Current anomaly: Five generations alive!

[Ghost]

(01-14-2020, 07:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:50 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:32 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 02:18 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Civics are activists, as they were in the 1930s. The March for our Lives activists were millennials and saw themselves as such at the time. The young climate activists are cuspers like Greta. But the artist generations are not so activist, at least not until midlife. They are "silent" and well-behaved, as they are described today.

I think that "activists" make sense as a subgeneration, ranging from 2000-2003 (or late 1999-mid 2003 if you go by graduating years), because the Parkland activists (David Hogg, Kyle Kashuv, etc), Greta Thunberg, Nick Sandmann, and CJ Pearson were all born during that four-year timeframe.

I think that adding 1999/late 1998-mid 1999 is kind of a stretch for the "activist" label because while they certainly can't remember 9/11, they weren't at school for the Parkland shooting (I am going to assume that Parkland is probably why Anthony 58 called his definition of the Activist generation "Activists").

I don't disagree with calling early 2000s cohorts, and perhaps 1999-98 cohorts too, as a subgeneration called activists. In my 1997 book I called them "flame throwers" and said they would be effective reformers and propagandists. I see them as the last subgeneration of millennials and I called them Generation Y-c. They appear to me as later incarnations, so to speak, of the best and brightest that surrounded JFK.

http://philosopherswheel.com/generations.htm

I probably wouldn't add 1998 and even 1999 to the list because not only were those born in 1998 and 1999 out of high school when the Parkland shooting happened, but they were also already college upperclassmen when the September 2019 climate strikes took place. I also have a feeling that most of those who participated in the September 2019 climate strikes were the same age as those who were in high school for the Parkland shooting, or in other words those born from 2000 to 2003.

Yes, I saw that. I think some of the Parkland activists were born in 1999, though. In my book I even extended them back to 1996, but those were less typical than those born after 1998. But accounts may differ on exact dates.

The only one I can think of is Emma Gonzalez (born November 1999, making her the odd one out). There's even a Parkland activist born in 1997 (Hunter Pollack), but he wasn't at school at the time. The rest (David Hogg, Sarah Chadwick, Cameron Kasky, Kyle Kashuv, etc) were born between 2000 and 2003.

But even if they were born in 1999, they'd be from the HS class of 2018 (born late 1999-mid 2000), which mostly consists of 2000 borns.

[Ghost]

(01-14-2020, 07:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:50 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:32 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 02:18 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Civics are activists, as they were in the 1930s. The March for our Lives activists were millennials and saw themselves as such at the time. The young climate activists are cuspers like Greta. But the artist generations are not so activist, at least not until midlife. They are "silent" and well-behaved, as they are described today.

I think that "activists" make sense as a subgeneration, ranging from 2000-2003 (or late 1999-mid 2003 if you go by graduating years), because the Parkland activists (David Hogg, Kyle Kashuv, etc), Greta Thunberg, Nick Sandmann, and CJ Pearson were all born during that four-year timeframe.

I think that adding 1999/late 1998-mid 1999 is kind of a stretch for the "activist" label because while they certainly can't remember 9/11, they weren't at school for the Parkland shooting (I am going to assume that Parkland is probably why Anthony 58 called his definition of the Activist generation "Activists").

I don't disagree with calling early 2000s cohorts, and perhaps 1999-98 cohorts too, as a subgeneration called activists. In my 1997 book I called them "flame throwers" and said they would be effective reformers and propagandists. I see them as the last subgeneration of millennials and I called them Generation Y-c. They appear to me as later incarnations, so to speak, of the best and brightest that surrounded JFK.

http://philosopherswheel.com/generations.htm

I probably wouldn't add 1998 and even 1999 to the list because not only were those born in 1998 and 1999 out of high school when the Parkland shooting happened, but they were also already college upperclassmen when the September 2019 climate strikes took place. I also have a feeling that most of those who participated in the September 2019 climate strikes were the same age as those who were in high school for the Parkland shooting, or in other words those born from 2000 to 2003.

Yes, I saw that. I think some of the Parkland activists were born in 1999, though. In my book I even extended them back to 1996, but those were less typical than those born after 1998. But accounts may differ on exact dates.

If your "Millennial Third Block" were in two halves, do you think it will look like this?

Political Escalation Subgeneration (born 1996-1999 or Late 1995-Mid 1999/HS Classes of 2014-2017): All at high school during the time when political tensions escalated with the Crimean Annexation and the Isla Vista shooting. A lot of stereotypical young far right and far left people probably fall under this category. Peter Cvjetanovic, James Alex Fields, "Lauren Rose"?, Patrick Crusius, Nick Fuentes, Logan Huysman, Shelby Shoup, and John Timothy Earnest were all born during this four-year time frame. When media outlets talk about late Millennials or Generation Z being socially very left wing/very right wing, they're probably only basing their opinion on this subgeneration. Quintessential birthyear is probably 1998.

Activist Subgeneration (born 2000-2003 or Late 1999-Mid 2003/HS Classes of 2018-2021): All at high school during the Parkland shooting and its aftermath and probably were the stereotypical attendees of the September 2019 Climate Strikes. David Hogg, Jazz Jennings, Cameron Kasky, Sarah Chadwick, Kyle Kashuv, Billie Eilish, Nick Sandmann, CJ Pearson, and Greta Thunberg, all of whom are activists, were born during this four-year time frame. Quintessential birthyear is probably 2001.

[pbrower2a]

(01-14-2020, 08:16 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 07:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:50 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:32 PM)Ghost Wrote: I think that "activists" make sense as a subgeneration, ranging from 2000-2003 (or late 1999-mid 2003 if you go by graduating years), because the Parkland activists (David Hogg, Kyle Kashuv, etc), Greta Thunberg, Nick Sandmann, and CJ Pearson were all born during that four-year timeframe.

I think that adding 1999/late 1998-mid 1999 is kind of a stretch for the "activist" label because while they certainly can't remember 9/11, they weren't at school for the Parkland shooting (I am going to assume that Parkland is probably why Anthony 58 called his definition of the Activist generation "Activists").

I don't disagree with calling early 2000s cohorts, and perhaps 1999-98 cohorts too, as a subgeneration called activists. In my 1997 book I called them "flame throwers" and said they would be effective reformers and propagandists. I see them as the last subgeneration of millennials and I called them Generation Y-c. They appear to me as later incarnations, so to speak, of the best and brightest that surrounded JFK.

http://philosopherswheel.com/generations.htm

I probably wouldn't add 1998 and even 1999 to the list because not only were those born in 1998 and 1999 out of high school when the Parkland shooting happened, but they were also already college upperclassmen when the September 2019 climate strikes took place. I also have a feeling that most of those who participated in the September 2019 climate strikes were the same age as those who were in high school for the Parkland shooting, or in other words those born from 2000 to 2003.

Yes, I saw that. I think some of the Parkland activists were born in 1999, though. In my book I even extended them back to 1996, but those were less typical than those born after 1998. But accounts may differ on exact dates.

If your "Millennial Third Block" were in two halves, do you think it will look like this?

Political Escalation Subgeneration (born 1996-1999 or Late 1995-Mid 1999/HS Classes of 2014-2017): All at high school during the time when political tensions escalated with the Crimean Annexation and the Isla Vista shooting. A lot of stereotypical young far right and far left people probably fall under this category. Peter Cvjetanovic, James Alex Fields, "Lauren Rose"?, Patrick Crusius, Nick Fuentes, Logan Huysman, Shelby Shoup, and John Timothy Earnest were all born during this four-year time frame. When media outlets talk about late Millennials or Generation Z being socially very left wing/very right wing, they're probably only basing their opinion on this subgeneration. Quintessential birthyear is probably 1998.

Activist Subgeneration (born 2000-2003 or Late 1999-Mid 2003/HS Classes of 2018-2021): All at high school during the Parkland shooting and its aftermath and probably were the stereotypical attendees of the September 2019 Climate Strikes. David Hogg, Jazz Jennings, Cameron Kasky, Sarah Chadwick, Kyle Kashuv, Billie Eilish, Nick Sandmann, CJ Pearson, and Greta Thunberg, all of whom are activists, were born during this four-year time frame. Quintessential birthyear is probably 2001.

More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

[Ghost]

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 08:16 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 07:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:50 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I don't disagree with calling early 2000s cohorts, and perhaps 1999-98 cohorts too, as a subgeneration called activists. In my 1997 book I called them "flame throwers" and said they would be effective reformers and propagandists. I see them as the last subgeneration of millennials and I called them Generation Y-c. They appear to me as later incarnations, so to speak, of the best and brightest that surrounded JFK.

http://philosopherswheel.com/generations.htm

I probably wouldn't add 1998 and even 1999 to the list because not only were those born in 1998 and 1999 out of high school when the Parkland shooting happened, but they were also already college upperclassmen when the September 2019 climate strikes took place. I also have a feeling that most of those who participated in the September 2019 climate strikes were the same age as those who were in high school for the Parkland shooting, or in other words those born from 2000 to 2003.

Yes, I saw that. I think some of the Parkland activists were born in 1999, though. In my book I even extended them back to 1996, but those were less typical than those born after 1998. But accounts may differ on exact dates.

If your "Millennial Third Block" were in two halves, do you think it will look like this?

Political Escalation Subgeneration (born 1996-1999 or Late 1995-Mid 1999/HS Classes of 2014-2017): All at high school during the time when political tensions escalated with the Crimean Annexation and the Isla Vista shooting. A lot of stereotypical young far right and far left people probably fall under this category. Peter Cvjetanovic, James Alex Fields, "Lauren Rose"?, Patrick Crusius, Nick Fuentes, Logan Huysman, Shelby Shoup, and John Timothy Earnest were all born during this four-year time frame. When media outlets talk about late Millennials or Generation Z being socially very left wing/very right wing, they're probably only basing their opinion on this subgeneration. Quintessential birthyear is probably 1998.

Activist Subgeneration (born 2000-2003 or Late 1999-Mid 2003/HS Classes of 2018-2021): All at high school during the Parkland shooting and its aftermath and probably were the stereotypical attendees of the September 2019 Climate Strikes. David Hogg, Jazz Jennings, Cameron Kasky, Sarah Chadwick, Kyle Kashuv, Billie Eilish, Nick Sandmann, CJ Pearson, and Greta Thunberg, all of whom are activists, were born during this four-year time frame. Quintessential birthyear is probably 2001.

More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

[pbrower2a]

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

[Anthony '58]

(01-14-2020, 06:32 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 02:18 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-13-2019, 07:02 AM)Anthony Wrote: I have made a few changes since the days of http://www.babybusters.org, which will be undergoing major changes soon.  While pretty much willing to conform to S&H's model up through the Lost, after that the pattern changes, and the generations become shorter:

Interbellum Generation: Born 1901-1910 (core grandparents of the Baby Busters)
World War II Generation: Born 1911-1926 (by the time the 1927 cohorts got out of basic training, WW2 was already over)
Silent Generation: Born 1927-1942 (core parents of the Baby Busters)
Baby Boomers: Born 1943-1957 (no memory of WW2)
Baby Busters: Born 1958-1968 (Birth rate declined 11 years in a row; rejected Boomer views on political and social issues; entire childhood shaped by Cold War)
Core Xers: Born 1969-1981
Millennials: Born 1982-1998
Activists: Born 1999-2019? (no memory of 9/11)

Civics are activists, as they were in the 1930s. The March for our Lives activists were millennials and saw themselves as such at the time. The young climate activists are cuspers like Greta. But the artist generations are not so activist, at least not until midlife. They are "silent" and well-behaved, as they are described today.

I think that "activists" make sense as a subgeneration, ranging from 2000-2003 (or late 1999-mid 2003 if you go by graduating years), because the Parkland activists (David Hogg, Kyle Kashuv, etc), Greta Thunberg, Nick Sandmann, and CJ Pearson were all born during that four-year timeframe. 

I think that adding 1999/late 1998-mid 1999 is kind of a stretch for the "activist" label because while they certainly can't remember 9/11, they weren't at school for the Parkland shooting (I am going to assume that Parkland is probably why Anthony 58 called his definition of the Activist generation "Activists").

Correctamente!  And if there is another Civil War anomaly (with a 2021-25 4T), the 1999-2019 generation will be the Prophets/Idealists of the next saeculum, with the Millennials suffering the same fate as the Progressives, and the Core Xers becoming the new Gilded (Busters will end up playing the same role as the Clement Attlees of post-WW2 Britain, and may be in power only briefly).

[Tim Randal Walker]

I think the theory still holds if the coming of age generation (Millenials) and post-elders (G.I.s) over lap only briefly. Basically, the younger generation is just barely starting to have influence, while the influence of the older generation is a last gasp. Of course, the G.I. remnant is now too old to have any significant influence on society.

[Ghost]

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

Due to the fact that saeculums, on average according to users on this website, are 84 years long, wouldn't that make Artists (Homelanders) begin in like 2009?

[Ghost]

(01-15-2020, 01:31 PM)Anthony Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 06:32 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 02:18 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-13-2019, 07:02 AM)Anthony Wrote: I have made a few changes since the days of http://www.babybusters.org, which will be undergoing major changes soon.  While pretty much willing to conform to S&H's model up through the Lost, after that the pattern changes, and the generations become shorter:

Interbellum Generation: Born 1901-1910 (core grandparents of the Baby Busters)
World War II Generation: Born 1911-1926 (by the time the 1927 cohorts got out of basic training, WW2 was already over)
Silent Generation: Born 1927-1942 (core parents of the Baby Busters)
Baby Boomers: Born 1943-1957 (no memory of WW2)
Baby Busters: Born 1958-1968 (Birth rate declined 11 years in a row; rejected Boomer views on political and social issues; entire childhood shaped by Cold War)
Core Xers: Born 1969-1981
Millennials: Born 1982-1998
Activists: Born 1999-2019? (no memory of 9/11)

Civics are activists, as they were in the 1930s. The March for our Lives activists were millennials and saw themselves as such at the time. The young climate activists are cuspers like Greta. But the artist generations are not so activist, at least not until midlife. They are "silent" and well-behaved, as they are described today.

I think that "activists" make sense as a subgeneration, ranging from 2000-2003 (or late 1999-mid 2003 if you go by graduating years), because the Parkland activists (David Hogg, Kyle Kashuv, etc), Greta Thunberg, Nick Sandmann, and CJ Pearson were all born during that four-year timeframe. 

I think that adding 1999/late 1998-mid 1999 is kind of a stretch for the "activist" label because while they certainly can't remember 9/11, they weren't at school for the Parkland shooting (I am going to assume that Parkland is probably why Anthony 58 called his definition of the Activist generation "Activists").

Correctamente!  And if there is another Civil War anomaly (with a 2021-25 4T), the 1999-2019 generation will be the Prophets/Idealists of the next saeculum, with the Millennials suffering the same fate as the Progressives, and the Core Xers becoming the new Gilded (Busters will end up playing the same role as the Clement Attlees of post-WW2 Britain, and may be in power only briefly).

I kind of disagree with the "Activist" label on your definition because it really only applies to 2000-2003, not 1999 and earlier or 2004 and after.

[pbrower2a]

Adults who have any memory of the speculative binge that culminated in the Crash of 2008 will have the generational role of those who remembered the speculative boom culminating in the Crash of 1929. Note well that such a binge was impossible as long as the GI's who still had even childhood memories of cause and effect of the Crash of '29 were able to squelch any speculative boom. The Silent knew from childhood memories the effect, if not the cause; they were more likely to accede to the idea that younger people had that a speculative bubble was a cause of prosperity instead of the ruin that a bubble creates.

The late Friedrich Hayek (1898-1994), with whom I rarely agree gets it right. The bubble is itself the waste and destruction of the capital needed for sustainable growth. A bubble devours capital that might otherwise go into plant and equipment that creates jobs and produces goods. The inevitable panic at the end of the boom is the recognition that the bubble created assets that must be written down or written off -- when people recognize that times really are bad because of misplaced priorities in economic choices.

With respect to the generational cycle, a speculative boom of the worst kind is most likely in the most degenerate time in the generational cycle, when anything goes in the names of easy money and sybaritic excess among 'winners'. Maybe this time we run into an economic complication in the end of scarcity. Much that used to be precious that has not simply gone obsolete (like VHS tapes and best-selling novels of twenty years ago) is now available cheaply in thrift shops.

I remember seeing a sci-fi novel in which the author suggested that in a truly-advanced society, one of the hallmarks of social status would be in not having the clutter of mass-market schlock in one's residence. Antiquarian interest in the form of a coherent collection might be fine, but the souvenir coffee mug that has the word "Paris" with a depiction of the Eiffel Tower replacing the "A" is worthless.

Guess where we are now. We can no longer rely upon making more stuff to make people happier. Much of what we now manufacture first as luxury items has become ordinary, then questionable, then trashy, and now discreditably obsolete or irrelevant. As one of the New Poor who has been around long enough to know how the technological course goes, I recognize that being a late adapter is one of the best ways in which to avoid excessive spending. I now have a smart phone that set me back a full $20 and the cheapest pre-paid service that I can get away with. If I had the money I would not get something more expensive except as necessary for meeting requirements on the job. (I would probably have a landline phone again, too, if my employer required such).

[Ghost]

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

I think that Don Adams was born in 1923, not 1924. Or maybe you meant to say Don Knotts, who was born in 1924?

It also depends on other circumstances, as well.

A 1924 born person that has parents born in 1902 and is the firstborn child in his or her family will seem more like a Silent than a GI.
A 1925 born person that has parents born in 1881 and is the last born child in his or her family will seem more like a GI than a Silent.

[Eric the Green]

(01-15-2020, 06:11 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

Due to the fact that saeculums, on average according to users on this website, are 84 years long, wouldn't that make Artists (Homelanders) begin in like 2009?

According to Mr. Howe, there are fluctuations in the exact dates of generations and turnings. If the 4T began in 2008, then the artist generation would start about 3-5 years earlier.

[Ghost]

(01-16-2020, 12:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:11 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

Due to the fact that saeculums, on average according to users on this website, are 84 years long, wouldn't that make Artists (Homelanders) begin in like 2009?

According to Mr. Howe, there are fluctuations in the exact dates of generations and turnings. If the 4T began in 2008, then the artist generation would start about 3-5 years earlier.

But 3T (and arguably the 80's as a decade) began in November of 1980 when Reagan was elected, so that kind of breaks the whole 84-year saeculum thing too.

By that metric, Millennials will begin in like 1976, which has happened in the past (I think that the fact that they weren't at school yet when Reagan was elected is exactly why extremely outdated sources group them as Millennials), but is nearly or pretty much extinct now.

[AspieMillennial]

(01-16-2020, 09:18 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

I think that Don Adams was born in 1923, not 1924. Or maybe you meant to say Don Knotts, who was born in 1924?

It also depends on other circumstances, as well.

A 1924 born person that has parents born in 1902 and is the firstborn child in his or her family will seem more like a Silent than a GI.
A 1925 born person that has parents born in 1881 and is the last born child in his or her family will seem more like a GI than a Silent.

The 1924 born in your example can take on more GI traits from their cusper parents though.

[Ghost]

(01-16-2020, 03:43 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(01-16-2020, 09:18 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

I think that Don Adams was born in 1923, not 1924. Or maybe you meant to say Don Knotts, who was born in 1924?

It also depends on other circumstances, as well.

A 1924 born person that has parents born in 1902 and is the firstborn child in his or her family will seem more like a Silent than a GI.
A 1925 born person that has parents born in 1881 and is the last born child in his or her family will seem more like a GI than a Silent.

The 1924 born in your example can take on more GI traits from their cusper parents though.

I can see that, but people born in 1902 weren't your average WWII vets and were already in their 30s during most of the Great Depression.

[AspieMillennial]

(01-16-2020, 03:47 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-16-2020, 03:43 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(01-16-2020, 09:18 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote: I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

I think that Don Adams was born in 1923, not 1924. Or maybe you meant to say Don Knotts, who was born in 1924?

It also depends on other circumstances, as well.

A 1924 born person that has parents born in 1902 and is the firstborn child in his or her family will seem more like a Silent than a GI.
A 1925 born person that has parents born in 1881 and is the last born child in his or her family will seem more like a GI than a Silent.

The 1924 born in your example can take on more GI traits from their cusper parents though.

I can see that, but people born in 1902 weren't your average WWII vets and were already in their 30s during most of the Great Depression.

1902 borns are Lost/GI cuspers. They are the equivalent to 1981 borns. They were highly impacted by the Great Depression.

[pbrower2a]

(01-16-2020, 09:18 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 11:39 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 09:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(01-15-2020, 06:43 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: More significantly, five adult generations or parts thereof. The divide between the Millennial and Homeland generations is still murky, but so it was between the GI and Silent generations. 

Who knows? The youngest kids today (now in early infancy) might grow up to be Idealists (God forbid, Boomers in style, at least among the dominant ones), especially if the current Crisis resolves quickly and decisively.

There was a time not so long ago when there were five active adult generations (when the GI Generation was hanging on) about fifteen years ago.

I could recall someone on here saying that the GI/Silent division didn't really become pronounced until WWII, where people born in 1924 were able to have ranks in the war and people born in 1925 weren't (was that you?). I added that people born in 1924 were also the last to be in elementary school when Black Tuesday happened, therefore making them the last to have a likely chance to remember it.

Similarly, I don't really think that there was a split (even if it still seemed murky) between Millennials and Homelanders until Pew defined the generations in March 2018, stating that people born in 1996 were the last to have a likely chance of remembering 9/11 due to being at school when it happened and that people born in 1997 and later won't remember 9/11 because of how they weren't at school yet when it happened. I think that the 1996-1997 split is very similar to the 1924-1925 split, not to mention how they have the same Chinese zodiac animals (1924 and 1996 being rat, 1925 and 1997 being ox). Now nearly two years later, the 1996-1997 division is probably the most common divide between Millennials and Homelanders.

'Twas I, but from my memory of Generations. This said, Don Adams (born 1924) seemed more like a Silent and Paul Newman (born 1925) seemed more GI-like.

I do not see 9/11 as a part of a Crisis Era. Too much of what ensued was inconsistent with a Crisis. The Pearl Harbor attack got Americans to cut back on consumption and residential construction (unless housing for war plant workers). Men in all walks of life enlisted for military service, including those with high incomes in sports and motion pictures. Recreational travel practically ceased, and people started buying war bonds. Americans came to accept rationing  quickly. The President in 2001 told Americans to do the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do the antithesis of -- travel and go shopping. America went on a binge of speculative investment in real estate that would have been impossible during American involvement in WWII.

A 9/11-style attack in a Crisis Era would get Americans acting as if they were in a full-blown Crisis. Remember: America is in a Crisis mode even if events have not yet been traumatic.

The Crash of 2008 had people fearing an economic meltdown of the sort that began in 1929. But -- Obama first rescued the financial system to prevent anything like a three-year meltdown from going past the sesqui-year duration (the meltdown began in 2007, and not 2008). By rescuing the banks at a stage roughly a year and a half before FDR did he made possible the ability of thye economic elite4s to buy the political process. 

We have solved nothing. People broke in 2008 are generally still broke. We have a boom for our elites, and a depression for the rest of us.

I think that Don Adams was born in 1923, not 1924. Or maybe you meant to say Don Knotts, who was born in 1924?

It also depends on other circumstances, as well.

A 1924 born person that has parents born in 1902 and is the firstborn child in his or her family will seem more like a Silent than a GI.
A 1925 born person that has parents born in 1881 and is the last born child in his or her family will seem more like a GI than a Silent.

Either Knotts or Adams would have been an example of a Silent-like parody of GI efficiency, which is what someone like Andy Griffith (1925) was. In the mid-'20's, a GI child could have been born to an adult GI. (Having a teenage parent but becoming a prominent adult in any field is rare).

[Anthony '58]

As if to remind us that six generations are still among us, not five:

Betty White turned 98 yesterday.

[nguyenivy]

(08-11-2019, 10:54 AM)Ghost Wrote:

(08-11-2019, 09:12 AM)Anthony Wrote: No way was 2008 the start of any Crisis.  Unemployment only got up to 10.2% (in October 2019) - while in November and December of 1982 it reached 10.8%.

Yet 9/11 never really changed anything: Not only didn't the Culture Wars not diffuse, they actually intensified - Lawrence v. Texas, 2003, Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 2018.

So what I have chosen to do is to do something unique and declare 9/11 a "half-catalyst" that moved us into a place between a 3T and 4T - where we will remain until the 2020 election, when a Super Civil War Anomaly (and a Second Civil War itself) will break out.

What do you think are the "bridge zones" between the turnings? In my opinion, they go like this:

4T to 1T: 1942-1945 (starts with Stalingrad and ends with the end of WWII)

1T to 2T: 1960-1965 (starts with the introduction of the birth control pill and ends with the start of America's involvement in Vietnam)

2T to 3T: 1978-1984 (starts with Carter's popularity slightly slipping and ends with Reagan's 1984 landslide victory)

3T to 4T: 2001-2008 (starts with 9/11 and ends with the 2008 financial crisis)

One common trend I seem to notice is that over time, bridge zones between "turning periods" keep getting bigger.

Bridge between 4T and 1T is 3 years long.
Bridge between 1T and 2T is 5 years long.
Bridge between 2T and 3T is 6 years long.
Bridge between 3T and 4T is 7 years long.

I really do not know if 2T/3T bridge is correct and if it isn't, please let me know.

Been thinking about this 'bridge' thing you mentioned. Do you think with all that has transpired since this post that we're either in a bridge between 4th & 1st turnings or just the next part of the 4th turning? Perhaps an 8-year 'bridge' opened with the pandemic that won't close until we both solve the pandemic & people adjust to whatever new way of life people will adapt afterwards. 8 years seems long enough to just be part of the turning itself rather than a connection to the next one. I wonder if us Millennials/Zoomers/Xers/etc will be holding onto our masks long after COVID-19 is no longer a big threat then the neo-Prophets a decade+ from now see us cleaning out the closet or cellar wondering why there are 50 unopened mask boxes there that we forgot about from 2020/1. I'll probably always have some around from now on.

[pbrower2a]

We now see three largely-full adult generations (Boom, X, and Millennial) fully within the ages of maturity in participation in the economy, and the tail end of the Silent Generation and the first segment of Generation... whatever entering adulthood. The Silent still include some active, prominent politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, and Joe Biden, but even with the power that they hold they are clearly the last acts of the Silent Generation. People over 85 are at most relics of an older time and may be interesting for archival study of their personalities, but they are almost always irrelevant.

One of the usual marks of a 4T is the weakness of any Adaptive component in public life, and if you think Adaptive influence weak now, then wait a couple years. The oldest young Adaptive types born in the early 21st century are heavily laborers and college students. To be sure they can participate in protests and demonstrations that older adults organize... or provoke.

........................

As polarized as American political life is, demographics is destiny. The Hard Right has had nothing to offer Millennial adults except hardship on behalf of loud, rapacious, ruthless special interests, and such is not effective in winning hearts and minds. Should the Hard Right prevail, then it will have nothing to offer as an inducement to slavish compliance except fear. Such is the hallmark of authoritarian, dictatorial, and despotic societies more adept at doing things to people than at doing anything for people or even letting people improve their lot through enterprise or activism. The Hard Right has been winning its skirmishes so far through the creation of bogeymen. Not so long ago it was "gay marriage", which now seems ludicrous. Then it was "Radical Islam"... well, you probably know how I contrast the rather pacific norm for Islam in America to much that is wrong in the moral slum of the worst in American secularism. Better the mosque than the strip club! Now it is "critical race theory" which questions the dubious defense of people who put up a fight to keep slaves in bondage and the systemic racism that yet to disappear.

The Hard Right has been successful at creating and exploiting bogeymen for bamboozling people... but it cannot solve the questions of inequality of economic result. I predict that in the 1T, personal thrift (much easier as people recognize the hollowness of buying stuff for which they have no storage space or capacity for display) and recognize by default the appropriateness of simple living that means that they will have money in savings, securities, and insurance policies as the middle class had in the 1950's. After the failure of trickle-down economics to bring about some super-prosperity that would make economic inequality irrelevant, people will generally see themselves more competent than their supposed betters to manage personal wealth.

In my experience, savers are happier people than are spendthrifts. Just recently a poll showed that a majority of Republicans said that they would have been happier in the 1950's. Obviously there was much about the 1950's (Jim Crow, polio, male chauvinism, redlining, "gentleman's agreements" (is any member of your party a Hebrew?), the Red Scare, environmental degradation, Blood Alley highways, and cars that became death traps in collisions) that few of us would miss. Not many of us wax nostalgic about culinary tastes of the time (mushy vegetables and meats practically burned or the insipid music to which practically nobody listens to anymore.

OK, the 2030's will likely be a conformist time with at most partial mergers of some cultures. Traditions will be defended where valid or at least comforting. But failures from the 3T that hung on longer than is appropriate will be shamed and scorned. It is mostly 3T ways, innovations that had bog problems attached, that die.