4 ms·

> Isn't wealth _always_ more concentrated in higher age brackets? Yes. That's why the quoted factoid talks about "at this stage in their life". If you look bac

by HWR_14 5y ago

> Isn't wealth _always_ more concentrated in higher age brackets? Yes. That's why the quoted factoid talks about "at this stage in their life". If you look back at boomers and genx, they had 4 and 2 times as much wealth as millennials do when they were the same age. > I've heard of millennials not turning up for work because they "didn't feel like working" that day. Why would that matter? Even if that happens sometimes it's not like it changes things on a generational level if the lowest earners get fired slightly more often.

ghusto 5y ago
> Yes. That's why the quoted factoid talks about "at this stage in their life". If you look back at boomers and genx, they had 4 and 2 times as much wealth as millennials do when they were the same age. I missed and am continuing to completely miss this. Do you mean in the article? If true, would that align with the difference in population size (distribution of a finite amount of wealth to more people)? It would be interesting if so, because it could mean that we're in for even more interesting times when the population shrinks in 50 years. > Why would that matter? Even if that happens sometimes it's not like it changes things on a generational level if the lowest earners get fired slightly more often. True, but do they? I'm not saying they don't, but haven't seen anything to indicate they do. I've seen people get away with things that would have gotten me fired at their age, so am inclined to believe people are not getting fired more often.
- pedrosorio 5y ago
  You have failed to show any reasoning to explain how some millennials getting fired (or not getting fired, apparently, in this last comment) for being "lazy" and "not wanting to work" led that generation to having a much lower share of total wealth compared to previous generations at the same age. As the comment above you stated, the lower decile/quintile performers getting fired (or lower salaries) because of their laziness, does not explain this, because most of the wealth is accumulated by the average and higher earners anyway.
  - ghusto 5y ago
    Wut? I asked two questions, one of which was me being genuinely interested to see where I missed the assertion that millennials have "4 and 2 times as much wealth as millennials do when they were the same age". I wondered if it was in the article, because I didn't see it. If you want to talk about reasoning though, I actually did give a reason this could be the case (if indeed it really is), by suggesting it could be related to the difference in population size between when the baby boomers were around, and now.
    - civilized 5y ago
      > In 1989, when baby boomers were around the same age as millennials are today, they controlled 21% of the nation's wealth. That's almost five times as much as what millennials own today. > Many previous reports have found that millennials are, on average, worse off financially than their parents and grandparents were at the same age, despite being better educated. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-than-5percent-of-all-us-wealth.html https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-tha...
      - ghusto 5y ago
        Interesting! Now I wonder why this is. Could it be age brackets being stretched? That's just off the top of my head, but I'd be very interested to hear people who know about these kinds of things. EDIT: Probably this: https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-highest-earning-generation-less-wealthy-boomers-2021-9?international=true&r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-highest-earning-...
- HWR_14 5y ago
  > If true, would that align with the difference in population size You're quite confused. First boomers and millennials are approximately equal in size, adjusting the boomers for back when they were the same age as the millennials. GenX is smaller. Secondly, you seem to think I'm using averages. I'm not. The boomer generation had 4x as much wealth distributed over a similar size generation when they were as old as millennials. The GenX generation had twice as much wealth distributed over a population that was smaller. > so am inclined to believe people are not getting fired more often. If people aren't getting fired more often, what difference does your discussion about people calling in sick matter?
jjav 5y ago
> If you look back at boomers and genx, they had 4 and 2 times as much wealth as millennials do when they were the same age. Any links to show this? It feels like now is the golden age to enter employment, at least in technical fields. Starting salaries and total comp are through the roof, so anyone having graduated recently can jump start their earnings in their 20s at a very high level. Adjusted for inflation, I've hired new graduates at salaries 3x what my starting salary was (again, adjusted for inflation). Back a few decades ago tech was just another professional job, salaries were ok but nothing like the incredible numbers of today.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  You're confusing income and wealth. And also the people earning the most money in a generation with the average. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-than-5percent-of-all-us-wealth.html https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-tha...
  - jjav 5y ago
    > You're confusing income and wealth. No, no confusion. You need income to start building wealth (unless you just inherit it). More specifically, you need enough income over and above the necessities of life, so you can start saving and investing all the extra, in order to build wealth. Time is your friend in investing, so the earlier you can get started the more wealth will grow. If one can start with an extremely high salary out of school in your early 20s, that gives the opportunity to save a lot and invest it early in life, apply some F.I.R.E. and suddenly the idea of being able to retire before 40 is realistic.

by HWR_14 5y ago

ghusto 5y ago

> Yes. That's why the quoted factoid talks about "at this stage in their life". If you look back at boomers and genx, they had 4 and 2 times as much wealth as millennials do when they were the same age. I missed and am continuing to completely miss this. Do you mean in the article? If true, would that align with the difference in population size (distribution of a finite amount of wealth to more people)? It would be interesting if so, because it could mean that we're in for even more interesting times when the population shrinks in 50 years. > Why would that matter? Even if that happens sometimes it's not like it changes things on a generational level if the lowest earners get fired slightly more often. True, but do they? I'm not saying they don't, but haven't seen anything to indicate they do. I've seen people get away with things that would have gotten me fired at their age, so am inclined to believe people are not getting fired more often.

pedrosorio 5y ago
You have failed to show any reasoning to explain how some millennials getting fired (or not getting fired, apparently, in this last comment) for being "lazy" and "not wanting to work" led that generation to having a much lower share of total wealth compared to previous generations at the same age. As the comment above you stated, the lower decile/quintile performers getting fired (or lower salaries) because of their laziness, does not explain this, because most of the wealth is accumulated by the average and higher earners anyway.
- ghusto 5y ago
  Wut? I asked two questions, one of which was me being genuinely interested to see where I missed the assertion that millennials have "4 and 2 times as much wealth as millennials do when they were the same age". I wondered if it was in the article, because I didn't see it. If you want to talk about reasoning though, I actually did give a reason this could be the case (if indeed it really is), by suggesting it could be related to the difference in population size between when the baby boomers were around, and now.
  - civilized 5y ago
    > In 1989, when baby boomers were around the same age as millennials are today, they controlled 21% of the nation's wealth. That's almost five times as much as what millennials own today. > Many previous reports have found that millennials are, on average, worse off financially than their parents and grandparents were at the same age, despite being better educated. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-than-5percent-of-all-us-wealth.html https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-tha...
    - ghusto 5y ago
      Interesting! Now I wonder why this is. Could it be age brackets being stretched? That's just off the top of my head, but I'd be very interested to hear people who know about these kinds of things. EDIT: Probably this: https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-highest-earning-generation-less-wealthy-boomers-2021-9?international=true&r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-highest-earning-...
HWR_14 5y ago
> If true, would that align with the difference in population size You're quite confused. First boomers and millennials are approximately equal in size, adjusting the boomers for back when they were the same age as the millennials. GenX is smaller. Secondly, you seem to think I'm using averages. I'm not. The boomer generation had 4x as much wealth distributed over a similar size generation when they were as old as millennials. The GenX generation had twice as much wealth distributed over a population that was smaller. > so am inclined to believe people are not getting fired more often. If people aren't getting fired more often, what difference does your discussion about people calling in sick matter?

jjav 5y ago

> If you look back at boomers and genx, they had 4 and 2 times as much wealth as millennials do when they were the same age. Any links to show this? It feels like now is the golden age to enter employment, at least in technical fields. Starting salaries and total comp are through the roof, so anyone having graduated recently can jump start their earnings in their 20s at a very high level. Adjusted for inflation, I've hired new graduates at salaries 3x what my starting salary was (again, adjusted for inflation). Back a few decades ago tech was just another professional job, salaries were ok but nothing like the incredible numbers of today.

HWR_14 5y ago
You're confusing income and wealth. And also the people earning the most money in a generation with the average. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-than-5percent-of-all-us-wealth.html https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/09/millennials-own-less-tha...
- jjav 5y ago
  > You're confusing income and wealth. No, no confusion. You need income to start building wealth (unless you just inherit it). More specifically, you need enough income over and above the necessities of life, so you can start saving and investing all the extra, in order to build wealth. Time is your friend in investing, so the earlier you can get started the more wealth will grow. If one can start with an extremely high salary out of school in your early 20s, that gives the opportunity to save a lot and invest it early in life, apply some F.I.R.E. and suddenly the idea of being able to retire before 40 is realistic.