Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

stahleo t1_j1rd9q9 wrote

Reply to comment by dclxvi616 in Pennsylvania politics are heated. It soon could be utter chaos by Yelloeisok

Sure, let's use your definition - someone born between 1946 - 1964.

So instead of discriminating against an "elderly person," it's against someone nearly 60 years of age and older. Where's the difference? There is none. It's the same.

If the primary reason you are calling them a "boomer" is because of their age group, then (in the way it was used) it is, in fact, age discrimination.

−5

dclxvi616 t1_j1rdm3s wrote

>it's against someone nearly 60 years of age and older.

Again, you're getting this definition incorrect. Someone who is 80 years old right now is not a boomer.

>If the primary reason you are calling them a "boomer" is because of their age group, then (in the way it was used) it is, in fact, age discrimination.

Sure, it's age discrimination. It's generational discrimination. It's not a blanket discrimination against the elderly though. I said it's different, not better.

7

stahleo t1_j1re6j0 wrote

>Sure, it's age discrimination.

Great, we agree.

2