been a side of parenting that's bordered on the ostentatious. French children's clothing stores have long lined the sidewalks of New York's Madison Avenue. Nineteenth century Parisians gossiped when Napoleon III obtained a rattle made of aluminum -- then a scarce and expensive resource -- for his son and heir. But the mass consumption of children's luxury goods is something new -- and something undesirable.

If parents are looking to buy themselves and their kids a status upgrade, jeopardizing their own -- and their children's -- financial futures with luxury shopping isn't the way to go.

After all, long after that baby bling is relegated to the attic, there will be college costs to think about. Then again, mom and dad can always tell junior to take a page from their own book. They can tell the rug rats to charge it.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: consumerism, debt, generation x, luxury items, retail therapy, luxury industry

Helaine Olen is a freelance writer whose work has appeared in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Wall Street Journal, Salon.com and numerous other publications. Her book, co-written with Stephanie Losee, Office Mate: The Employee Handbook for Finding -- and Managing -- Romance on the Job, will be published this fall.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Mike Males
Posted by: mmales on Aug 8, 2007 1:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
FOR GOD'S SAKE, what is this kind of mainstream fluff doing in the supposedly progressive alternative media? So what if there's a $45 billion "luxury children's market"--that's far less than 1% of total consumer spending, just 1/20 of what adults spend on gambling. There have always been rich parents who spent a fraction of their riches on their kids, but the notion that American adults lavish money on youth is a cruel myth. The big issue is that while 13 million children and teens live in poverty, including 5 million in abject destitution, society's resources are being hoarded by aging Boomers and older Xers who spend trillions on themselves (including for 8 million cosmetic surgeries every year for folks over 35), then refuse to pay taxes for schools and basic opportunities for the young. THAT's a truly progressive issue, not this culture-war clucking that seems to pass for progressive commentary on youth issues these days.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mike Males Posted by: aussidawg
Is this what we teach our children?
Posted by: farhada on Aug 8, 2007 4:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with the article, the problem is so wide spread that is becoming an epidemic.

The mountain of toys, gadgets and "stuff" 4-15 year olds have these days really scares me.

I remember when I was kid, my parents used to give aways some of my toys that I didn't use to kids who needed them. That way, I learned to enjoy the good stuff, but at the same time, giving to others and share the joy of seeing them happy as well. Today, people through them out rather than giving them to charity or buy larger houses to be able to have more space for their "stuff".

What will happen to these kids when they get older? Are they going to request for more and not thinking about the consequences of their purchases? Go into debt in early age and suffer for the rest of their lives or let others pay for their mistakes?

We are shooting ourselves in the foot in more than one way!
/Farhad

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Did I Miss Anybody?
Posted by: Windwhistler on Aug 8, 2007 5:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we have here is just another symtom of the general decadence the good ole "democratic" "captalistic" US of A is sinking into deeper and deeper:
On the one hand you have the lower income people who are barely staying afloat. They are not your usual customers for $2000 baby beds. And then you have the above described portion of the population that have access to money (credit or not) and could use this money to genuinely help themselves and other Americans or even 3rd world people to improve their lot. But no, they are so brainwashed that they use their money in counterproductive ways for both themselves and others. Then at the very top you have the greedy bastards who pay few taxes and apparently are recycled slave holders who wouldn't give a drink of water to a dying thirsty man!
Did I miss anybody?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Working in 'Higher' education
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Aug 8, 2007 6:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you would not believe what 'necessary' crap students lug around. TVs, DVD players, ipods, new cars, etc. No wonder the focus isn't on making grades but getting by with 'passing' marks, getting through college to get a 'good' job to buy more crap. We certianly have shown youth what truly is important: having so we feel less bored, less lonely, more 'accepted'. Go Boomers!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Spend more". It's much more pervasive.
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Aug 8, 2007 6:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So sure, you're not 100% satisfied with your "parenting experience"?

There are pay-as-you-go lines everywhere; just stand in one, give the porter your money, and you'll get to punch your parenting ticket.

It doesn't end there, though...

Your child's school failing to graduate kids who can read and add? Failing to graduate them at all? Failing period?

Spend more money; hire more administrators, more paper-clip counters, and more people to keep more chairs from rolling away by the creative placement of their well-trained posteriors. Yeah. Doesn't that feel good--to do sumfin fer' those kiddies?

Your war not going schwimmingly? Your "liberated" country now liberated to engage in civil war amongst competing flavors of the same blood-thirsty power cult at the expense of their innocent fellows?

Spend more money; surge a little more blood on the ground, and throw up a larger lightening rod and a bigger "American Targets Here, No Plane Rides Necessary" sign. That's just got to help teach grown people not to kill each other. Bonus: it's great fer the 'conomy, stewpit because the Chinese and Japanese are loaning us free money.

How about your favorite airline? Amtrak?

Nothing a few billion here or there couldn't fix. Again, it's not like we're talking about real money, after all.

Your computer running slow?

It couldn't be your choice of operating systems, smut, or program bloat. Buy more processors, more memory, more space, more power...just don't look up the word "ubuntu" or an even more paired down version of the best-free-as-in-beer-fast software in the world.

Some of my pet peeves with how my fellow citizens choose to live their lives, spend their money and support the spending of that magical, mythical, free stuff called gubbanit funds, not necessarily in any particular order of importance. Now, don't get me wrong--I'm staunchly pro-choice, and people are entitled to choose to spend on whatever they wish.

I just let my pro-choice nature be tempered by my anti-stewpit ideology on occasion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This explains it...
Posted by: cmaukonen on Aug 8, 2007 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And all these kids will wind up becoming the next generation of spoiled brat right wing republicans. Oh so convinced that the world owes them something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This explains it... Posted by: dangerouslysane
B-O-R-I-N-G
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Aug 8, 2007 7:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is all about people who can't come up with anything interesting to do or say and so they spend money as a past time and then talk about it non-stop. It's a shame because they are educated and shouldn't be so dull and predictable. Somewhere the marketing people meet and have many laughs at their expense. Babies don't care much about what they're wearing or that their stroller is the size of a small car. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: B-O-R-I-N-G Posted by: Trazom
» RE: B-O-R-I-N-G Posted by: owleyes
Talkin bout my generation
Posted by: mviscid on Aug 8, 2007 8:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whoa. It's a bit of a surprise to me to read that Gen Xers tend to spend to compensate for their various anxieties. I mean, of course hyperconsummerism's everywhere but i guess, in my circles, I've seen it more in folks just older than the now-42-yr-olds (I call them the Dazed & Confused, you know, because of the 70s) and the Boomers. Maybe I'm just putting too fine a point on it.

I've grown up thinking those of us who came of age and were into counter-cultures in the late 80s/early 90s would take that 'fuck the system' sensibilitity--and the cautionary tales from our Boomer parents selling out in the 80s--with them into adulthood. That those sensibilities would continue to define us. We were the 1st generation who were told, before college, that we wouldn't do as well financially as our parents and we were like, "fuck yeah, who wants to be a chump in the rat race where the MAN always wins?". Did the dot-com boom's sudden success just kill it in us? Was it really ever there? Guess I've never read up on our spending habits, or seen us from a consumer perspective.

What a bunch of posers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Toys, Toys!
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Aug 8, 2007 8:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is bad enough but look how well upscale pet stores do.. hundreds $$$ for a dog sweater etc..

The problem is, despite what many believe, many young people have a substantial cash flow and are two income families. They lack assets, or liquid assets, hence the debt!

And debt has been made so easy which has given rise to the market crunch because of high risk loans.

In the town I work in, which is a very high income town, mortgage defaults are skyrocketing!.. to many people over their head!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Toys, Toys! Posted by: Trazom
» RE: Toys, Toys! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Toys, Toys! Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Toys, Toys! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Toys, Toys! Posted by: Trazom
What happened to the 'Middle Class' ?
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 8, 2007 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Middle Class died when Nixon got elected!!! Now it's become 'middle income', which is an even bigger farce! Why do I say that? Let me run it down to you.
This comes straight form the govt's own figuring. Say you live in a place like Appleton Wisconsin,pop. 69.000+. What Uncle Pissy Pants calls 'Medium Level LOW INCOME for this area is 42,000/yr. Yes, $42,000/yr. That's with a family with 2 children, if it's just you and your mate, $ 36,000 per year.
So the TOP 1% of LOW INCOME with a family would be $125,000/yr or approximatly $85,000/yr. for a couple. Now remember this is LOW INCOME for a town 60,000+
If you live in NYC,LA, of any other BIG city it's $ 53,000, $44,000 and $ 145,000 respectivly, all LOW INCOME for those areas.
Now think about this.....80% of Americans are LOW INCOME. This is unthinkable in a country that used to pride itself on the opinion that a person who had a family of 5,working a 40 hour week,making $35,000/yr, could own a house,have a good car and a vacation spot, pay all the household bills and keep the kids in the latest of things without being 'showy'. I don't know anyone making $35,000/yr. with three kids that has that kind of ability today.
According to the feds, MID-LEVEL MIDDLE INCOME, 350,000/YR!!!!! That's barely good enough to get you an efficency appt. to 'own', as a fixer-upper, that costs $500,000 in the Big City. This is also unthinkable.
For 80% of us the cost of Living is almost unbearable. They don't factor in food and gas when they tell us 'prices have gone up only slightly'. They don't tell us the 100% utility increase was due to the fines the Power Company had to pay for over pollution fines. Try asking your boss for a 100% raise the next time you've got a ticket to pay.
80% of us are having the money sucked out of our wallets faster than a hoover in overdrive. 80% of us are still waiting for the light to even flicker in the tunnel or even see the 'end' we're supposed to meet. We're the people that need the most from any sort od governance,NOT the Coperations or Upper Middle Income and Upper Income People. They hoard the wealth of the Nation on the backs of the LOWER INCOME.
80% of us have the absolute power to change the way the system works!
80% of us can be the change we want to see in the world. There's one small hangup though. 80% of don't have the money. That's true. That's why there needs to be an Executive Order written that relieves all taxes on the Low Income. Think of what you could do with NO TAXES ON LOW INCOMES.
Then we stop the second drain on your monies,compound interest rates.
The banks steal your money for doing nothing. The house you own will cost three times as much in 'interest payments' as you paid for it. You are being robbed buy the banks! They should only be allowed to charge a 'Flat Rate Interest' no matter how long you had to pay it off.
80% of us can make these things happen. 80% of us can build a better society. 80% of us can bring Peace to the World.
Draft Jeffrey7 for Prez, It's the only vote that counts!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I Never Saw the Point of Spending a Lot of Money on Baby Gear
Posted by: Bab5nutz on Aug 8, 2007 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Babies grow so fast that the clothes that fit them one day, don't fit them the next. And of course, there are all the little accidents that babies have - that cashmere sweater would be ruined in a second.
The two things I would invest in would be a decent buggy - not necessarily an expensive buggy. Just something that would be easy to use, get in and out of places, and could go the distance. You could be using the buggy for three/four years, so it's worth getting a decent one - not a solid gold one, though!
The other thing would be a cot. Again, not a solid-gold one. Something solid, and safe. Again, it's going to be something that you will use for a couple of years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I never even wore diapers Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
It's not just material things,
Posted by: Trazom on Aug 8, 2007 10:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it's everything. It seems the way our children are growing up these days and interacting with one another is completely different from how we did. Remember when we used to go play with a neighbor who lived down the street or next-door? No longer. We don't talk to our neighbors. We have play-dates. Better put gas in the tank and drive 5-10 miles to get your kids together for 2 hours at someone's house. When I was growing up I had one big birthday party, now it seems every kid I know has a big one EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Those birthday gifts really add up.

Want your child to play in the local soccer league? $100 or more. And, you have to volunteer for at least one or two off-the-field activities, such as painting the lines, operating the concession stand, etc. (kind of defeats the point of volunteering doesn't it?) And don't forget the snacks and water now too. Kids dehydrate themselves a lot faster than they used to, so make sure to pack a few gallons of water. Snacks are mandatory now (I don't ever remember having one when I was a kid playing).

Want a membership to the community pool? $250-$500/year. When I was a kid, it was free.

How about school. Remember the days when just a pencil and some paper sufficed? No longer. Now we need to buy everything from glue sticks to scientific calculators because "there is no money" for these things in the budget. My favorite - buying kleenex. Yes, kleenex for the schools.

What is my point in all of this? This article talks about a small minority of generation X who are parents. Let's talk about the things that affect the vast majority, and then figure out why we're getting into debt. It seems as a parent there is no choice anymore, unless of course you want to sit home all the time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

umm
Posted by: Phenix on Aug 8, 2007 10:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What was the point of this article?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: umm Posted by: peridot
Let's be literate, shall we?
Posted by: nopuppy on Aug 8, 2007 12:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I won't comment much on content here; we can bemoan the waste of dollars or say who cares and why are we paying attention to people who spend too much on crap? But I would like to comment on the sloppy writing of this article.

First, spelling: It's "Architectural Digest," not "Archetectural Digest". It's "too cool for school baby gear" (actually, better would be "too-cool-for-school baby gear," to easily differentiate the modifier from the compound noun, though the whole construction is awkward), not "to cool for school." It's "...with even well-heeled suburban districts routinely facing bruising battles over property tax rates...", not "...with even well-heeled suburban districts routinely face bruising battles over property tax rates..."

Why worry about a few typos? Because they're not typos. They're evidence of sloppy, haphazard thinking. The sweeping generalizations are sloppy thinking's payoff. At best, this undermines the credibility of the piece; at worst, it inevitably leads to alienating the thoughtful reader. I happen to share some of the assumptions and prejudices of the writer; but I will question those assumptions and prejudices more vigorously now; perhaps righteous indignation leads to sloppy thought, eh?

The greatest of sins is self-righteousness, for it fuels all other sins.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barely Gen X parents
Posted by: scb on Aug 8, 2007 1:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I see much of this as a result of people waiting until they are very old to be becoming new parents. When you're 42 and having baby, you're got a lot invested in that kid -- emotionally, and maybe financially if you've had to resort to fertility treatments. Of course you're going to give them the best money can buy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Barely Gen X parents Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Barely Gen X parents Posted by: DaBear
» RE: Barely Gen X parents Posted by: owleyes
Yuppie-speak fluff piece with no basis in reality
Posted by: DaBear on Aug 8, 2007 1:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More relevant is this article which reveals a great deal about Ms. Olen, our fair author.

Ad hominem slumming aside, it's curious that Ms. Olen cites no actual statistics to support her claims... oh wait, I forgot, a rich lady says it's so so we're supposed to believe her. There is not one GenX parent I know (of or personally) that even thinks about gold plated strollers or whatever the frack Olen is slobbering about here. We're too overworked and underpaid, underhoused, underinsured, etc. to care. Buy stuff from Target?! Jesus, lady, whaddaya think we are, rich or something? We shop at thrift stores dammit! Those soccer boots for little janey? Hand me downs from some yuppette from school, carefully scrubbed and polished to look new-er. Back when we needed strollers, we used a sling, made from an old shirt. Go sit in your yuppified Manhattan penthouse and poo-poo your pals but don't mix us up in your psychosis, chickita!

Here's the deal, from now on, if your GenX, you can speak from your own experience, but if you're not born between 1963 and 1971 (the genuine GenX) shut the frack up and mind your business... this was the clearest case of projection I've ever seen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keep the Sheep Asleep
Posted by: ender on Aug 8, 2007 4:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Paragraph four: "...Generation X, the age group that makes up the bulk of new moms and dads..."

Paragraph five: "....more than one in five children live in poverty."

Hmmm. So, then about one in five Gen Xers is also living in poverty, yeah?

Why oh why would GenXers be living in poverty?

Paragraph four: "Gen X [ers]...carry 78 percent more debt than Baby Boomers did at the same age..."

Hmmm. Healthcare, staggering college debt, falling wages, home ownership costs that double every decade, a veritable plague of corporate malfeasance, corporate welfare and externalization of corporate costs onto the unwashed masses? Perhaps the extinction of the middle class?

Naah.

Paragraph four: "Gen X[ers]...have always spent their way into popularity." Yes, that's it. The generation of grunge, tolerance, second-hand shops wearing keeping-it-real anti-consumerist and able to smell bull**** at 100 yards 'slackers' have always spent their way into popularity.

(Last time I checked the TV, it was a Logan's Run-esque wasteland of over-privileged 20 somethings a la Paris and Lohan, and super sweet sixteens conspicuously consuming with nary a thirty year old to be seen anywhere.)

Since Reagan, the United States has become a pyramid scheme using the enticing dream of freedom in a middle class life and constant shiny distractions to keep the sheep asleep. The baby boomers have gorged themselves on all that the 'greatest generation' worked for and left nothing but the bill for the Gen Xers to pay.

I found this article to be below alternet's usual standards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"marketers point out . . . "
Posted by: owleyes on Aug 8, 2007 8:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's all you've got? You make the sweeping claim that an entire generation is shallow and spiritually bankrupt, and to support that claim, you tell us that "marketers point out . . . " Then you quote somebody named Anne Fischer or something, like we're supposed to know who she is. I was born in 1974, which I guess makes me part of generation X. And I don't know one person who fits the profile outlined in this insipid article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've unsubscribed
Posted by: heecheeboy on Aug 9, 2007 12:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm so tired of all the false lead-ins, the claims in titles that never pan out, the sloppy thinking.

A suggestion to Alternet: hire some editors, stop trying to fill the site with quantity (and subscription lists that endlessly repeat content), pointless top ten lists and comment rating systems. Pay pay more attention to quality articles and vetting out poor concepts and sloppy thinking. Less is more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement