Nearly 40 Percent of U.S. Gen Zs Identify as LGBTQ, Poll Shows

#177
#177
Christian Lowe said:
I think the “I want my child to have a better life than I did” theory can only go so far until you raise a nation of spoiled idiots who don’t know how to do anything
Click to expand...
How long would you last if the grid goes down and food isn't found in stores?
 
#179
#179
85SugarVol said:
There would undoubtedly be Americans who took the lump sum and effed it up.

Personal Responsibility

Have to take the short term hit (payouts & pain) to get out from under this behemoth.
Click to expand...
I agree completely I wasn’t offering up why we shouldn’t do it. I think the current generation coming into adulthood will probably be better at managing money in the long term. That is the ones who properly plan for retirement at least. They are looking at an employment environment of very few defined benefit retirement plans and questionable federal retirement safety nets. The smart one will figure it out and I think there are a lot of smart ones.

In todays adults anybody over 45 hasn’t necessarily been forced to plan for their retirement. Or should I say they didn’t realize they were being forced to plan.

We will live a comfortable retirement very shortly. We won’t meet any level of “rich” but we should easily be able to maintain our current lifestyle we have while still working. But our gross income will go down by 50%. The fact is that flush cash coming in now has been going into savings and paying off our house which will happen at the end of this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol
#180
#180
utvolpj said:
How long would you last if the grid goes down and food isn't found in stores?
Click to expand...
No clue. I definitely wouldn’t do it alone. Probably go to my aunt’s house in the middle of nowhere South Carolina since they’re preppers and have a farm already, so even if I lasted a while I’d have cheated a bit.

Humans are adaptable. Some more than others. Even those soft kids my age will have a good bit of them figure it out.
 
#181
#181
Christian Lowe said:
No clue. I definitely wouldn’t do it alone. Probably go to my aunt’s house in the middle of nowhere South Carolina since they’re preppers and have a farm already, so even if I lasted a while I’d have cheated a bit.

Humans are adaptable. Some more than others. Even those soft kids my age will have a good bit of them figure it out.
Click to expand...
The point is that "don't know how to do anything" is relative. Take away the ease of modern life you enjoy and that phrase means something very different. Blanket accusations like that are rarely accurate or helpful
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#182
#182
NorthDallas40 said:
Nah you’re right I don’t blame you. I’m 10 years from planned start of benefits and I expect a 20% haircut. That’s what I’ve got in my model right now. But you’re gonna get royally screwed with no reach around. We are about to be way upside down on payouts vs revenue with our old boomer asses retiring and not dying fast enough. They are gonna increase the individual percentage, the maximum taxable income, and without increasing benefits for you. You guys should act now and get the death panels added to the ACA and Medicare to off our worn out old asses.
Click to expand...
Want to fix SS as it’s not as complicated as everyone wants to believe. First, quit treating it like a welfare program and return it to the paid benefit program it was designed to be. Everyone’s benefit is tied directly to their contributions. All the others receiving unearned benefits roll onto separate welfare programs not lumped into SS. This includes the spousal benefit for non SS contributing spouses. Remove the max contribution limit. If still not balanced, raise the age to draw benefits another year. I’m not drawing benefits yet but have paid well over $100K range over 45 years. Those dollars invested would be well over a million now and would buy an annuity paying much more than my SS benefits will ever be. Only thing wrong with SS is all the free loaders who are allowed to draw from it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, zhangliao04 and 825VOL
#184
#184
walkenvol said:
Want to fix SS as it’s not as complicated as everyone wants to believe. First, quit treating it like a welfare program and return it to the paid benefit program it was designed to be. Everyone’s benefit is tied directly to their contributions. All the others receiving unearned benefits roll onto separate welfare programs not lumped into SS. This includes the spousal benefit for non SS contributing spouses. Remove the max contribution limit. If still not balanced, raise the age to draw benefits another year. I’m not drawing benefits yet but have paid well over $100K range over 45 years. Those dollars invested would be well over a million now and would buy an annuity paying much more than my SS benefits will ever be. Only thing wrong with SS is all the free loaders who are allowed to draw from it.
Click to expand...
Don’t disagree with any of your assertions or proposals.
 
#188
#188
Christian Lowe said:
No clue. I definitely wouldn’t do it alone. Probably go to my aunt’s house in the middle of nowhere South Carolina since they’re preppers and have a farm already, so even if I lasted a while I’d have cheated a bit.

Humans are adaptable. Some more than others. Even those soft kids my age will have a good bit of them figure it out.
Click to expand...
In a situation like that, do you think they would be welcoming folks coming in from all over the southeast?
 
#190
#190
Vol423 said:
Sorry to disagree, but we are a civilization at its pinnacle that is potentially getting ready to implode due to a slew of incredibly significant problems.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree.

It is more a chicken or egg argument.
 
#192
#192
Thunder Good-Oil said:
By “this model of SS lasts till 2035”, what that means is the surplus in the trust fund will be drawn down to zero without adjusting ANY of the variables. It would only require small changes to the various components to push the 2035 date much further out. The ages to receive full or reduced benefits can be extended (the youngest Boomers have already been hit with this). The 6.2% tax (x 2) can be raised a slight amount. The COLAs can be frozen or reduced. A pandemic can be engineered and released to kill off the oldest participants sooner… wait.

Worst case scenario (with no adjustments made to the variables) is that the benefits (after administrative costs) payed out every year equal what is collected… probably something like a 40% reduction in benefits.
Click to expand...
Yes that is what I mean by the current model. If they make adjustments it will last longer, and they will likely do that. But that adjustment just further hurts the younger group, which is why I want to end or completely change it before I get to draw from it

The break even point on money paid in vs money out is already stupid low, based on some set of years receiving. I think its below 50k of income. So if they do a 20 or 40% reduction that break even point goes down even lower.
 
#193
#193
PKT_VOL said:
The lack of real problems? In theory, no. With our current culture, I think so.
Click to expand...

I think I misunderstood what you were saying, but I thought you were saying the LGBTQ realities of today are not a real problem, but a problem nonetheless. I probably didn't get it.
 
#194
#194
VolStrom said:
Don't blame the boomers, we were all for destroying communism, it wasn't until our kids started becoming sentient that the world turned to crap.
Click to expand...

Every generation deserves a massive backhand. Boomers are no different.
 
#195
#195
LouderVol said:
Yes that is what I mean by the current model. If they make adjustments it will last longer, and they will likely do that. But that adjustment just further hurts the younger group, which is why I want to end or completely change it before I get to draw from it

The break even point on money paid in vs money out is already stupid low, based on some set of years receiving. I think its below 50k of income. So if they do a 20 or 40% reduction that break even point goes down even lower.
Click to expand...

Late Boomers are a group that has been getting negative returns on their contributions. It’s nothing new suddenly affecting the youngest demo.

The necessary tweaks to maintain surpluses in the trust funds are small. But even 1% adjustments would get politicians voted out of office so changes are pushed further out beyond current politician’s terms.
 
#196
#196
n_huffhines said:
I think I misunderstood what you were saying, but I thought you were saying the LGBTQ realities of today are not a real problem, but a problem nonetheless. I probably didn't get it.
Click to expand...

They are symptoms of a sick culture. A sick culture fostered into existence by a lack of substantial problems.
 
#197
#197
PKT_VOL said:
They are symptoms of a sick culture. A sick culture fostered into existence by a lack of substantial problems.
Click to expand...

To be clear, you are saying 40% of kids in this poll (with sampling issues) identifying somewhere on the spectrum besides totally hetero is a symptom of a sick culture?
 
#198
#198
n_huffhines said:
No. They all didn't.

There actually is evidence. Use Google next time before you say something so absolute and ignorant.

Ganna’s research revealed there are a number of genetic variations that can influence sexual behavior, even though the paper published today in the Journal Science doesn’t name the ingredients for what exactly causes a human being to deviate from the most common form of sexual orientation: heterosexuality.

The researchers’ analysis identified five genes which are clearly connected with same-sex sexual attraction. While the variations in these genes are not enough to raise a rainbow flag and label anyone as unquestionably gay, the researchers say these biological variants may at the very least partly influence sexual behavior.

The 'Gay Gene' Is A Myth But Being Gay Is 'Natural,' Say Scientists
Click to expand...

Forget the Forbes article, which was an advocacy piece but I am most grateful for your posting the other two links because I had not gone through that study yet. As the study itself references, prior work to assign DNA to same sex attraction was inconclusive.

Now, despite the heavy breathing of advocates like the Forbes piece, this study ALSO does not prove or even seem to provide evidence of strong correlation.

Collectively, the DNA differences explained only 8 to 12 percent of the heritability of having same-sex partners. “There is no gay gene,” Ganna said, “but rather non-heterosexuality is influenced by many tiny-effect genetic factors.”

Here is the reality - those genetic markers are ones for increased risky behavior, not just in sex but other areas as well. So if you are born with a disposition to defy what is seen as normative behavior, perhaps being very open to or actively seeking new experiences - then you are far more likely to have same sex experiences. The reason they no doubt cannot find anything definitive of "being" a homosexual, is because it is not an identity but a behavior (2 dudes or 2 women having sex).

Throughout history people have engaged in such behavior without exclusivity. Some male Greeks thought nothing of having a young male lover while also being happily married, ancient Persians with eunuch boys, medieval Turks in bathouses with boys, to Afghans with boys in mudhuts today. Sappho from Lesbos seems to have had a daughter, etc. History is clear that people never thought of themselves as "homosexual" but rather they had sex with whomever they CHOSE - and THAT is what modern apologists cannot allow to stand because it means that there is choice. Its not about who you may be "attracted" to or who you feel yourself to "be", its simply about who you choose to have sex with.

Now, I do believe there are things which can give a person a predilection for certain types of desire, more testosterone/estrogen, etc - but at the end, its still down to choice as the study itself concludes- “Same-sex sexuality appears to be genetically influenced, but not genetically determined,”

Once again, thanks for posting something informative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#199
#199
Christian Lowe said:
My personal anecdote says it wouldn’t surprise me but mostly because of women. I don’t think I know a woman from my college days who doesn’t describe herself as at least bi. LGBT rise and simultaneous rise of hatred towards men definitely to blame. I definitely noticed a lot more gay looking men, but I couldn’t confirm if they were or not because I didn’t talk to them as much as the women when I was in college for obvious reasons lol.
Click to expand...

Yeah,
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top