The original title of this article as I saw it was “Millennials are richer than their boomer parents. Here's why they love to complain anyway.” This line now appears as the subtitle.

I was curious what HN readers think of the idea or evidence that millennials are actually richer than boomers, since everything I hear in casual conversations is about how boomers hoarded everything and millennials are worse off, due to boomers and the subprime crisis.

I saw a comment recently that described the shift to a "consumer economy." Relative to boomers, millennials have increased access to goods and services like high-definition televisions, computers, international travel, and luxury foods (e.g., avocado toast). But in terms of wealth and assets, millennials have reduced or less feasible access to things like home ownership or college degrees (not to mention childcare or healthcare), compared to boomers. Though the causes of this shift are up for debate, it does seem that boomers had an easier path to ownership or growth, while millennials and beyond face more rent-seeking obstacles.

I think it's of course not so simple, and the abstract of the paper they refer to [0] seems to contradict the Business Insider article. Sure, inflation adjusted median income is up slightly. In addition to this educational costs have exploded, and to earn a median salary it has become necessary to buy in. People under 30 have greater inflation adjusted income, but this is because they rely more on their (boomer) parents. The overall wealth in society has increased dramatically, but the vast majority of gains are going to the outliers.

That is to say, the real conflict isn't between boomers and millennials, it's between billionaires and everyone else. But generational friction is not new, a more common experience, and easy to exploit in media.

0: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2024007pap...

I commonly see that discussions of “unemployment rate” don’t account for the ways a person can be excluded from the labor market [1]. To achieve middle-class with a family detached home mortgage, annual vacation, etc., dual-earner is nearly mandatory. Those that “give up” and live in their parent’s basement playing video games are not counted as unemployed.

[1] https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#nilf

"It's taking longer to launch, there is some more debt, but in the long run, millennials are actually doing better than Generation X and baby boomers," says Kevin Corinth, a senior fellow and deputy director of the Center for Opportunity and Social Mobility at the American Enterprise Institute and one of the paper's authors. "It's just taking them a longer time."

Not exactly the most persuasive arguement.

The most common complaint I've seen online is how far behind their parents people are. You can find meme images comparing their parents owning a home and having two kids, to them stuck in their parent's basement.

It's not that homeownership deferred until 40 "doesn't feel good". It's that we've missed out on a decade of housing security—a material condition that impacts both physical and social well-being.

It also drastically changes opportunities. Hard to get into welding or machining or smithing from an apartment. Hard to start a business when you can't take any financial risks because housing is half your take-home and you'd be risking homelessness within months.

Let's not even get into how healthcare premium are over half of what minimum rent costs in my town.

A decade or two ago I talk with a 90 year old who bought, sold and especially exchanged everything not bolted down since he was 12. He had a crappy shed he filled with all kinds of garbage/treasures. I wouldn't call it a business. He did have businesses later on but that wasn't his primary activity. He would trade some old wood stoves for goats that he traded for a boat. That's not a business model is it? He obtained one classic car that took many years to get back on the road. Not really a business? I barely knew the guy but know enough hilarious stories to fill a book. Without that shed however he wouldn't have happened.