Young people didn't make these laws and allow them to be put into place, or existing laws be ignored -- their parents did.
People try to defend this twaddle with "well they didn't all support it" which of course is immaterial; plenty of them did or the policies wouldn't be there, a 16 year old can't vote for the thing that screws him or her five or ten years down the road but his or her parents both can and did. Should a kid who watches his or her parents profit at their expense, especially when it drives home prices out of reach (but is of benefit to their parents because they already have one) or their stock portfolio skyrocket when Disney lays off an entire IT department and replaces it with H-1bs (their parents have a flush 401k; the kid has none as he has no work history) let his or her parents get away with it unscathed?
Reczek’s research found that people rely on accountability and growth, intentional connection, mutual respect and emotional safety to remain in a relationship.
Excuse me, but what's wrong with that?
But I doubt very much that most of this "trend", such as it might be, is driven by that in point of fact. I suspect its more of the intentional rug-pulls and treatment of children as pawns in a game where their parents have deliberately sat back and allowed, or even worse personally profited, from their kids being screwed.
Nobody has an obligation to stand for that and if younger Americans are finally pushing back on such acts then my view is "it's about damn time." After all the younger generation not only didn't vote to be rug-pulled they didn't vote to be here either; both occurred due to the deliberate acts of their parents and beyond a child's 18th birthday all involved are quite-justly on the button in terms of the others being able to say "up yours!" if they believe they got screwed -- and nobody else has a right to claim superior judgement in that regard.
Both the decision and consequences are entirely the involved parties -- and nobody else's.
