4 ms·

> Someone in their 60s is supposed to be doing better than someone in their 20s. That’s an incredibly new, and probably temporary, phenomenon. Across the vast

> Someone in their 60s is supposed to be doing better than someone in their 20s. That’s an incredibly new, and probably temporary, phenomenon. Across the vast majority of space-time the non-working elderly are poorer than their still working children and rely on them. As late as the Greatest Generation senior discounts weren’t a sick joke.

al_borland 3mo ago
The barrier to entry for investments used to be pretty high. Most people felt limited to what their employers offered. Even as access started getting easier, the knowledge was still difficult to get. Currently, the barrier to entry has never been lower, and the access to information has never been better. I don't see either of those things changing any time soon. Of course, even with that, basic financial literacy with younger generations seems to be at an all time low. The finger pointing on that could go in many directions.
- bradleyjg 3mo ago
  Yes, the finger pointing can and does go in many directions. Meanwhile the observed pattern is the boomers (actual boomers) get the golden path and every other generation doesn’t. Maybe they were uniquely virtuous and wise. Strongly doubt the xennials will be as rich in twenty five years as 70 year olds are now.
  - bryanlarsen 3mo ago
    I'd definitely take the other side of that bet. Xennials are significantly richer today than boomers were 25 years ago, generally own their house and have a 401K or similar. Xennials have benefitted from the same forces that made the boomers rich. They're not young adults. Xennials were at prime house buying age when houses were really cheap after the 2008 housing crash.
    - bradleyjg 3mo ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case-Shiller_index#/media/File:Case-Shiller_Index,_1890-8.2025.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case-Shiller_index#/media/File... If you bought at exactly the right second of the crash, houses were where they were at the peak of the late 80s bubble.
      - bryanlarsen 3mo ago
        Mortgage rates in the late 80s were well over double what they were post-crash. For a 25 year mortgage, twice the mortgage rate means about double the payments.
        bradleyjg 3mo ago
        That exact dynamic—-sharply appreciating house price, falling interest rates, no prepayment penalty—-allowed them to use the homes as an infinite piggy bank. Very convenient.
        bryanlarsen 3mo ago
        And xennials had access to same dynamic. Xennials houses were more expensive than boomer houses, but they were also much larger and financed more cheaply. Once you make those two adjustments, those who bought their house around the turn of the millennium were the ones who got the most value in terms of house payment as fraction of income, and who experienced the most appreciation the most quickly. And in 2000, it was Gen-X buying their first home, not boomers. (a very brief moment post-crash was even better). It's young adults that are getting screwed. Xennials are no longer young adults. P.S. I bought my first house in 2001 at the age of 28. In hindsight I got super lucky and timed it perfectly. I bought it the month I paid off my student loans, which took me ~4 years of accelerated payments.
port11 3mo ago
Yes, Things Get Better Over Time, that’s also not a new phenomenon. Even if you don’t compare against a well-off previous generation, there are 2 issues: 1) Not enough young people can contribute to make social security payments to the elderly, across most of the developed world. A typical pension in Belgium is almost comparable to a typical young person’s salary. 2) At a young age, the previous 2–3 generations could afford social mobility levers, i.e. a house and car. Note that I’m not commenting on the management, investment strategy, returns, or sustainability of social security (point 1). “Across the vast majority of space-time”, the elderly also somewhat contributed to the tribal/community needs, trained their replacements, cared for grandchildren, and so on. Oh, and everyone was poor, so the range in standard of living was reasonably tight.

al_borland 3mo ago

The barrier to entry for investments used to be pretty high. Most people felt limited to what their employers offered. Even as access started getting easier, the knowledge was still difficult to get. Currently, the barrier to entry has never been lower, and the access to information has never been better. I don't see either of those things changing any time soon. Of course, even with that, basic financial literacy with younger generations seems to be at an all time low. The finger pointing on that could go in many directions.

bradleyjg 3mo ago
Yes, the finger pointing can and does go in many directions. Meanwhile the observed pattern is the boomers (actual boomers) get the golden path and every other generation doesn’t. Maybe they were uniquely virtuous and wise. Strongly doubt the xennials will be as rich in twenty five years as 70 year olds are now.
- bryanlarsen 3mo ago
  I'd definitely take the other side of that bet. Xennials are significantly richer today than boomers were 25 years ago, generally own their house and have a 401K or similar. Xennials have benefitted from the same forces that made the boomers rich. They're not young adults. Xennials were at prime house buying age when houses were really cheap after the 2008 housing crash.
  - bradleyjg 3mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case-Shiller_index#/media/File:Case-Shiller_Index,_1890-8.2025.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case-Shiller_index#/media/File... If you bought at exactly the right second of the crash, houses were where they were at the peak of the late 80s bubble.
    - bryanlarsen 3mo ago
      Mortgage rates in the late 80s were well over double what they were post-crash. For a 25 year mortgage, twice the mortgage rate means about double the payments.
      - bradleyjg 3mo ago
        That exact dynamic—-sharply appreciating house price, falling interest rates, no prepayment penalty—-allowed them to use the homes as an infinite piggy bank. Very convenient.
        bryanlarsen 3mo ago
        And xennials had access to same dynamic. Xennials houses were more expensive than boomer houses, but they were also much larger and financed more cheaply. Once you make those two adjustments, those who bought their house around the turn of the millennium were the ones who got the most value in terms of house payment as fraction of income, and who experienced the most appreciation the most quickly. And in 2000, it was Gen-X buying their first home, not boomers. (a very brief moment post-crash was even better). It's young adults that are getting screwed. Xennials are no longer young adults. P.S. I bought my first house in 2001 at the age of 28. In hindsight I got super lucky and timed it perfectly. I bought it the month I paid off my student loans, which took me ~4 years of accelerated payments.

port11 3mo ago

Yes, Things Get Better Over Time, that’s also not a new phenomenon. Even if you don’t compare against a well-off previous generation, there are 2 issues: 1) Not enough young people can contribute to make social security payments to the elderly, across most of the developed world. A typical pension in Belgium is almost comparable to a typical young person’s salary. 2) At a young age, the previous 2–3 generations could afford social mobility levers, i.e. a house and car. Note that I’m not commenting on the management, investment strategy, returns, or sustainability of social security (point 1). “Across the vast majority of space-time”, the elderly also somewhat contributed to the tribal/community needs, trained their replacements, cared for grandchildren, and so on. Oh, and everyone was poor, so the range in standard of living was reasonably tight.