This fundamental underpinning has crumbled due to bad leadership. Don't blame, "The Boomers." That is an absurd generalization. And, note that Bill Clinton and G.W. Bush are the only two presidents who might be called Boomers. Most of the damamge came before them, and Bill Clinton actually was pretty good..

Who elected those "bad leaders," timbuktom?

The Boomers are the dominant demographic. They are the population who has had the MOST control over the way the government has been selected AND the way the business world has been run.

Who elected Reagan? Twice? Who elected GHWB? Clinton was a pleasant surprise, sure, but he did gut welfare and labor protection, and he's the guy who ended up giving away our publicly-financed telecom infrastructure to America's richest business owners.

I personally think it's a mistake to put too much of this on government. The downfall of corporate integrity is not a result of laws or government officials. It's a result of an overenthusiastic embrace of the cult of greed. The vast majority of folks were either direct contributors to the problem or at best indifferent.

So, no, sorry--you may be a boomer and dislike the generalization, but that sure doesn't make it "absurd."

And of course, no generalization like that is going to capture every nuance of our past 30 years of history.

BTW--I'm an X-er (in case it's not obvious), and I tend to agree with the generalization about my contemporaries as a bunch of cynical and apathetic slackers.

C'est la vie.

would be their single largest purchasing decision of their lifetime (home ownership was not the norm -- most couldn't amass a down payment).

I got my first credit card when I was around 27. I simply didn't make enough to qualify, even though I was steadily employed from age 19 on. (now they hand them out to kids going to college on their parents' dime). My second car, a new but no-frills Honda Civic cost irrc $6000 in 1982. A college education costs several automobiles ... for several kids, it's a house-equivalent.

Lots of young folk seem to get first car and/or condo/house down payment help as well.

Excellent point made: A leave-no-debt-behind bankruptcy makes very good sense.

On Friday, my work load is light enough for me to reflect:

I am an early boomer, we drive Fords and live in a double-wide. Hedonistic? I don't think so. But we've put three kids through higher education.

I've worked for a corporation for approx. 30 years (the "approx" is because my company sold me and my sector (and my vested pension) to a competitor and I rejoined my company after 16 months). A few years back, the company switched from a pension plan to 401k (which didn't even exist 30 years ago), leaving us old ones in the dust. And our health insurance premiums went from zero to 350 dollars a month for a family of 2 adults. The coverage has slipped too - we were out of pocket over $8000 for diagnostic tests last year.

Oh, and I haven't had a raise in over 6 years.

It isn't lack of planning nor any hunger for expensive goods that is causing our crisis. It's the completely changed landscape. I don't think we can be faulted for embracing "the rules" in the 70's and then being blindsided by the current situation.

I may be in bankrupcy soon, too. But not by my own hand.

Talk about insecurity, the stock market is only a few hundred points from where it was on January 10, 2000.

You're older, the kids are grown, you're living off the bank's money and your medical benefits are going to cost a lot more. My god I'd be working with a tax lawyer big time to hide as much income legitimately as possible and then declare bankruptcy and walk away from that smoking wreck.

Now that more than half of all people with 401K plans are as of today pulling out early and eating the penalty I'd say the only rational approach would be a pre emptive strike and declare bankruptcy before the come looking for you.

See http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data for what graphs of the economic stats would look like if they were computed the way they were pre-1982. It isn't pretty.

which propelled vast numbers of people into college and "white collar jobs" who would never in a million years have been able to afford to leave the proverbial farm and get a college education (and stay largely out of the workforce for several years) ... it was then that "greatest generation" that spawned the boomers, many of whom went to college with student loans, family help and working their way through (in part to avoid the draft, but college was seen as opening many doors).

I don't know how many boomers put their kids through college (it used to be reserved for only the smartest boy in the family, now everyone expects a shot, even if its community college, it's a big expense)... but I suspect many of the more successful did ... perhaps through home equity loans or second mortgages... I remember when my coworkers' kids suddenly were graduating from high school and college fees loomed large (that was about 20 years ago -- these were working class boomers who had married and had kids in their early 20's). Second mortgages were mentioned.

Anyhow... I think suggesting that boomers debt was somehow all hedonism is mistaken. I also think that many in my generation realized that "the family home" was not going to be wanted once they were gone ... unlike previous generations where often the family home was the biggest inheritable asset and might be kept but more often sold and the proceeds divided.

I suspect a lot of folk are facing the reality that with depreciated property values, and virtual or real negative equity, there's nothing left, the well has run dry. Giving kids "a good start" is expensive and as far as I can tell has become "expected" and prolonged in ways that I never experienced (although my more affluent high school friends certainly did).

There's a lot to be said for "you can't take it with you" and "living trusts" and the rest ... I think there has been some shift. Certainly Medicare and solid retirement plans reduced the necessity of saving up a big nest egg for one's old age, particularly if it could/would be wiped out instantly by illness.