such a negative and absurd attitude.

the reason that a Michael Jackson or Arnold Schwarzenegger are much more appreciated is because they ARE (or were) much older and have had more time to do more and resonate more

the concept that you can generalize a generation is just retarded. Also you're grouping together someone like Arnold (at like 70) with someone like Kobe Bryant (at like 40?). That's just ridiculous, they wouldn't be the same 'generation'.

Again, anyone clueless enough to group together a generations is a non circular thinker and ignorant. There were portions of screwups from old gens just like there are new, and there are some of the hardest workers ever who were born recently. 

The allusion that you can just clump people together or that new gens are unproductive, any more than older ones, is just silly. If anything older gens have had the luxury (economically) and have sort of screwed current gens by putting the country (well USA at least, as well as some other parts of the world) in debt. 

The most hilarious part about it though is that you seem to gauge a whole 'generation' based on sports stars and actors. As if that's what matters at all in a society. What a joke. If I could neg your post I would neg it to the moon and back

100% agree. I grew up in the 90's, there is a lot of crap there too, teletubbies, pop music, pokemon, but for the most part I 100% believe the best of the 80's and 90's completely trumps the best of the 2000's. Especially music and movies.

The only thing I don't agree with is TV, which I think peaked in the 22000's with stuff like Sopranos, The Shield and 24 among other shows.

I do prefer video games these days though.

It doesn't just end with entertainment though. I too have seen in the workplace, most can't do shit. They have their heads in clouds. They are more interested in instagram and selfies. 

Politically I don't even know where to begin. Feminazi culture (not feminism) and SJWS make up a majority of the Millenial mindset

You're right. I guess what I consider "Gen Z" isn't quite Gen Z. But I don't see why kids born in the mid 90s are grouped with my early 80s group y'know. The differences are so significant. But this does kinda put the kybosh on the OP's topic.

I used to make the same mistakes the OP is making. I used to think nothing can be as good as how things were in my childhood. But the reality is we're all idealists when we're children and therefore view the things we experience at that time as "the best ever". But be honest, there are many things today that top things I loved in the 80s. The 80s is by far my favorite decade but I wouldn't call it the best nor would I sh!t on succeeding generations in favor of it.

Isnt "millenial" anyone who was born from 80's forward? I ask, because then a 35year old is a millenial and I def. dont think they fit the description, not anyone I know at least.
Also, I imagine it depends on country and social background, in the USA "millenial" seems to be like an insult even.

if you are judging generations based on music and movies then:
A) you're success criteria is stupid
B) future gens are at a disadvantaged since it has only been since the this century that music has been preserved generation to generation and movies are a relatively new thing. of course the first scifi movie seems innovatative and of course every scifi movie thereafter will be compared to what came before.


but as i look around my workplace,.. millenials are WAAAAAYYYY better than the older generations.

millenials are concerned about things justice in the workplace,.. equal pay for equal work. and millenials work hard and keep up with emerging trends and technologies.

the old people i work with don't want justice,.. they think they've put in their dues early and now due to seniority (of age) deserve higher pay for less working. they are out of date to new technology, refuse to learn it, and complain to high hell when you ask them to change anything and are completely upset when i give work and responsibility to the millennials that do good work instead of them.


baby boomers are the whiniest most entitled generation ever. thank god they are leaving the workplace in droves these days. the world is a better place without them.

i think as a definition people start millenial with the high school class of 2000.  that means millenial starts from 1982 on word.

as a guy born in 1982 with a big brother,.. he and i are miles apart in terms of generational stuff.  i'm not talking about stupid stuff like he listened to "the police" and i didn't.  i'm talking about meaningful stuff: internet access, AoL instant messenger, email, google, video games, the beginnings of social media (who remembers friendster?), cell phones.     all of the technology revolutions that changed peoples lives started in my generation.  

i'm certainly on the leading edge of the generation (i didn't get a cell phone until freshman year of college) but god i remember the arguments with my elders about "no, i don't fucking need a land line i have a fucking cell phone mom".

i don't know what the next generation will be called but i feel like i'm outside of the twitter/youtube generation. 

Having checked your profile I see you're sort of near the edge between Gen X and Gen Y (Millenial).  I understand from reading around the subject, people like you (and me) who are within a couple of years between the beginning / end of a generation just go with whichever group they identify themselves the most with. Looks like we both identify ourselves with Gen X more than anything else (in your case Millenial, in my case Baby Boomer)

The generation thing is more of a generalisation anyway and the cut-off years vary.

I think only the quality of the music went down, films and sports are still fine.
Nowadays, talent barely matters in the music industrty. Everybody wants to make as much money as possible, so they all try to make simple poppy songs that get stuck in your head, instead of actualy caring about quality.

Music maybe but surely not sports, science and so on...

Nowadays most successful musicians can't even play an instrument but that doesn't mean that they are idiots or something. Just that we have new possibilities nowadays to make music people in the past simply didn't have. Who knows which kind of music the exact same The Beatles would make if they would be young now.

But I agree that I think music felt "More real" in the past. 

We have a lot of geniuses nowadays especially in science and other important areas. It's just that you didn't have so many in the past that we still talk about those who were so great for their time. For one smart dude from 1920 you have 100 nowadays so that you will simply know that one single dude from 1920 better because he was simply the only one then^^

TV it depends. I find some TV shows nowadays just awesome and better than everything from the past (Game of Thrones as example) but for movies I find the past better but that doesn't mean that in 5 years it can't be great again. 

Sports is kinda like with scientists. You just have more nowadays and with that it's harder to let someone reach the status of Ali. That doesn't mean that Ali would even have a chance nowadays just because we know him so good. Not so many standing out from the others in their sport doesn't mean that we don't have great ones. The best ones are just closer to each other maybe with all the training perfectly thought-out on a scientific basis where the best train  pretty much all the same while in the past there was no scientific evidence that you should train this and that so many hours to reach your best form and it was all more about feeling instead of facts how to train. 

Nowadays you see people in sport doing exactly what some data from a computer tells them. That may look more boring  on the TV screen but that doesn't mean that they are wore.