There’s a tragic movement afoot that characterizes and stereotypes Millennials. Media powerhouses have latched onto contorted, shortsighted views. This wholesale disqualification is embodied in Time Magazine‘s “The Me Me Me Generation” cover and articles.

As the cover states, “Millennials are lazy, entitled narcissists who still live with their parents.” Without a critical curiosity, you may read the article and think, “Wow, this generation really is the worst yet.” Unfortunately, vitriolic articles are commonplace about Millennials and the effects will likely damage us all.

Them vs. Us

The consequence of overindulgent, everlasting news outlets is that they simplify and repeat. With 24-hour, cyclical news, it’s often filtered for mass audiences. The consequences result in Them versus Us debate. Stories are painted in black and white – watered down for easy consumption.

Millennials likely have very little different from the parents and predecessors. Even though rapid social change has occurred, the generations are largely the same. Regrettably, media outlets continue their onslaught – wrong as they may be.

Damaging Disqualification

Here’s the cold, hard data: The incidence of narcissistic personality disorder is nearly three times as high for people in their 20s as for the generation that’s now 65 or older, according to the National Institutes of Health (Source)

Time Magazine would like you to believe that they’re only dealing in facts – no opinion, assumption, or personal perspective. They cite an article from the NIH that suggests, when compared to those 65 or older, Millennials are three times more likely to suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). This severe psychological disorder brings with it heavy consequences. NPD sufferers often have a lack of empathy, arrogance, need lots of attention, and preoccupied with thoughts and fantasies regarding success and others’ admiration.

There’s nothing flippant about this disorder. Despite popular culture and media interest, narcissism in a psychological sense is terrifying. Yet, the author of this Time article throws it around. And yet, a very small minority of the population actually has narcissism.

Unfortunately, this is poorly understood and disrespectfully used in the context. In these studies that compare narcissism over time, it’s important to realize that they’re are longitudinally-based; meaning, you’re getting a section in time. By analyzing rates of NPD across generations in this single subset of time, you risk missing the bigger picture: increased rates of “narcissism” (I’d say, selfish) at this time of life (to an extent). Secondarily, that people lose this selfishness and self-centeredness as they age. This would require a latitudinal (over time) study with a consistent psychological definition of narcissism (which rarely happens, as the DSM gets updated every decade or so).

Economic Upheaval

The report says nearly every group is worse off than four years ago, except for those 65 to 74. Some groups have experienced larger-than-average declines, including blacks, young and upper-middle-aged people and the unemployed. (Source)

Vast economic upheaval has left this generation feeling abandoned by political powers and past generations. Rising unemployment, staggering student loan debt, and lessening social mobility all confluence together into a torrential problem for everyone. By writing these caustic articles, Time Magazine and media outlets like them are downplaying these significant social issues.  If anything, “Generation Me” is asking to be remembered before this country abandons them.

In a recent Rolling Stone article on the crisis of student loan debt, Matt Taibbi takes aim at this $1.2 trillion problem. Rather than blaming individuals for suffering the crushing burden of out-of-control student loans, he takes jabs at a system that has failed lower and middle-income populations. Students of the millennial generation suffer through the most onerous tuition fees and rising costs amidst state tax revenue shortages.

Frankly, the majority of us don’t have time to sit around and bask in our reflections, as Time’s article suggests. This generation is struggling to make ends meet. The economic distress of our time is changing the minds of our youth. We are a tougher group, and we’re fighting tooth and nail to change our situation. And as we hope and work for a better future, media outlets criticize these efforts – labeling them as narcissistic and lazy.

We must move away from pejorative labeling and accept a more peaceful acceptance of other generations. Many came before us and many will follow. Why create such demons in those to come? Everybody should be saving and contributing to a better future.

The United States is home of the free, the brave, and the in-debt. We are a people and country swimming in the loathsome tide of I.O.U.s. It’s painful to self-correct or change a path that’s been forged by our predecessors. Workers are paid less than ever (when controlling for inflation) and students are practically forced to take internships that pay nothing. We’re lining our shelves with stuff and our pockets with receipts.

Nearly everyone in America recognizes that something needs to change. Our spending habits need to be curtailed. We must develop a critical-consumer mentality and protect ourselves from the threat of spending outside our budgets. That’s why I started this site – to engage an audience and self-reflect about the choices I make. But sometimes it feels like it’s fruitless in a system that’s stacked against those working tirelessly for a better life.

There’s a continuous drumbeat-like debate inside my head over the balance of personal and governmental responsibility. There are choices we can make that help alleviate debt, overcome student loans, and craft a better future. When we sign a loan, it’s an acceptance of the terms and conditions (whether you’ve read them or not). The burden of responsibility is clear, but the system seems to be stacked against us, too.

Recently, The Washington Post published an article on the staggeringly-low minimum wage in America. It’s $7.25.

Most developed countries have a higher minimum wage than we do…The U.S., unsurprisingly, is on the bottom but it’s tied with Japan. (Source)

In comparison, Australia’s is $16.88. The words “unconscionable” and “immoral” flutter and flicker in my mind. How can we pay such unlivable wages? Even before taxes, you can’t live off of $7.25 an hour. Never mind budgeting, saving for retirement, giving to charity, and a wealth of good that’s talked about in the personal finance community. The cards feel stacked against those with less – they have an even larger hurdle to balance their spending.

In fact, McDonald’s came under close scrutiny from the popular media over it’s partnership with PracticalMoneySkills.com. The McD’s sponsored site offered budget tips and an outline for how to make the most of your income (You can download the “Budget Journal” here). The budgets left you with a plan to:

…save $100 a month to realize long term financial goals…the purchasing power of the minimum wage has been on a general downward path since 1968, when it stood at $1.60—the equivalent of $10.70 in May 2013 dollars.(Source)

A fallacy exists about minimum wage. It goes like this, “Minimum wage is a stepping stone to a better life. This is where people get their first jobs before college. You have to work your way up.” Ever heard it, said it, felt it? Maybe I can’t dissuade the belief in ~750 words, but I want to tell you that’s a myth. Here’s why:

The average age of a fast-food worker is almost 30 right now. (Source)

Simultaneously, the youngest, most financially unprepared age group, is accepting non-paid internships at alarming rates. These bastions for experience and career networking have turned into a previous generation taking advantage of youth. They’re not protected by legal authority, can be let go at will, and experience no direct financial gain from today’s non-paid internships. And yet, students and recent graduates continue to work for free.

Because of this, we’ll likely see a greater splitting of income groups – a caste. Lower and middle-income populations are placed under financial duress when accepting these future-oriented opportunities. Maybe they’ll unlock doors to careers that pay well and allow for budgets to flourish. But the risk may not be worth the reward. Regardless, at times, it feels like the system is stacked against the greater whole.

Even at the top – in the White House – interns are not paid. If, the White Whose pays their interns, the cost to taxpayers is estimated to be around $7 million dollars at a $9 per hour wage. Incredible and expensive, but a infinitesimal fraction of the country’s budget. Our most competent and motivated youth receive White House internships – it is a true honor. But what if you couldn’t accept it because you’d fall into greater debt or need to support a family?

We need a gut-check, America. The status quo is painful, disorganized, and stacked against the majority. The pejorative wages and non-paid internships undercut the fabric of opportunity and the livelihood of our American dream. Employers need to be encouraged systematically to raise their minimum wages, offer more financial incentives for internships, and bolster the bottom. In turn, individuals should react accordingly by saving more, planning for retirement, and taking responsibility of this gift.

What do you think the federal government should do about minimum wage? What’s been your experience with non-paid internships? Are they fair?

Last month I wrote a guest article for PTMoney.com on the state of privacy versus frugality. Basically, I asked the simple question: What information would you voluntarily give up to save a buck? The fact is that we are bombarded with offers, coupons, and savings. The paper (if you get one) has a coupon section, there are tons of sites for freebies, and coupon sites are a dime-a-dozen. Amidst the swirl of opportunity are privacy sacrifices. Sometimes you can’t even realize what you give up to save. But did you know you can limit sharing of private information and still get a great deal?

Privacy Disclosures

Rather than a debate or structural question/answer to the problem of privacy concerns, this article will help you take action. We may be living in a state of Total Information Awareness on a societal level, but there are steps you can take to limit the sharing of certain banking information.

Each time you apply for a credit card, information is sent to the bank. From your social security number to date of birth, the data is highly important and needs to stay relatively private. We entrust our banks with these details. Thankfully, they keep their servers encrypted and have a direct interest in limiting breaches (it’s bad for business).

It’s An Opt-Out World

But much more nefarious are the detailed disclosures you’re likely voluntarily sharing. By sharing your transaction history, credit worthiness, and other personal, banking details, the bank you use can profit off of your account (to any even greater extent). There’s nothing inherently illegal about this behavior, but nowadays, you can limit much of the sharing.

Regrettably, the credit and banking organizations force consumers to opt-out, rather than opt-in to targeting, marketing, and information sharing. Until federal laws change this behavior, we must be critical consumers and do everything we can to be empowered.

How To Limit Affiliate Sharing

Reducing your information footprint with the banks and credit companies can be challenging. As mentioned, by default, you’re sharing more than you have to. It’s important to realize what you can limit and who you have to contact.

Each company operates on a different set of standards for information sharing (or privacy leaks). Read the documentation carefully, and look for a phone number on each notice to limit disclosures. The following are 5 popular companies that people bank with and links to their privacy notices:

American Express

Phone: 800-297-8378

Chase

Phone: 888-868-8618

Citicards

Phone: 877-640-3983

Target (Redcard)

Phone: 800-968-4001

Ally

Phone: 800-204-2197

These are just some examples. My recommendation is to search for “privacy notice (insert bank name here)” on any popular engine. Click on your bank and they should (are legally obligated to) tell you how to opt-out of secondary information sharing. If all else fails, call the number on the back of your card.

Scared By Another’s Cracked Phone

My friend pulled out his black iPhone 5 and began typing into his screen. Something appeared askew, different then I remembered it. I glanced over the phone and blanched at a nasty crack along the glass face. Immediately, I thought, “I need a smartphone case.”

As a budding frugal man, self-identified minimalist, and spendthrift, buying a new iPhone 5 was probably financially irresponsible. With nearly $40,000 in debt, the latest gadgets are hardly necessities. My one excuse: I purchased the device before I started this journey to tackle my debt and improve my financial future.

Frugal Without A Case?

I developed a strong focus toward spending cuts (my own austerity) and smart financial moves. My iPhone 5, an homage to a bygone spending era, stuck with me. The phone was purchased, and the reasoning was that I would make this one count – this would last me more than a two-year contract cycle. I wasn’t going to fall prey to the lock-in tactics of major wireless carriers.

Despite this vestige to out of control spending, I left it naked, without a case. Somehow, as I entered the frugal world, it didn’t seem financially smart to buy more. Part of me was right. The other part was scared by what had happened to my friend.

Motivated by fear, I quickly purchased an iPhone case with a special discount (a Lifeproof case, in case you’re interested). Despite the sizable bargain, it was still nearly $40. Admittedly, the swift purchase was motivated by fear. I worried I would soon share a similar fate. But was it fiscally responsible?

Why Buy?

A cracked phone can cost hundreds of dollars to replace screens professionally. Even if you do it yourself, you’re looking a supplies and materials that can cost a small fortune. Suddenly, a $40 case seemed far more frugal. Even though I never dropped the iPhone or suffered such consequences, the threat of lost resale value is an important consideration.

Cases are a form of insurance. You’re lessening risk of loses with a smaller investment. With an expensive cost for accidents with these glass-heavy devices, it’s important to protect them. That is, if you’re going to own them at all. Because the reality is that it’s far more frugal to get a cheap, prepaid flip-phone.