Is this really a thing or just repeating their laments? Gen Z are also a very whiny generation that don't seem to tolerate the 'suck it up we all went through the same shit' message.
I mean young engineers in my company get paid nicely in comparison to their older peers. Noone can really complain about not finding a flat and live correctly. Moreover they are definitely not into having kids, as they prefer to keep money for leisure, so I really don't buy their whining.
> I mean young engineers in my company get paid nicely in comparison to their older peers.
No, they don't, not after you adjust for inflation and housing prices.
And young engineers are a very privileged few, the vast majority of young American workers have had it much worse.
Good luck getting a respectable job that will allow you to buy a house and raise a family while your wife stays at home without a STEM degree nowadays.
And the US education system is uniquely terrible at STEM education before college, meaning many American kids who could have gotten onto the STEM gravy train instead get replaced by immigrants like me.
>"I mean young engineers in my company get paid nicely in comparison to their older peers."
Yeah, because they're 10% of Gen Z (and I'm part of that 10% Gen Z). Most of my peers, my former classmates, and friends are struggling to make ends meet in an increasingly antagonistic status quo to present-day starters, the likes of which are not comparable to any other contemporary time - both through anecdotes and data - excluding 1971-73, and that was quickly rectified (and you STILL have people who joined the workforce in those years complaining about it 50 years later). And as for kids, they can't afford them. Young engineers probably can, old news - but that's not the bulk of the generation. If you want a functioning society, you must account for options and outcomes for ALL sectors of the bell-curve. Not just people from the sectors you associate with.
This comment screams myopia and a lack of perspective, and an obvious lack of interest in trying to amend either.
I know a few couples making an incredible amount of money (both engineers, or lawyers, or doctors, or some combination thereof) on a path to retire by 40 (50 at the latest) with no kids, and they don't seem to have any desire to have children to spend those post-retirement years with. Their lives are full of collections, but I just look at those trinkets and shrug.
I'd rather have my kids go hang out with their kids in the back yard and throw a ball around, scrape a knee, cry, grow, and then extend an invitation to hang out again next weekend. But I can't because they have their "reasons" to not have children which have always seemed superficial (barring the obvious serious health issues) and usually based on a fear mindset and a desire to enjoy a life of overconsumption, leisure, and gluttony.
That's a pretty wild interpretation of the child-free life. From the other side, that description of a weekend with kids sounds incredibly boring, but I know from my friends and family that do have children that they genuinely get a lot of depth from those experiences. And even I enjoy that occasionally.
It sounds like you project a lot onto what you think the other side experiences. And you also seem upset that there are people that don't make the same choices as you about how to live their lives.
I can assure you that, for many, it's not about fear, over-consumption, leisure and gluttony. And I encourage you to learn more about that, especially in the event that one of your own children decides to be child-free themselves.
One book that I found helpful is called The Baby Decision: How to Make the Most Important Choice of Your Life. Some of it is obvious, but it really goes over both sides really well. It helped me come to terms with my decision to not have kids, and also helped me really understand why some people do have that drive.
Now I have a healthy circle of friends that include both child-free and people with children. And for a lot of us, we don't dislike kids, we just don't want to raise them.
Before I had kids, I didn't have kids -- so I know both sides of the experience. You are only able to guess. Saying that I seem upset sure seems a lot like projection, which is a common technique for the offended. You weren't the target of my post, but you feel like you are -- ruminate on that.
>I'd rather have my kids go hang out with their kids in the back yard and throw a ball around
It sounds like you need a pet, not kids. You're not going to spend your post-retirement years with kids: your kids are going to go to college while you're still working, and then move on with their lives as they build their careers, date, make new families, etc. Hanging out with their retired parents isn't something kids do very much; they're too busy with their own lives.
That time where you hang out with your kids in the back yard and throw a ball around lasts about 18 years (subtracting the years where the kid is too small to do anything interesting), and you have to fit that time in around your own work schedule.
I've never understood this crazy mentality that some people have, thinking their kids are going to be around them for the rest of their lives. After all, are you still living with your parents, and do you plan to do so until they die?
I mean young engineers in my company get paid nicely in comparison to their older peers. Noone can really complain about not finding a flat and live correctly. Moreover they are definitely not into having kids, as they prefer to keep money for leisure, so I really don't buy their whining.