Generation diZappointing

[+ Charlie]

Youngsters today are much more sophisticated about the world outside their home than my generation was. For instance, I was a senior in high school before I realized that everyone in the world wasn't automatically born heterosexual.  I don't imagine that any kid today isn't aware that there is a GLBTQ world out there from the time they learn their alphabet. Adults fight over whether kids should be taught anything about that reality in school, but in fact any kid who is curious about those letters can just google on his computer or phone to find out about it.

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 2/5/2025 at 5:49 AM, ShortCutie7 said:

Millennial here… I got HOURS and HOURS of homework every night from third grade or so on.  Between homework, studying for tests, and rehearsing/practicing for my arts-focused classes (I went to specialized schools for JHS and HS), there was no time for an after school job.  My friends who did have after school jobs suffered academically and did not graduate on time.

Millennial here as well.  When I look back on my childhood, I am most thankful for the well-rounded approach to my after school activities (YMCA Indian Guides, Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Order of the Arrow, Awana, YMCA Youth in Government, swim team, AYSO soccer, little league baseball, karate, chess club, piano lessons, music club, and band).  It was a nice mix of varied activities: some physical, some social, some mental, some religious, some artistic.  With the exception of scouts, I only stayed with each activity for a few years.  So, I became proficient in many skills but an expert in none 😆.  I think that's what Generation Z lacks: a broad background.  Parents today often push a kid to become the best in one sport, or study to become the best in school, without allowing the kid to try several new things and then quit after a year or two or three of the activity.  There's a push to be the best in your activity, rather then be well-rounded.

Scholastically, I had the highest GPA in my Junior High class, graduated valedictorian from Senior High, graduated Magna Cum Laude in Engineering, and earned a Master's degree. 

I worked summer jobs away from home at a scout camp in high school and college and fundraised for my scout activities.  I have to say that those summers working and living away from my family helped me mature the most.  I have a sibling with nearly identical education and extra-curricular activities as mine; yet, my sibling very much missed out on maturing and learning how to do things independently.  My sibling has never lived away from home, or worked in an industry away from family, and it shows 😢 

The sooner Gen Z can move away from home without going into debt (think sharing a studio with 3 roommates), the sooner they will be prepared to thrive and enjoy life.

Edited February 6 by Vegas_Millennial

[Archangel]

On 2/5/2025 at 8:49 AM, ShortCutie7 said:

Millennial here… I got HOURS and HOURS of homework every night from third grade or so on.  Between homework, studying for tests, and rehearsing/practicing for my arts-focused classes (I went to specialized schools for JHS and HS), there was no time for an after school job.  My friends who did have after school jobs suffered academically and did not graduate on time.

I’d be curious to know how many here would be able to make the accurate distinction between millennial and Gen Z without looking it up. 

[ShortCutie7]

1 hour ago, Archangel said:

I’d be curious to know how many here would be able to make the accurate distinction between millennial and Gen Z without looking it up. 

I consider there to be two separate points of distinction:

1- if you remember where you were, what you were doing, etc on 9/11, you are a millennial or older.

2- if you have no recollection of what life was like before widespread internet access, smartphones, etc, you are Gen Z.

I’m a millennial not only because of the year I was born, but because I remember every detail of my day on 9/11 and didn’t have a computer/internet access at all until I was 10 or 11.

[samhexum]

@marylander1940 still remembers the era when you had to wait all day for the technician to come out to fix your sundial.

[mike carey]

11 minutes ago, samhexum said:

@marylander1940 still remembers the era when you had to wait all day for the technician to come out to fix your sundial.

And they only agreed to a house call after you brought it into their shop and they couldn't find the fault.

[Archangel]

On 2/6/2025 at 6:06 PM, ShortCutie7 said:

I consider there to be two separate points of distinction:

1- if you remember where you were, what you were doing, etc on 9/11, you are a millennial or older.

2- if you have no recollection of what life was like before widespread internet access, smartphones, etc, you are Gen Z.

I’m a millennial not only because of the year I was born, but because I remember every detail of my day on 9/11 and didn’t have a computer/internet access at all until I was 10 or 11.

That’s a decent functional definition. But it’s too fuzzy for the kind of gross generalizations to be sweeping that are being made here and by others that like to kvetch about “youngins.”

Strauss-Howe proponents go with 1998/97-2012/13 as Generation Z. It’s the hard-and-fast category, and fits with the theory as the theory functions best by assigning hard-and-fast characterizations to broad swaths of people in arbitrary boxes boundaries by time.

What some here are bitching about is probably in part the millennial generation which is supposed to arbitrarily begin in 1982 and run to 1998/97. Millennials have for the past decade or more been the butt-end of everyone’s social aspersions, and now Gen Z is used as a synonym for them – largely, I’d surmise, because people don’t realize that Millenials are also sometimes, albeit less often, called Gen Y. The evils of the millennials have now become the evils of Gen Z, but many conflate the two groups.

Mind you, I believe the distinctions are overly simplistic and much prefer the notion of putting people into societal cohorts – if we must – based off shared experiences (like 9/11, although I wouldn’t limit it to a single event but perhaps several circumstances), as you do. Someone who was an acutely aware 8-yo in 2001 in remember 9/11 while an oblivious 16-yo might not. All sorts of things could contribute to why it’s the case that someone remembers certain collective experiences and others don’t. That sort of distinction among people, experientially based, is much more compelling for me than some pseudo-scientific theory like the Strauss-Howe generational theory that is based on some arbitrary metric like birth year prima facie. 

[ShortCutie7]

6 hours ago, Archangel said:

That’s a decent functional definition. But it’s too fuzzy for the kind of gross generalizations to be sweeping that are being made here and by others that like to kvetch about “youngins.”

Strauss-Howe proponents go with 1998/97-2012/13 as Generation Z. It’s the hard-and-fast category, and fits with the theory as the theory functions best by assigning hard-and-fast characterizations to broad swaths of people in arbitrary boxes boundaries by time.

What some here are bitching about is probably in part the millennial generation which is supposed to arbitrarily begin in 1982 and run to 1998/97. Millennials have for the past decade or more been the butt-end of everyone’s social aspersions, and now Gen Z is used as a synonym for them – largely, I’d surmise, because people don’t realize that Millenials are also sometimes, albeit less often, called Gen Y. The evils of the millennials have now become the evils of Gen Z, but many conflate the two groups.

Mind you, I believe the distinctions are overly simplistic and much prefer the notion of putting people into societal cohorts – if we must – based off shared experiences (like 9/11, although I wouldn’t limit it to a single event but perhaps several circumstances), as you do. Someone who was an acutely aware 8-yo in 2001 in remember 9/11 while an oblivious 16-yo might not. All sorts of things could contribute to why it’s the case that someone remembers certain collective experiences and others don’t. That sort of distinction among people, experientially based, is much more compelling for me than some pseudo-scientific theory like the Strauss-Howe generational theory that is based on some arbitrary metric like birth year prima facie. 

Yeah, I don’t like the hard birthyear distinction- I know people born in 1995/1996 I would consider Gen Z and people born in 1998 I would consider millennials.

[CuriousByNature]

1 hour ago, ShortCutie7 said:

Yeah, I don’t like the hard birthyear distinction- I know people born in 1995/1996 I would consider Gen Z and people born in 1998 I would consider millennials.

I agree.  My comments about GenZ'ers refer mostly to those who are closer to GenAlpha.  Those who are in their mid 20s have always seemed more grounded and realistic in my experience.  And not just because they've matured over time.  On the flip side, I also know a couple of GenX'ers who have significant similarities to GenZ, even though they are over 50.

 

[Archangel]

7 minutes ago, CuriousByNature said:

I agree.  My comments about GenZ'ers refer mostly to those who are closer to GenAlpha.  Those who are in their mid 20s have always seemed more grounded and realistic in my experience.  And not just because they've matured over time.  On the flip side, I also know a couple of GenX'ers who have significant similarities to GenZ, even though they are over 50.

 

Precisely. That’s because the whole thing is rooted in pseudo-science that seeks to legitimate the long-standing gripe every older generation has against every younger generation. You can slice and dice however you want; groups will form and share feelings about other groups based off shared narratives. It doesn’t have to be Gen Z v. Boomers. It can liberals v. conservatives or providers v. clients. It just so happens the Strauss-Howe model is very developed but it just describes intergroup dynamics based on categories of age. Just like it would be unfair to categorize all providers based off one aspect in a blanket statement, so it’s unfair to categorize all kids born in 2010 off one aspect in a blanket statement

 

[CuriousByNature]

7 minutes ago, Archangel said:

Precisely. That’s because the whole thing is rooted in pseudo-science that seeks to legitimate the long-standing gripe every older generation has against every younger generation. You can slice and dice however you want; groups will form and share feelings about other groups based off shared narratives. It doesn’t have to be Gen Z v. Boomers. It can liberals v. conservatives or providers v. clients. It just so happens the Strauss-Howe model is very developed but it just describes intergroup dynamics based on categories of age. Just like it would be unfair to categorize all providers based off one aspect in a blanket statement, so it’s unfair to categorize all kids born in 2010 off one aspect in a blanket statement

 

It would be inappropriate to characterize everyone in a generation the same way, but generalizations can be made.  There will always be those who do not represent the common characteristics of a generation.

[Archangel]

11 minutes ago, CuriousByNature said:

but generalizations can be made

Generalizations > stereotypes > prejudice

That’s why you’re seeing people in this very thread talk about considering not even considering someone to hire who’s Gen Z. Such generalizations lead to outliers getting likewise characterized.

Tangential, have you ever noticed that a few negative examples is enough to make a generalization worth guiding behavior but a few positive ones are written off as anonymous and not representative of the whole? It’s almost as if we’re looking for an excuse to negatively portray something that fits into our narrative! 

[+ DrownedBoy]

First of all, scientific research isn't prejudice. Putting things into different boxes and making predictions based on a variable are the essence of science.

That being said, I read the Strauss-Howe theory in college, during the late 90s. They claimed younger voters would be more likely to elect an autocratic leader. They claimed Millennials (who they defined as college graduates around 2K) would be the generation that fixes everything. They also claimed a crisis of Revolution/Civil War/WWII proportions should have happened by now, and coincidentally enough, the theory just kept getting updated from the original version I read. Analogy isn't science, and you don't change the goalposts - I don't think highly of the Strauss-Howe model.

[Archangel]

@DrownedBoy – Strauss-Howe isn’t science. It’s pseudo-science.

[CuriousByNature]

3 hours ago, Archangel said:

Generalizations > stereotypes > prejudice

That’s why you’re seeing people in this very thread talk about considering not even considering someone to hire who’s Gen Z. Such generalizations lead to outliers getting likewise characterized.

Tangential, have you ever noticed that a few negative examples is enough to make a generalization worth guiding behavior but a few positive ones are written off as anonymous and not representative of the whole? It’s almost as if we’re looking for an excuse to negatively portray something that fits into our narrative! 

I get what your saying, but maybe I wasn't clear in how I expressed myself.  I would say that the majority of GenZ'ers that I have encountered seem to have the negative characteristics I mentioned in earlier posts.  There is a small minority that I have met who do not fit that description.  So, generally speaking, the GenZ'ers I have met seem to be quite entitled, unable to handle criticism very well, and have unrealistic expectations about life and its normal challenges.  That said, I would never prejudge someone because of their age, but if it turned out that they fit those characteristics, it wouldn't surprise me either.  I completely agree that there is a link between broadly generalizing, and a resulting prejudice towards a group. 

[Archangel]

@CuriousByNature, and others – And how would you generally characterize Gen X? Boomers? The Silent Generation? The Greatest Generation? It does seem to me that the closer one gets to one’s own generation, the more favorable the characteristics listed become.

What positive attributes can we find in Gen Z? 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

2 hours ago, Archangel said:

What positive attributes can we find in Gen Z? 

Well, that would be getting off topic, because the subject is how disappointing Gen Z is. 

But every generation has those who are bright and useful and those who are not.  It's the rule of 20/80.  In Nature, 20 percent of the pods produce 80 percent of the peas.  In society, 20 percent of the people produce 80 percent of the output.  I guess this thread is how the useless 80 percent of Gen Z differs from the useless 80 percent of other generations

[Archangel]

@Vegas_Millennial – You are diplomatic 😜 

[CuriousByNature]

6 hours ago, Archangel said:

@CuriousByNature, and others – And how would you generally characterize Gen X? Boomers? The Silent Generation? The Greatest Generation? It does seem to me that the closer one gets to one’s own generation, the more favorable the characteristics listed become.

What positive attributes can we find in Gen Z? 

Most GenZ'ers I know are very technologically astute - definitely more than my generation.  While they may be more fearful of certain things, technology is not one of them.  Perhaps due to being somewhat more naive about the world, many seem hopeful about the future.  My generation is definitely more jaded, but that might just be a function of age.  Because GenZ doesn't seem to be as aware of history they also seem to be less bogged down by it.  

[ICTJOCK]

It can be frustrating.   They don't seem to be very reliable employees.    I've found they seem to be in a world of their own and things like job responsibilities  seem to be a secondary consideration.

That said,  there are some that are dedicated and I do find conversation with some of them enlightening.   Some no.

[samhexum]

Generation Z-ero chance of applying.

Young workers say there’s no way they would submit their resume for a job that doesn’t list the estimated salary.

A recent report from the essay writing service EduBirdie revealed that 58% of Gen Z employees won’t submit an application if the expected income isn’t disclosed.

“Research keeps communicating to us Gen Z associates their personal and professional happiness more with the money they earn that past generations have,” Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor at the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek.

“For many of them, work isn’t about fulfillment, but rather a way to earn income that provides for products and experiences that fulfill them.”

But it’s not necessarily “nefarious” on the part of the employer, he added. Some companies hesitate to share expected salaries on a job listing because of “internal concerns on how other staff may see pay compared to their own” or to other employers.

But, he said it “may be time for those employers to reconsider their choice” to not feature salaries on job postings. New York City, for one, implemented a salary transparency law in 2022 that required employers to post a “good faith pay range” for all job listings.

Beene added: “More importantly, it may not just be Gen Z in the years to come, as more employees across generations are desiring to have a better picture of pay because of current inflationary pressures.”

According to the survey, which polled 2,000 adults ages 18 to 27, 71% of young people in the workforce believe in salary transparency, saying it should be talked about in the office.

“This generation is much more transparent about everything. I think my friends are comfortable sharing what they earn, so everyone has a measuring stick to know if they are getting paid fairly for the work they do,” Maddy Carty, 30, previously told news.com.au.

She said discussions about pay between friends or colleagues can be “a good bargaining tool” so that workers “can negotiate what is fair” — and with “evidence.”

She even went so far as to say it is a “red flag” if a company attempts to bar employees from discussing salaries.

“Gen Z has watched previous generations get strung along with vague promises and being told to be grateful to even have a job. When the job’s expectations far exceed the pay, candidates want to and deserve to know upfront,” human resources consultant Bryan Driscoll told Newsweek.

“The workforce has changed, and companies that refuse to adapt are setting themselves up to lose out on an entire generation of talent.”

The report also found that 58% of Gen Z workers say that an annual income of $50,000 to $100,000 would suffice, while one in four said $100,000 to $200,000 was the ideal salary range.

Driscoll warned that employers who do not divulge salaries will probably receive fewer candidates applying for roles.

“The irony is that companies claim they want the best talent, yet many still expect candidates to blindly apply without knowing if the pay is even livable, let alone aligned with industry standards and job requirements,” he said.

“And to be clear, this isn’t a Gen Z problem — this is simply bad business strategy.”

This is why Gen Z aren't applying for jobs — and it will shock you

NYPOST.COM

---

"For many of them, work isn't about fulfillment, but rather a way to earn income that provides for products and...

 

[CuriousByNature]

34 minutes ago, samhexum said:

Generation Z-ero chance of applying.

Young workers say there’s no way they would submit their resume for a job that doesn’t list the estimated salary.

A recent report from the essay writing service EduBirdie revealed that 58% of Gen Z employees won’t submit an application if the expected income isn’t disclosed.

“Research keeps communicating to us Gen Z associates their personal and professional happiness more with the money they earn that past generations have,” Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor at the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek.

“For many of them, work isn’t about fulfillment, but rather a way to earn income that provides for products and experiences that fulfill them.”

But it’s not necessarily “nefarious” on the part of the employer, he added. Some companies hesitate to share expected salaries on a job listing because of “internal concerns on how other staff may see pay compared to their own” or to other employers.

But, he said it “may be time for those employers to reconsider their choice” to not feature salaries on job postings. New York City, for one, implemented a salary transparency law in 2022 that required employers to post a “good faith pay range” for all job listings.

Beene added: “More importantly, it may not just be Gen Z in the years to come, as more employees across generations are desiring to have a better picture of pay because of current inflationary pressures.”

According to the survey, which polled 2,000 adults ages 18 to 27, 71% of young people in the workforce believe in salary transparency, saying it should be talked about in the office.

“This generation is much more transparent about everything. I think my friends are comfortable sharing what they earn, so everyone has a measuring stick to know if they are getting paid fairly for the work they do,” Maddy Carty, 30, previously told news.com.au.

She said discussions about pay between friends or colleagues can be “a good bargaining tool” so that workers “can negotiate what is fair” — and with “evidence.”

She even went so far as to say it is a “red flag” if a company attempts to bar employees from discussing salaries.

“Gen Z has watched previous generations get strung along with vague promises and being told to be grateful to even have a job. When the job’s expectations far exceed the pay, candidates want to and deserve to know upfront,” human resources consultant Bryan Driscoll told Newsweek.

“The workforce has changed, and companies that refuse to adapt are setting themselves up to lose out on an entire generation of talent.”

The report also found that 58% of Gen Z workers say that an annual income of $50,000 to $100,000 would suffice, while one in four said $100,000 to $200,000 was the ideal salary range.

Driscoll warned that employers who do not divulge salaries will probably receive fewer candidates applying for roles.

“The irony is that companies claim they want the best talent, yet many still expect candidates to blindly apply without knowing if the pay is even livable, let alone aligned with industry standards and job requirements,” he said.

“And to be clear, this isn’t a Gen Z problem — this is simply bad business strategy.”

This is why Gen Z aren't applying for jobs — and it will shock you

NYPOST.COM

---

"For many of them, work isn't about fulfillment, but rather a way to earn income that provides for products and...

 

Sometimes it seems that employers will do anything to prevent workers from knowing what each other make, especially when it's for the same position.  I once had a supervisor who told me that discussing salaries with co-workers was grounds for firing.  I think it was just one more way for management to control the staff.  This was long past the days when it was still appropriate to ask someone about their religious beliefs or marital status in an interview.  Some of my older relatives faced those kinds of questions.

[Archangel]

4 hours ago, CuriousByNature said:

The irony is that companies claim they want the best talent, yet many still expect candidates to blindly apply without knowing if the pay is even livable, let alone aligned with industry standards and job requirements

That’s because companies don’t actually care about their employees. Employees are a liability and an expense – hence the mentality of simply axing them in the federal government right now. My board at work a few years back was faced with a tough budget year. The solution the Finance Committee sent us was to slash employee salaries. The Finance Committee is made up of Boomers and Gen X. They couldn’t fathom how cutting salaries at a non-profit was a huge morale blow. The board sent it back and demanded other things be cut. The point is that a certain generation just accepts human capital as expendable. It’s nice to see millennials and Gen Z pushing back against that, frankly, unethical view. The highest good isn’t necessarily just turning over a higher revenue. 

[jeezifonly]

Boomers created the Ultimate  
Path of Least Resistance 

No generation since needs to go back. Doing things the hard way builds character and behavioral skills, but ain’t nobody got time fro that 

[Archangel]

15 minutes ago, jeezifonly said:

Boomers created the Ultimate  
Path of Least Resistance 

No generation since needs to go back. Doing things the hard way builds character and behavioral skills, but ain’t nobody got time fro that 

Even this fails to appropriately understand the world changes. Today’s world is different from 1925. And 2055 will be different from today. Some homes in America didn’t have indoor plumbing in 1925. Today not having indoor plumbing is borderline if not outright unconscionable. The idea that today’s convenience is tomorrow’s necessity is nothing new. And each generation bitches about the next generation requiring what once was seen as convenience, which was once luxury. Flush toilets weren’t a thing for Cæsar…No Billy Jo has one in his doublewide on the bayou.