I'm not a baby boomer, so I have no interest in defending them, but there's something inherently tautological about this whole line of reasoning. The argument is basically "everything sucks right now, so blame the largest voting bloc/age-group". I mean, yeah, that line of reasoning is more or less valid in any moderately-functioning democracy. But it doesn't really actually <i>explain</i> anything useful. I mean, it's not like people born in the period after WW2 to the mid 60s are somehow genetically predisposed to be complete sociopaths.<p>I realize the article attempts to touch a bit on <i>why</i> the baby boomers may have been psychologically predisposed to be so irresponsible (raised on TV or something), but that seems pretty hand-wavy. The reality is it's simply human nature to take the path of least resistance and put off solving hard problems in favor of easy short-term gains. And after WW2, America experienced unprecedented economic growth as a new emergent industrial superpower. But that kind of growth can't last forever. The baby-boomers were just around at the right time to benefit from it, and their natural human short-sightedness pretty much guaranteed they wouldn't prioritize making decisions that benefited future generations.