We're of the same generation. You'll reach old age when I do. Let the drooling begin.


That may be so for you, but has never been so for me.

I will never be as old as you, unless you die before me. As the Irish say: "May you live forever, and may I dance at your wake!"

I was born on the late edge of the baby boomer generation, too young to be a hippie, too old for generation X or slacker. I've had to create my own individuality, and it is uniquely mine, for better or worse.

My point about 20 years' experience vs. one years' experience repeated 20 times stands. I have lived and worked in so many different localities in my diverse and varied career that few can match my life experience; much like Jack London, Louis Lamour, or Papa Hemingway. With all it's myriad attractions, diversions, and advantages, even New York City cannot offer such experience! (Wow, did I really say that?)

You seem to consider remaining in New York City as some sort of badge of honor or distinction? I am happy for you. However, a rut can be found anywhere, even in New York City. And, the famous skyline is confining, when compared to the far horizon. You can't see the stars from the streets of Manhattan, so your dreams are smaller and confined. Whether you are a big frog in a small pond or a small frog in a big pond, it is far more exciting and enlightening to swim in the sea!

NewYorkjoe

I was born on the late edge of the baby boomer generation..

According to your RJ board profile, you were born on January 13, 1953. The definition of baby boomer years runs from 1946 to 1964. So, unless the information on your profile is inaccurate, you qualify as a boomer, closer to the beginning of the run than the end.

Doesn't matter either way. Age is a state of mind.

According to your RJ board profile, you were born on January 13, 1953. The definition of baby boomer years runs from 1946 to 1964. So, unless the information on your profile is inaccurate, you qualify as a boomer, closer to the beginning of the run than the end.

Doesn't matter either way. Age is a state of mind.

If age is a state of mind, then do you mind stating your age?


KRW- a zen question M!

If age is a state of mind, then do you mind stating your age?


KRW- a zen question M!

Not at all. I've mentioned my age specifically many times on this board in many places. Look around. You'll find it.

According to your RJ board profile, you were born on January 13, 1953. The definition of baby boomer years runs from 1946 to 1964. So, unless the information on your profile is inaccurate, you qualify as a boomer, closer to the beginning of the run than the end.

Doesn't matter either way. Age is a state of mind.

I'm unclear as to where you derive your definition of "baby boomer years." Perhaps you are referring to the years from when the Baby Boom commenced to when Baby Boomers reached their teens and were no longer babies?

No one born in the late '50s, much less the early '60s, can be considered a baby boomer. Webster's defines the Baby Boom as occurring during the "next few years following the end of WWII." There was a minor boom in the early '50s following the end of the Korean War. Since the major baby boom of the late '40s and the minor boom of the early '50s occurred so close together, most sociologists have combined them into one baby boom. However, no one of any standing has ever suggested that the baby boom stretched beyond 1953; hence my remark that I was born on the near edge of the boom.

You are entitled to your individual viewpoint, but standard and accepted definitions of common terms have to be used. Otherwise, I'm likely to lose interest and I'm not interested in tutoring you.

As for age being a state of mind, I would like to agree with you, but arthritis and Alzheimer's might disagree. If you think age is solely a state of mind, you have never tried to hold a meaningful conversation with a 17-year-old.

I think this thread has unravelled far enough from our original subject of "Brokeback Mountain." Refer to my "Senryu" post under "Off-Topic Discussion."

"You just paid to see the cards;
lessons are extra!"

NewYorkjoe

I'm unclear as to where you derive your definition of "baby boomer years." Perhaps you are referring to the years from when the Baby Boom commenced to when Baby Boomers reached their teens and were no longer babies?

No one born in the late '50s, much less the early '60s, can be considered a baby boomer. Webster's defines the Baby Boom as occurring during the "next few years following the end of WWII." There was a minor boom in the early '50s following the end of the Korean War. Since the major baby boom of the late '40s and the minor boom of the early '50s occurred so close together, most sociologists have combined them into one baby boom. However, no one of any standing has ever suggested that the baby boom stretched beyond 1953; hence my remark that I was born on the near edge of the boom.

You are entitled to your individual viewpoint, but standard and accepted definitions of common terms have to be used. Otherwise, I'm likely to lose interest and I'm not interested in tutoring you.

NewYorkjoe

From where are you getting your "standard and accepted definitions"? It seems to me that you are attaching the terms standard and accepted to ideas that aren't standard or accepted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-WW2_baby_boom

A baby boomer is someone who is born in a period of increased birth rates, such as those during the economic prosperity that in many countries followed World War II. In the United States, the term is commonly used to refer to the generation which demographers have identified with birth years between 1946 to 1964, despite the fact that the U.S. birth rate actually began to decline after 1957.

...

William Strauss and Neil Howe, in their book Generations, include those conceived by soldiers on leave during the war, putting the generation's birth years at 1943 to 1960.

There are several age ranges listed on that site. ALL of them include 1953.


http://www.itseemslikeyesterday.com/Baby...ctoids.asp

How did the birthrate rise and fall during the baby boom years in the US?

1940 - 2,559,000 births per year

1946 - 3,311,000 births per year

1955 - 4,097,000 births per year

1957 - 4,300,000 births per year

1964 - 4,027,000 births per year

1974 - 3,160,000 births per year

Seeing as the PEAK year on that chart is 1957, I would be inclined to presume that 1953 was included.


(Just doing my part to keep the thread derailed)

From where are you getting your "standard and accepted definitions"? It seems to me that you are attaching the terms standard and accepted to ideas that aren't standard or accepted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-WW2_baby_boom

A baby boomer is someone who is born in a period of increased birth rates, such as those during the economic prosperity that in many countries followed World War II. In the United States, the term is commonly used to refer to the generation which demographers have identified with birth years between 1946 to 1964, despite the fact that the U.S. birth rate actually began to decline after 1957.

...

William Strauss and Neil Howe, in their book Generations, include those conceived by soldiers on leave during the war, putting the generation's birth years at 1943 to 1960.

There are several age ranges listed on that site. ALL of them include 1953.


http://www.itseemslikeyesterday.com/Baby...ctoids.asp

How did the birthrate rise and fall during the baby boom years in the US?

1940 - 2,559,000 births per year

1946 - 3,311,000 births per year

1955 - 4,097,000 births per year

1957 - 4,300,000 births per year

1964 - 4,027,000 births per year

1974 - 3,160,000 births per year

Seeing as the PEAK year on that chart is 1957, I would be inclined to presume that 1953 was included.


(Just doing my part to keep the thread derailed)

You stopped just one paragraph short.

"It can be argued that the defining event of baby boomers was the Vietnam War and the protest over the draft. Conscription in the United States ended in 1973 so anyone born after 1955 was not at risk. This argues for a ten year range 1946 to 1955 and this would fit the thirtysomething demographic covered by the TV show of the same name. This means that those born in the ten years 1956 to 1965 would be Generation X in the late 1980s and would be twenty something as a response."

A generation is generally considered to stretch across 20 years. However, the baby boom years, those resulting directly from the return of soldiers following the end of WWII and the Korean War, do not stretch across 20 years or 18 years (1946-1964). How can you consider someone a baby boomer who stares blankly when Howdy Doody is mentioned?

I did mention Generation X and the Slackers. Would you lump them in with the baby boomers when obviously their culture does not include protesting the Vietnam War, The Summer of Love, and The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test?

If you Google long enough, you can find support for nearly any specious argument, but that does not make it right. I'll stand by the strict definition of the baby boom years, not a baby boom generation.

"You're good, kid, real good, but as long as I'm around, you're second best!"

NewYorkjoe

All in favor of killing this thread raise your hand. (My apologies to the thalidomide babies.)

All in favor of killing this thread raise your hand. (My apologies to the thalidomide babies.)

Only if you make out with me on the plains after we're wrangled some steer.

Susan

What if the steer get lonely? I almost feel obligated...

Will there be chickens too?