[1] http://www.unfinishedman.com/aviator-wing-desk-inspired-by-w... [2] http://www.unfinishedman.com/electric-hot-tub-boat-for-ultim... [3] http://www.unfinishedman.com/mercedes-benz-c63-amg-edition-5...

http://www.unfinishedman.com/founderscard-live-like-a-prince...

Absolutely absurd.

You really think you have it worse than somebody born into slavery? Or worse than a medieval serf?

A large fraction of humans alive right now would look on your lifestyle as extremely privileged.

This kind of statement comes across as pitifully ignorant whining. You actually hurt the cause of fixing real injustices when you fly off into hyperbole like this.

I do think that "perhaps more so for our generation that any previous" is hyperbole though.

Like everything else young people find persuasive? (That was whiny and hyperbolic, too, because young people like irony.)

According to Historian David McCullough, the functional literacy rate in 1900 was 11%.

Sure, the article focus on students. But, by historical standards, you are extremely lucky TO BE ABLE to be a student into your early 20s.

By historical standards, we are very privileged. This "toughest generation ever" bit is both naive and sad.

You really think we have it better than someone who owned a few dozen slaves, living leisurely on a huge plantation? History has treated some well, and some not so well.

Four reasons off the top of my head:

    1. Dentistry
    2. Antibiotics
    3. Indoor plumbing
    4. Central Air

Given the choice of being rich during the age of slavery, or being rich today, I'd prefer today.

Historically, slaves could be (and were) raped or killed by their "owner." When you talk about "slaves" today, are you talking about someone with a low wage? That's not slavery.

Unfortunately, there is still slavery in the 21st century, but that has nothing to do with the people discussed in this article.

While no doubt these people actually do exist, IMO author is really reaching here. This reads like "I'm starter than all these idiots".

We'll see how it goes...

[1] http://www.asa.org/policy/resources/stats/default.aspx

If you're already borrowing some thousands of $ for an education on the basis that you will "make it back when I graduate" what's a few more hundred $ for an iphone?

Uhm, have you ever heard of World War II? I'm pretty sure the MacBook-toting hipsters you describe have a slightly easier life than those people had to serve in Vietnam or World War II.

If anything, the fact that the debt 'crisis' is global will end up making student loans easy(er) to repay (because inflation).

So the requirement of debt for a chance, is probably a harbinger of a really, really shitty time.

(NOTE: please... no "but I am different in w.r.t. that stuff" posts... the terms "many", "significant portion", and "most" mean some aren't in that category, but that doesn't change the statistics).

Still, it hardly takes a $50,000 psychology degree (people just looking for a credential should be fine with a state school) to get a job in a high tech factory, a $10,000 or $15,000 technology certificate is a lot more sensible.

And I don't mean to argue that these choices are easy or that it is great that people face them, but going $150,000 into debt is not the only path out there.

i) Dying while fighting in trench warfare

ii) Paying back money loaned to you for your education (presumably, while living in a comparably safe and climate controlled apartment)

It's fine to say things people disagree with, but this is just non-sense.

If I'd been a soldier soldier deployed in battle, or if I'd lost a family member in battle, I would find your comment one of the more offensive things I've ever seen on HN.

I guess what I meant was "at least it was over quick" meaning that you died and that was the end of it. I'm not saying that paying back a loan is definitely equivalent to dying, but there are plenty of people killing themselves over debt that they cannot escape.

The problem in my mind is not that it was loaned to people to pursue their education (that's good!) but that it was loaned to them with no regard for their ability to pay it back. $200k for a finance degree or engineering or something like that with a reasonable chance of paying it off is good. But $200k loaned to someone to get a bachelors in sociology is not a good bet since they have little prospect of paying it off. And no recourse once they find out how stupid they've been.

In WWII people made tremendous sacrifices for the good of the country and quite possibly freedom world-wide. That's incredibly noble. The leaders who had to make tough choices did so knowing that they would be sending many people to their deaths and (hopefully) took that responsibility seriously.

I doubt many private university presidents really truly care how many lives they're ruining by allowing totally egregious interest rates.

EDIT: debt driven suicide on google pulls a lot of hits: http://www.google.com/search?q=debt+driven+suicide&oq=de...

EDIT2: Thanks for at least telling me why you think I'm an insensitive clod. I appreciate it.

Oh and if they managed to avoid ww2 they get to spent a few years in Korea.

I spend less than €100 a month. I live with my parents, and currently doing a Masters in the best uni of my country, which costs around €550 for a year. I take the train to class everyday which is about 1 hour, but a train subscription costs me €80 for 3 months. A car is a luxury here and in my opinion, useless if you live in a city.

I don't have any debt whatsoever and have never seen why I should go into debt. I almost never spend on anything not necessary. heck sometimes I wonder WHY I don't buy more things. My computer is 5+ years old and still in good shape, so are most of my clothes, although I do buy new stuff every year.

If I do buy a gadget like my smartphone, I save for it first, I don't even have a credit card. I have never bought things and paid them after. Interest rates are the devil. Own your assets, not the other way around.

Stop spending so much.

You have to right? Because if you don't borrow money to pay yourself to do useless stuff, well then you can't afford to eat... At least this way you're buying some time to figure out a way to get someone else to borrow money and pay you.

I recently finished reading John Brunner's "Shockwave Rider" and found the taxation proposal near the end intriguing, if a bit alien. Tax rates are adjusted based on scoring of profession on three axes: training/talent, drawbacks (like unpredictable hours and dirty working conditions), and social indispensability. On all three axes, advertisers would score a zero, thereby qualifying for a 90% tax rate. I wonder where people would score people who work in a lot of these startups? I suppose it would depend heavily on what the startup was doing.

In the case of web startups you can go from "college students all have smartphones so let's build a social network for them to share their most banal thoughts" to "almost everyone in the US will have a smartphone within 5 years and a social networking profile, how can we use this information to provide more efficient public services?". So frivolous spending can accidently create opportunity for much more valuable work.

Move on people.