The anger directed at the Resets stems from the economic impact on the youth. If the government had mandated retirement ages, would the younger generation have been less agitated? Would environmental issues have been enough to anger them on their own?

BookBrowse Book Club Reset by Kevin Charles
1

The anger directed at the Resets stems from the economic impact on the youth. If the government had mandated retirement ages, would the younger generation have been less agitated? Would environmental issues have been enough to anger them on their own?

2

Definitely having guard rails for the resetters would have helped - like saying you don’t get to stay on your job, you must retire at what would have been your real age before the reset. This would have helped greatly economically. Climate change still needs addressing so the youth would have still have rallied around that.

3

In a way, the “youth anger” was created by older adults who disagreed with the reset and found a way to energize the youth for their own purposes.

4

The author didn’t develop this concept thoroughly. I wondered what the EU countries might have done. It seems that governments would have enacted some laws. What about RMD’s? Those funds wouldn’t be taxed for quite some time, and we know how the IRS wants the coins!!

5

I felt the anger questions were not addressed directly by the author. It was the part of the book that need to be better defined. If some of these issues had been addressed the younger crowd would not have been so bitter. But then the story would not have ended as it did.

6

I believe there should have altered the retirement age however there is the impact if this would have bankrupt the society security system.

7

Maybe a required 5 or 10 years of service to community/state/county would have helped the resetters to better the world environmentally, socioeconomicly, and overall add good will to the world. But I know that wouldn’t have happened all over the world

8

Change! Regardless of good or bad it is hard to accept and when that change really intercedes in your livelihood that is not going to be accepted. People can only go with change in one section of their lives at a time. Family, work, leisure, safety. This change was affecting all 4 main points in the lives of most people. Grounded in 3 sections of life you would be able to accept change, possibly even grounded in 2 sections, would allow change without a big upheaval - but 3 or 4 sections changing at any one time you have to protest - that is too much and the reset effected all 4 sections.