For instance, the article argues that boomers are NIMBYs:
>Older generations used the levers of government to create this situation. In high-cost cities, the building of new homes and apartment complexes is often derailed in local planning and zoning-board meetings.
However Scott notes:
>It’s not even clear that Boomers are that much more likely to be NIMBYs. From Pew:
>https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!wf8x!,w_1456,c_limit...
The article also talks about social security as benefiting boomers, but Scott notes:
>The Social Security Administration’s own website says that its generosity peaked in 1972, when the program primarily served the Greatest Generation; since then, it’s been one contraction after another.
[1] https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/against-against-boomers
Most Boomers aren't NIMBYs, but most NIMBYs are Boomers.
This is a thing that uniquely threatens them because their home is their primary investment, so anything that can be leveraged to keep prices high, they'll do. Environmentalism is usually the weapon they reach for, and because they have nothing but time, they have the advantage when it comes to a court system that privileges this kind of retireded spam.
>Social security
This is more because everyone under 40 or so doesn't trust social security will even be around for them to collect, so that group sees it, correctly, as an unfair wealth transfer from young to old. Combine that with the above, and combine that with the abject refusal to even entertain basic reforms (which goes double for non-US nations), and that's where the resentment comes from. Throwing good years after bad ones.