9 ms·

The Fleecing of Millennials

96 points by SolaceQuantum 8y ago

albertgoeswoof 8y ago
Does anyone know / remember if there were similar pieces written in the late 90s about people in their 20s and 30s then? Ie is this a trend that has always happened or something new?
- platz 8y ago
  it's actually a cover to for an endorsement of Buttigieg's run for president.
  - aedron 8y ago
    Yeah, that was a pretty transparent plug. And to answer the OP's question, yes, in the nineties the "generational robbery" was a topic: Real estate was booming, making existing (old) homeowners rich and pricing out first-time buyers.
- newsgremlin 8y ago
  Probably not as glaring since interest rates are much much lower now than they were then, and the crash of 07/08 hadn't happened yet
- acdha 8y ago
  It’s been going on for awhile but there are a number of factors which have become worse since the 90s: health insurance, tuition, housing, etc. all cost significantly more and we’re a generation further on the hollowing out of middle class jobs due to automation, offshoring, replacing employees with contractors, etc. I think the net effect is that it’s well over a key threshold for many people where a generation earlier someone might have complained about one of those costs but still been able to make it work whereas now it’s just not possible fora growing number of people. As an example, I know someone with type 1 diabetes. The inflation-adjusted cost of insulin has gone up something like 700% over the last 20 years and the number of jobs offering health insurance has declined while the employee’s cost percentage has risen, so the percentage of people who can just absorb it is shrinking.
- hoaw 8y ago
  I don't generally think so. I'd be interested in an opposite opinion though. The end of the 90s was all about being twenty/thirty-something. Just look at popular shows like Friends, Seinfeld and Sex and the City. They are essentially shows about staying young, or at least not growing up. And also the change of things like MTV. Most of these shows more or less ended with the characters getting married, having kids or otherwise ending that period in their lives. In Sex and the City, Miranda moving to Brooklyn because Manhattan is too expensive is a major event in the last season.
- gaius 8y ago
  Read Douglas Coupland’s Generation X, the original book that coined the term. It’s all about 20-somethings in the ‘90’s dropping out because the rewards seem so impossibly far out of reach that it’s not even worth trying. Also held the Boomers to blame.
  - Joeboy 8y ago
    From the back of my copy: """Andy, Dag and Claire have been handed a society priced beyone their means. twentysomethings, brought up with divorce, Watergate and Three Mile Island, and scarred by the 80s fall-out of yuppies, recession, crack and Ronald Reagan, they represent the new generation - Generation X. Fiercely suspicious of being lumped together as an advertiser's target market, they have quit dreary careers and cut themselves adrift in the California desert. Unsure of their futures, they immerse themselves in a regime of heavy drinking and working at no-future McJobs in the service industry."""
  - howard941 8y ago
    That was a good read. Before Gen X we were called the 13th gen but that didn't get traction. Someone else wrote a book on it, reviewed here: http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CLASS/OBJECTS/III/reviews/13thgen.html http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CLASS/OBJECTS/III/reviews/13thge...
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  They were a lost generation for different reasons. A little earlier than late 90s: The Thatcher/Reagan de-industrialisation through the 80s meant a huge number of children deprived of opportunity as whole regions and cities lost their major employers. In the UK it was effectively the start of our drug problem. Criminalisation had only arrived in the late 60s. Then we got the big recession of the early 90s. Most of those de-industrialised areas had huge crime and drug problems, lost opportunities and parents who were broke, jobless and without hope. London and the South East was turbo-charging banking so we got Harry Enfield's comedy "Loadsa Money" character on tv, and plenty of market traders becoming stock traders. If you were early into IT you avoided it too. So London and the South East was mostly OK, the rest, not so much. For those coming onto the job market it was a time of very high youth unemployment and limited chances. By the late 90s it had settled and most were busy spending it. Some of those hardest hit areas are still not fully recovered. The cities have, mostly. My father's generation were lost in the Great Depression, then got to go to WW2. His father's in WW1. We can learn from history that we don't treat the unlucky at all well, or try and prevent damage to the next generation. Oh, and that we mostly don't learn from history.
  - gadders 8y ago
    >> Most of those de-industrialised areas had huge crime and drug problems, lost opportunities and parents who were broke, jobless and without hope. London and the South East was turbo-charging banking so we got Harry Enfield's comedy "Loadsa Money" character on tv, and plenty of market traders becoming stock traders. If you were early into IT you avoided it too. The Loadsamoney character was a plasterer. Even manual trades were doing well in the South East.
    - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
      Of course he was. I can't believe I forgot that! :)
  - hoaw 8y ago
    I am not sure it is the same thing, but maybe in the UK it was. As you say there have always been turmoil. But most of the time the young were seen as getting a better deal. Factories closed and older generations suffered, but the young got other jobs and at least to some extent benefited from the transition. Today we are talking about how young people get it almost universally worse from an economic standpoint and it is people in their ~forties that are winning in e.g. the housing market.
- Chazprime 8y ago
  It’s nothing new. I remember (barely) talk of baby boomers worried about retirement after Black Monday. Guess they recovered nicely.
mschuster91 8y ago
> Medicare and Social Security have been spared from cuts. Programs that benefit younger workers and families have not. This is a political incentive problem. Retired people tend to have free time to engage in politics (or at least watch TV all day and get fed "news") and they turn out to votes in droves (as they don't have to e.g. take a day off to vote!), while young people mainly have the power to pull off a shitstorm in social media and that's it, they don't vote enough for politicians to prioritize them over retirees (how can they, when they have to work two jobs to survive and are threatened with losing their job for missing work to vote - no matter if it's illegal, someone depending on the job will NOT complain). In addition, retirees are way better organized and actually have the free time on their hands to do stuff like mass phone calling of representatives.
- hopler 8y ago
  Don't underestimate the shitstorms. Look at the candidates who flipped districts in the 2018 elections. Also, Social Security benefits young families who aren't earning money. The student loan mess is terrible, but it's not a case of missing government funds but too many -- community colleges are in pretty good shape, but people borrow too much for useless private colleges thanks to modern marketing techniques and modern cultural nonsense about 4yr college degrees for all. Also, a little perspective is in order. Millennials in USA don't have a WWII or Vietnam war or Jim Crow laws or a big government supported KKK. They have the Internet and the rest of modern technology and high efficiency/productivity goods and services. Quality of life is pretty darn good compared to ancestors. It mostly feels bad due to wealth inequality, not absolute poverty. We've got a lot of problems to solve, but this pearl clutching hand wringing for millennials is just MAGA without the red hats, ignoring the reality of how the 99% lived in the past.
  - mschuster91 8y ago
    > Millennials in USA don't have a WWII or Vietnam war or Jim Crow laws or a big government supported KKK. Millennials in the USA and many other allied nations have the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, with additionally European youth dealing with the refugees caused by said wars and the right wing that has risen by piggybacking on said refugees. We don't have Jim-Crow-Laws but still disproportionate amounts of PoC and immigrants being targeted by police and systematically discriminated against by wider society. We don#t have government-supported KKK, at least not openly, but at least Germans have groups of Nazis outright murdering people ("NSU" if you're interested) and presumably aided or at least protected by secret services. Most of Islamist terrorists across Europe turned out to be known to police, most notoriously Anis A. (the Berlin murderer). > It mostly feels bad due to wealth inequality, not absolute poverty. That's the core point. We see the ultra rich flaunt their riches to the point of obscenity while spreading "you can get rich too" while knowing we can't ever realistically rise to that level of richdoms (and we know it, too, which makes it even more obscene). Corporate exec make way over 100x, some probably over 1000x, the money as the cleaning maid wiping their toilets. This disconnect is it what riles up young generations.
rnernento 8y ago
It's cute that they call it a fleecing, as if millenials could really have done anything about this. Sadly (I guess...) I suspect the generation responsible for all of this is going to end up paying some unexpected prices when the time comes as they age out of power and have to look to millenials for care.
- snikeris 8y ago
  No, the millenials will be paying for the older generation's retirement and healthcare via Social Security and Medicare.
  - pm90 8y ago
    Not unless the GOP gets its way and privatizes both.
    - Bahamut 8y ago
      Then we'll just be paying it out of pocket.
      - doytch 8y ago
        Eh. If that happened, then at least I'd only be paying for myself out of pocket and not also the older generation that saw fit to have their cake, eat it, and leave the bill for the next generation. (Not that I actually believe there should be a privatised healthcare system.)
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > millenials will be paying for the older generation's retirement and healthcare via Social Security and Medicare My guess is younger generations, once better politically ensconced, will flip the script on boomers by funding broad social benefits out of social security and Medicare. (For example, by reducing Medicare benefits while making them available to all age groups.)
kleborp 8y ago
This is an honest question I have that's tangentially related to this article (everyone on this forum is a lot smarter than I am so apologies if this is a stupid question): What is the catalyst for any action/change in regards to reversing these trends? I feel like I've been reading versions of the same article for the last 10 years with negligible change.
- tinktank 8y ago
  The people in power have to start representing the interests of the millennials. This will only happen when people of that generation are in power, or people in power are being influenced by them.
  - pm90 8y ago
    This. One of the reasons I suspect AOC gets so much attention (apart from her very unabashed personality) is because she represents the Millenial generation, always ridiculed as being "lazy" and "coddled". Finally someone in Power who: * is a millenial and * understands millenial priorities Ironically, the policy proposals that the most outspoken Millenials embrace would actually strengthen programs that help the older generation.
    - Pocketknife 8y ago
      She is getting lots of attention because vapid socialism is in fashion right now. She doesn't really understand the job she has, or how the government works. She is just making noise that sounds good to people who don't really think about policy implications. I wish the first millenial politician was at least competent... And did not sound like her qualifications were binging the West Wing. Seriously. Her "positions" are word for word out of the West Wing.
  - DataWorker 8y ago
    Millennials don’t seem to have a clue what’s in their best interest so I’m going to disagree with you. If there were any solid ideas coming from anybody in terms of helping millennials those ideas would have political traction. To think that only millennials can represent millennial interests is stupid.
IIAOPSWmobile 8y ago
>Given these trends, you’d think the government would be trying to help the young. But it’s not. If anything, federal and state policy is going in the other direction guess which age group is not represented in congress
11thEarlOfMar 8y ago
The fleecing affects millennials in that they cannot save and invest their income. Once they've paid their health care and education [1] payments, they have nothing left to save. Per capita, in 2017 dollars, 1970 Americans spent $1,797 on health care. In 2017, $10,739 [0]. In return on that $9,000 annual investment: Life expectancy rose from 74.7 to 78.6, adding 3.9 years. In 1993, the annual cost for tuition & fees to attending a UC as an in-state was $5,000. Today, it's $15,000 [2]. That's a 3x increase during a period when inflation was 1.7x. A Gen Y-er would have paid $20,000 in tuition for a 4-year degree. A millenial, $60,000. That $40,000 is money that could otherwise have been saved. Since those costs were lower as a percentage of income for boomers, Gen X and Gen Y, those prior generations had a better chance to save. Today, they also have highest incomes, and again, can save if that's how they prioritize their finances. Millennials, not so much. For sure, health care and education affects earlier generations, but they were better able to save in 401(k) plans because the portion of their income that went to health and education was substantially less than for millennials. [0] https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-spending-healthcare-changed-time/#item-total-health-expenditures-have-increased-substantially-over-the-past-several-decades_2017 https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-spe... [1] https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/growth-in-student-loan-debt-at-graduation-slows-as-borrowers-hit-loan-limits https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/growth-in-student-l... [2] https://www.kqed.org/news/70585/csu-and-uc-tuition-hikes-over-time https://www.kqed.org/news/70585/csu-and-uc-tuition-hikes-ove...
- diogenescynic 8y ago
  Housing and childcare are also outpacing inflation and wages. It’s crazy how much more things cost as a percentage of income than in the ‘90s. We’re going to have an inevitable retirement crisis when most millennials are forced to work until they die since they won’t have anything left to put into savings. 70% of Americans can’t even put together $400 in an emergency. I see things getting even worse unless something significant changes.
  - war1025 8y ago
    Part of that is the structure of the economy, like you say. A significant proportion of it, as a millennial myself, is people having a terrible understanding of personal finance. If you spend all your money on things to impress people or because "you deserve them", then you end up with an empty pot.
bryanlarsen 8y ago
Boomer's may have accumulated a large amount of wealth, but that wealth is going to be hit hard by Baumol's cost disease. Right now the US has ~4 workers per retiree. That's going to be dropping to about 2 in the next few decades. And despite frantic efforts from the Japanese, the services that the elderly need are hard to automate. These services generally suffer from Baumol's cost disease: nursing et al are very 1:1 jobs with or without the help of technology.
- georgefrick 8y ago
  [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%27s_cost_disease https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%27s_cost_disease
- alexgmcm 8y ago
  It's weird though - my girlfriend studies nursing and Geriatric Nursing is still one of the lowest paid specialisations with poor conditions and respect (compared to say working in the ICU). It seems residential homes charge the 'guests' loads and pay the staff (carers, nurses, cleaners etc.) very, very little.
  - RhodesianHunter 8y ago
    Hopefully not offending anyone, but it is one of the most manual labor intensive and has some of the lowest educational requirements and cognitive overhead of the various nursing specialties. It also carries lower requisite insurance costs.
    - hoaw 8y ago
      Also one of the best examples of what you lose in this changing society though. The decline of the middle class in general is of course problematic, but at least some of these jobs weren't worth saving as activities (though probably as careers). However that you can't have sustainable career as a common nurse, teacher or construction worker is a huge problem. Because these professions can't necessarily be paid a lot and also serve the public.
systematical 8y ago
There is an income gap that continues to grow. I think that is the real culprit. Those at the top continue taking more slices of the pie. Bad capitalism is amazingly resilient. After decades of being pushed back on things like unionization, pensions, monopolies and taxes. Capitalism has begun pushing back and winning. The problem with this beyond the wealth gap is you're going to see an over correction with hard left policies. This is going to be yet another interesting election cycle. I just hope enough moderates remain to create reasonable solutions to these problems.
kpwagner 8y ago
Federal debt and surface temperature charts are telling because they include 20+ year projections periods--and of course those projections are dire (and bullshit). It's clear the story this "opinion columnist" (bullshit artist) is trying to craft. To me, net worth by age group is the troubling chart. If I read this correctly, median net worth for all age groups under 44 years old is significantly negative. The scale isn't clear since the chart is indexed. What do you think is the source of so much debt? My guess: student loans and home mortgages.
- timerol 8y ago
  Note that a mortgage should not lead to negative net worth in the general case. Because you own a house, a mortgage with 0% down payment should have no immediate effect on your net worth. There are people who are upside-down on their mortgages, but that isn't the common case.
  - kpwagner 8y ago
    That's true. I misread the chart anyway, so it isn't necessarily saying anything about debt levels.
- lucozade 8y ago
  > If I read this correctly, median net worth for all age groups under 44 years old is significantly negative That's not what that graph shows. It's the cumulative change in net worth. For example, it's saying that the net worth (infl adj) of 55-64s hasn't changed since 1989. Not that it's zero.
- drewmate 8y ago
  I believe the chart is cumulative change in net worth for people in those age groups. The median net worth for someone under 50 isn't negative, but it's a lot lower than it was 30 years ago. On the other hand, older Americans seem to keep on earning and not retiring which boosts their relative net worth relative to the generation(s) before them.
  - 8y ago
nopinsight 8y ago
A major contributor to millennials' expenses is housing. NIMBYism will continue to be a contraint to having sufficiently more living units in existing major cities for the foreseeable future. We should push for building new cities or upgrading existing small ones. We can create them to fit with lifestyles of the young: walkable, bike- and pedestrian-friendly, well-served by public transportation, etc. Having good jobs nearby would be important. I believe developing new cities close to major universities (in smaller towns) and possibly adjacent to existing job centers would help garner critical mass to kickstart their momentum relatively quickly.
- cpursley 8y ago
  This so much. I don't think most Americans realize how much poorly designed build-environment/cities costs them. Both in terms of maintaining the infrastructure of the vast suburbs and the cost of personal vehicle ownership.
- jbob2000 8y ago
  It’s not just NIMBYism, but also down right selfishness. My parents are retired and live in a house that backs on to an elementary school. What the hell are retired childless couples doing living next to schools? I’m in the process of looking for my first house and my mother said to me the other day, “why don’t you try something out in the country”. I have 40 years left to work, why don’t YOU move out to the country! At some point, we’re going to have a bunch of vacant schools because all these old farts won’t leave.
oftenwrong 8y ago
Larry Littlefield writes a lot of interesting blog posts on generational equity, mainly with a focus on the US, and New York in particular: https://larrylittlefield.wordpress.com/category/generational-equity/ https://larrylittlefield.wordpress.com/category/generational...
pjdemers 8y ago
The first chart shows the trends started around 1978. Someone who was 25 then would be 65 now. And the worst time to be 25ish was the mid 1980s. That cohort is in their late 50s now. So I bet the 65+ line will fall as those who were less than 25 in 1978 start to join that group.
40acres 8y ago
I filed my taxes with Turbo Tax the other day and they compared my salary to other people my age (27) in my state (Oregon), I didn't double check the numbers but Turbo Tax reported that I made about 5 times the average 27 year old in Oregon. What I've noticed is that there is a huge inequality gap among millennials as well, a lot of millennials have crushing debt and poor job prospects yes -- but others get a job at FAANG at 21. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out as millennials age.
- downrightmike 8y ago
  What will happen is those that have better options will have kids. Similar to why there are so many people with last names of miller or smith. Both trades were protected to a point by not going to war and having the means to have kids. If we still went with our father's trades as last names, the next generation would probably be full (relatively) of Jane and Joe Engineer.
- loraa 8y ago
  When it comes to that inequality, parents play a huge role as well. I had friends growing up whose parents paid all their bills, bought their car, bought their condo, gave them an 'allowance', so when everything is free for you, and you never have to stress. It makes life easier.
rwmj 8y ago
This is related to the topic of this interesting book about how baby boomers stole resources from their own children (although obviously the supposed cause is quite different from the article): https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pinch-Boomers-Childrens-Future-Should/dp/1848872321 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pinch-Boomers-Childrens-Future-Shou...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
loraa 8y ago
You want to upset a millennial? Tell them as a gen-xer that you had a summer job when you were a teen, worked throughout university, your first car was used, beat up, and not a BMW/Audi or Mercedes. let them know you never paid $3000 for a winter coat or $1500 for a cell phone. Tell them about that time you got out of school, rented an apartment, save up bought a condo, and then bought a house after getting married.. Oh man... how reality and the truth is upsetting. Health care is crazy and Student loans are crazy.. but do you really want to pay a student loan for a degree in a SJW subject with no potential, or a health care plan for anxiety medication because you're triggered by Twitter too often.. I really think the major problem is the incredible sense of entitlement.
RhysU 8y ago
The income and wealth plots seem misleading... No one has been aged 25-34 for nearly 30 years. And 65+ life expectancy has gone up.

96 points by SolaceQuantum 8y ago

Does anyone know / remember if there were similar pieces written in the late 90s about people in their 20s and 30s then? Ie is this a trend that has always happened or something new?

platz 8y ago
it's actually a cover to for an endorsement of Buttigieg's run for president.
- aedron 8y ago
  Yeah, that was a pretty transparent plug. And to answer the OP's question, yes, in the nineties the "generational robbery" was a topic: Real estate was booming, making existing (old) homeowners rich and pricing out first-time buyers.
newsgremlin 8y ago
Probably not as glaring since interest rates are much much lower now than they were then, and the crash of 07/08 hadn't happened yet
acdha 8y ago
It’s been going on for awhile but there are a number of factors which have become worse since the 90s: health insurance, tuition, housing, etc. all cost significantly more and we’re a generation further on the hollowing out of middle class jobs due to automation, offshoring, replacing employees with contractors, etc. I think the net effect is that it’s well over a key threshold for many people where a generation earlier someone might have complained about one of those costs but still been able to make it work whereas now it’s just not possible fora growing number of people. As an example, I know someone with type 1 diabetes. The inflation-adjusted cost of insulin has gone up something like 700% over the last 20 years and the number of jobs offering health insurance has declined while the employee’s cost percentage has risen, so the percentage of people who can just absorb it is shrinking.
hoaw 8y ago
I don't generally think so. I'd be interested in an opposite opinion though. The end of the 90s was all about being twenty/thirty-something. Just look at popular shows like Friends, Seinfeld and Sex and the City. They are essentially shows about staying young, or at least not growing up. And also the change of things like MTV. Most of these shows more or less ended with the characters getting married, having kids or otherwise ending that period in their lives. In Sex and the City, Miranda moving to Brooklyn because Manhattan is too expensive is a major event in the last season.
gaius 8y ago
Read Douglas Coupland’s Generation X, the original book that coined the term. It’s all about 20-somethings in the ‘90’s dropping out because the rewards seem so impossibly far out of reach that it’s not even worth trying. Also held the Boomers to blame.
- Joeboy 8y ago
  From the back of my copy: """Andy, Dag and Claire have been handed a society priced beyone their means. twentysomethings, brought up with divorce, Watergate and Three Mile Island, and scarred by the 80s fall-out of yuppies, recession, crack and Ronald Reagan, they represent the new generation - Generation X. Fiercely suspicious of being lumped together as an advertiser's target market, they have quit dreary careers and cut themselves adrift in the California desert. Unsure of their futures, they immerse themselves in a regime of heavy drinking and working at no-future McJobs in the service industry."""
- howard941 8y ago
  That was a good read. Before Gen X we were called the 13th gen but that didn't get traction. Someone else wrote a book on it, reviewed here: http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CLASS/OBJECTS/III/reviews/13thgen.html http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CLASS/OBJECTS/III/reviews/13thge...
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
They were a lost generation for different reasons. A little earlier than late 90s: The Thatcher/Reagan de-industrialisation through the 80s meant a huge number of children deprived of opportunity as whole regions and cities lost their major employers. In the UK it was effectively the start of our drug problem. Criminalisation had only arrived in the late 60s. Then we got the big recession of the early 90s. Most of those de-industrialised areas had huge crime and drug problems, lost opportunities and parents who were broke, jobless and without hope. London and the South East was turbo-charging banking so we got Harry Enfield's comedy "Loadsa Money" character on tv, and plenty of market traders becoming stock traders. If you were early into IT you avoided it too. So London and the South East was mostly OK, the rest, not so much. For those coming onto the job market it was a time of very high youth unemployment and limited chances. By the late 90s it had settled and most were busy spending it. Some of those hardest hit areas are still not fully recovered. The cities have, mostly. My father's generation were lost in the Great Depression, then got to go to WW2. His father's in WW1. We can learn from history that we don't treat the unlucky at all well, or try and prevent damage to the next generation. Oh, and that we mostly don't learn from history.
- gadders 8y ago
  >> Most of those de-industrialised areas had huge crime and drug problems, lost opportunities and parents who were broke, jobless and without hope. London and the South East was turbo-charging banking so we got Harry Enfield's comedy "Loadsa Money" character on tv, and plenty of market traders becoming stock traders. If you were early into IT you avoided it too. The Loadsamoney character was a plasterer. Even manual trades were doing well in the South East.
  - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
    Of course he was. I can't believe I forgot that! :)
- hoaw 8y ago
  I am not sure it is the same thing, but maybe in the UK it was. As you say there have always been turmoil. But most of the time the young were seen as getting a better deal. Factories closed and older generations suffered, but the young got other jobs and at least to some extent benefited from the transition. Today we are talking about how young people get it almost universally worse from an economic standpoint and it is people in their ~forties that are winning in e.g. the housing market.
Chazprime 8y ago
It’s nothing new. I remember (barely) talk of baby boomers worried about retirement after Black Monday. Guess they recovered nicely.

mschuster91 8y ago

> Medicare and Social Security have been spared from cuts. Programs that benefit younger workers and families have not. This is a political incentive problem. Retired people tend to have free time to engage in politics (or at least watch TV all day and get fed "news") and they turn out to votes in droves (as they don't have to e.g. take a day off to vote!), while young people mainly have the power to pull off a shitstorm in social media and that's it, they don't vote enough for politicians to prioritize them over retirees (how can they, when they have to work two jobs to survive and are threatened with losing their job for missing work to vote - no matter if it's illegal, someone depending on the job will NOT complain). In addition, retirees are way better organized and actually have the free time on their hands to do stuff like mass phone calling of representatives.

hopler 8y ago
Don't underestimate the shitstorms. Look at the candidates who flipped districts in the 2018 elections. Also, Social Security benefits young families who aren't earning money. The student loan mess is terrible, but it's not a case of missing government funds but too many -- community colleges are in pretty good shape, but people borrow too much for useless private colleges thanks to modern marketing techniques and modern cultural nonsense about 4yr college degrees for all. Also, a little perspective is in order. Millennials in USA don't have a WWII or Vietnam war or Jim Crow laws or a big government supported KKK. They have the Internet and the rest of modern technology and high efficiency/productivity goods and services. Quality of life is pretty darn good compared to ancestors. It mostly feels bad due to wealth inequality, not absolute poverty. We've got a lot of problems to solve, but this pearl clutching hand wringing for millennials is just MAGA without the red hats, ignoring the reality of how the 99% lived in the past.
- mschuster91 8y ago
  > Millennials in USA don't have a WWII or Vietnam war or Jim Crow laws or a big government supported KKK. Millennials in the USA and many other allied nations have the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, with additionally European youth dealing with the refugees caused by said wars and the right wing that has risen by piggybacking on said refugees. We don't have Jim-Crow-Laws but still disproportionate amounts of PoC and immigrants being targeted by police and systematically discriminated against by wider society. We don#t have government-supported KKK, at least not openly, but at least Germans have groups of Nazis outright murdering people ("NSU" if you're interested) and presumably aided or at least protected by secret services. Most of Islamist terrorists across Europe turned out to be known to police, most notoriously Anis A. (the Berlin murderer). > It mostly feels bad due to wealth inequality, not absolute poverty. That's the core point. We see the ultra rich flaunt their riches to the point of obscenity while spreading "you can get rich too" while knowing we can't ever realistically rise to that level of richdoms (and we know it, too, which makes it even more obscene). Corporate exec make way over 100x, some probably over 1000x, the money as the cleaning maid wiping their toilets. This disconnect is it what riles up young generations.

rnernento 8y ago

It's cute that they call it a fleecing, as if millenials could really have done anything about this. Sadly (I guess...) I suspect the generation responsible for all of this is going to end up paying some unexpected prices when the time comes as they age out of power and have to look to millenials for care.

snikeris 8y ago
No, the millenials will be paying for the older generation's retirement and healthcare via Social Security and Medicare.
- pm90 8y ago
  Not unless the GOP gets its way and privatizes both.
  - Bahamut 8y ago
    Then we'll just be paying it out of pocket.
    - doytch 8y ago
      Eh. If that happened, then at least I'd only be paying for myself out of pocket and not also the older generation that saw fit to have their cake, eat it, and leave the bill for the next generation. (Not that I actually believe there should be a privatised healthcare system.)
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > millenials will be paying for the older generation's retirement and healthcare via Social Security and Medicare My guess is younger generations, once better politically ensconced, will flip the script on boomers by funding broad social benefits out of social security and Medicare. (For example, by reducing Medicare benefits while making them available to all age groups.)

kleborp 8y ago

This is an honest question I have that's tangentially related to this article (everyone on this forum is a lot smarter than I am so apologies if this is a stupid question): What is the catalyst for any action/change in regards to reversing these trends? I feel like I've been reading versions of the same article for the last 10 years with negligible change.

tinktank 8y ago
The people in power have to start representing the interests of the millennials. This will only happen when people of that generation are in power, or people in power are being influenced by them.
- pm90 8y ago
  This. One of the reasons I suspect AOC gets so much attention (apart from her very unabashed personality) is because she represents the Millenial generation, always ridiculed as being "lazy" and "coddled". Finally someone in Power who: * is a millenial and * understands millenial priorities Ironically, the policy proposals that the most outspoken Millenials embrace would actually strengthen programs that help the older generation.
  - Pocketknife 8y ago
    She is getting lots of attention because vapid socialism is in fashion right now. She doesn't really understand the job she has, or how the government works. She is just making noise that sounds good to people who don't really think about policy implications. I wish the first millenial politician was at least competent... And did not sound like her qualifications were binging the West Wing. Seriously. Her "positions" are word for word out of the West Wing.
- DataWorker 8y ago
  Millennials don’t seem to have a clue what’s in their best interest so I’m going to disagree with you. If there were any solid ideas coming from anybody in terms of helping millennials those ideas would have political traction. To think that only millennials can represent millennial interests is stupid.

IIAOPSWmobile 8y ago

>Given these trends, you’d think the government would be trying to help the young. But it’s not. If anything, federal and state policy is going in the other direction guess which age group is not represented in congress

11thEarlOfMar 8y ago

The fleecing affects millennials in that they cannot save and invest their income. Once they've paid their health care and education [1] payments, they have nothing left to save. Per capita, in 2017 dollars, 1970 Americans spent $1,797 on health care. In 2017, $10,739 [0]. In return on that $9,000 annual investment: Life expectancy rose from 74.7 to 78.6, adding 3.9 years. In 1993, the annual cost for tuition & fees to attending a UC as an in-state was $5,000. Today, it's $15,000 [2]. That's a 3x increase during a period when inflation was 1.7x. A Gen Y-er would have paid $20,000 in tuition for a 4-year degree. A millenial, $60,000. That $40,000 is money that could otherwise have been saved. Since those costs were lower as a percentage of income for boomers, Gen X and Gen Y, those prior generations had a better chance to save. Today, they also have highest incomes, and again, can save if that's how they prioritize their finances. Millennials, not so much. For sure, health care and education affects earlier generations, but they were better able to save in 401(k) plans because the portion of their income that went to health and education was substantially less than for millennials. [0] https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-spending-healthcare-changed-time/#item-total-health-expenditures-have-increased-substantially-over-the-past-several-decades_2017 https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-spe... [1] https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/growth-in-student-loan-debt-at-graduation-slows-as-borrowers-hit-loan-limits https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/growth-in-student-l... [2] https://www.kqed.org/news/70585/csu-and-uc-tuition-hikes-over-time https://www.kqed.org/news/70585/csu-and-uc-tuition-hikes-ove...

diogenescynic 8y ago
Housing and childcare are also outpacing inflation and wages. It’s crazy how much more things cost as a percentage of income than in the ‘90s. We’re going to have an inevitable retirement crisis when most millennials are forced to work until they die since they won’t have anything left to put into savings. 70% of Americans can’t even put together $400 in an emergency. I see things getting even worse unless something significant changes.
- war1025 8y ago
  Part of that is the structure of the economy, like you say. A significant proportion of it, as a millennial myself, is people having a terrible understanding of personal finance. If you spend all your money on things to impress people or because "you deserve them", then you end up with an empty pot.

bryanlarsen 8y ago

Boomer's may have accumulated a large amount of wealth, but that wealth is going to be hit hard by Baumol's cost disease. Right now the US has ~4 workers per retiree. That's going to be dropping to about 2 in the next few decades. And despite frantic efforts from the Japanese, the services that the elderly need are hard to automate. These services generally suffer from Baumol's cost disease: nursing et al are very 1:1 jobs with or without the help of technology.

georgefrick 8y ago
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%27s_cost_disease https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%27s_cost_disease
alexgmcm 8y ago
It's weird though - my girlfriend studies nursing and Geriatric Nursing is still one of the lowest paid specialisations with poor conditions and respect (compared to say working in the ICU). It seems residential homes charge the 'guests' loads and pay the staff (carers, nurses, cleaners etc.) very, very little.
- RhodesianHunter 8y ago
  Hopefully not offending anyone, but it is one of the most manual labor intensive and has some of the lowest educational requirements and cognitive overhead of the various nursing specialties. It also carries lower requisite insurance costs.
  - hoaw 8y ago
    Also one of the best examples of what you lose in this changing society though. The decline of the middle class in general is of course problematic, but at least some of these jobs weren't worth saving as activities (though probably as careers). However that you can't have sustainable career as a common nurse, teacher or construction worker is a huge problem. Because these professions can't necessarily be paid a lot and also serve the public.

systematical 8y ago

There is an income gap that continues to grow. I think that is the real culprit. Those at the top continue taking more slices of the pie. Bad capitalism is amazingly resilient. After decades of being pushed back on things like unionization, pensions, monopolies and taxes. Capitalism has begun pushing back and winning. The problem with this beyond the wealth gap is you're going to see an over correction with hard left policies. This is going to be yet another interesting election cycle. I just hope enough moderates remain to create reasonable solutions to these problems.

kpwagner 8y ago

Federal debt and surface temperature charts are telling because they include 20+ year projections periods--and of course those projections are dire (and bullshit). It's clear the story this "opinion columnist" (bullshit artist) is trying to craft. To me, net worth by age group is the troubling chart. If I read this correctly, median net worth for all age groups under 44 years old is significantly negative. The scale isn't clear since the chart is indexed. What do you think is the source of so much debt? My guess: student loans and home mortgages.

timerol 8y ago
Note that a mortgage should not lead to negative net worth in the general case. Because you own a house, a mortgage with 0% down payment should have no immediate effect on your net worth. There are people who are upside-down on their mortgages, but that isn't the common case.
- kpwagner 8y ago
  That's true. I misread the chart anyway, so it isn't necessarily saying anything about debt levels.
lucozade 8y ago
> If I read this correctly, median net worth for all age groups under 44 years old is significantly negative That's not what that graph shows. It's the cumulative change in net worth. For example, it's saying that the net worth (infl adj) of 55-64s hasn't changed since 1989. Not that it's zero.
drewmate 8y ago
I believe the chart is cumulative change in net worth for people in those age groups. The median net worth for someone under 50 isn't negative, but it's a lot lower than it was 30 years ago. On the other hand, older Americans seem to keep on earning and not retiring which boosts their relative net worth relative to the generation(s) before them.
- 8y ago

nopinsight 8y ago

A major contributor to millennials' expenses is housing. NIMBYism will continue to be a contraint to having sufficiently more living units in existing major cities for the foreseeable future. We should push for building new cities or upgrading existing small ones. We can create them to fit with lifestyles of the young: walkable, bike- and pedestrian-friendly, well-served by public transportation, etc. Having good jobs nearby would be important. I believe developing new cities close to major universities (in smaller towns) and possibly adjacent to existing job centers would help garner critical mass to kickstart their momentum relatively quickly.

cpursley 8y ago
This so much. I don't think most Americans realize how much poorly designed build-environment/cities costs them. Both in terms of maintaining the infrastructure of the vast suburbs and the cost of personal vehicle ownership.
jbob2000 8y ago
It’s not just NIMBYism, but also down right selfishness. My parents are retired and live in a house that backs on to an elementary school. What the hell are retired childless couples doing living next to schools? I’m in the process of looking for my first house and my mother said to me the other day, “why don’t you try something out in the country”. I have 40 years left to work, why don’t YOU move out to the country! At some point, we’re going to have a bunch of vacant schools because all these old farts won’t leave.

oftenwrong 8y ago

Larry Littlefield writes a lot of interesting blog posts on generational equity, mainly with a focus on the US, and New York in particular: https://larrylittlefield.wordpress.com/category/generational-equity/ https://larrylittlefield.wordpress.com/category/generational...

pjdemers 8y ago

The first chart shows the trends started around 1978. Someone who was 25 then would be 65 now. And the worst time to be 25ish was the mid 1980s. That cohort is in their late 50s now. So I bet the 65+ line will fall as those who were less than 25 in 1978 start to join that group.

40acres 8y ago

I filed my taxes with Turbo Tax the other day and they compared my salary to other people my age (27) in my state (Oregon), I didn't double check the numbers but Turbo Tax reported that I made about 5 times the average 27 year old in Oregon. What I've noticed is that there is a huge inequality gap among millennials as well, a lot of millennials have crushing debt and poor job prospects yes -- but others get a job at FAANG at 21. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out as millennials age.

downrightmike 8y ago
What will happen is those that have better options will have kids. Similar to why there are so many people with last names of miller or smith. Both trades were protected to a point by not going to war and having the means to have kids. If we still went with our father's trades as last names, the next generation would probably be full (relatively) of Jane and Joe Engineer.
loraa 8y ago
When it comes to that inequality, parents play a huge role as well. I had friends growing up whose parents paid all their bills, bought their car, bought their condo, gave them an 'allowance', so when everything is free for you, and you never have to stress. It makes life easier.

rwmj 8y ago

This is related to the topic of this interesting book about how baby boomers stole resources from their own children (although obviously the supposed cause is quite different from the article): https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pinch-Boomers-Childrens-Future-Should/dp/1848872321 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pinch-Boomers-Childrens-Future-Shou...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

loraa 8y ago

You want to upset a millennial? Tell them as a gen-xer that you had a summer job when you were a teen, worked throughout university, your first car was used, beat up, and not a BMW/Audi or Mercedes. let them know you never paid $3000 for a winter coat or $1500 for a cell phone. Tell them about that time you got out of school, rented an apartment, save up bought a condo, and then bought a house after getting married.. Oh man... how reality and the truth is upsetting. Health care is crazy and Student loans are crazy.. but do you really want to pay a student loan for a degree in a SJW subject with no potential, or a health care plan for anxiety medication because you're triggered by Twitter too often.. I really think the major problem is the incredible sense of entitlement.

RhysU 8y ago

The income and wealth plots seem misleading... No one has been aged 25-34 for nearly 30 years. And 65+ life expectancy has gone up.