
Millennials earn 20% less than Boomers did at same stage of life - micaeloliveira
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/01/13/millennials-falling-behind-boomer-parents/96530338/
======
anguswithgusto
I'm surprised at how much flack this article is getting here on HN. Is it
because we're all making those sweet 1% salaries in tech?

All my non-tech/finance friends are paying obscenely high rent, crippled with
student debt, can't afford houses, can't afford cars, and three times as
educated as their parents, but paid less than their parents were. In the case
of unpaid internships (unavoidable for lots of industries, especially in the
arts and media), many aren't being paid at all.

I think there are some possible cultural reasons (our generation being, on a
whole I think, a bit less materialistic and not as motivated to work hard,
boring, financially-rewarding jobs [like accounting] and more likely to want
those sexy art, media, and non-profit jobs.) But overall I think the Boomers
have dealt a real bum hand to their children.

~~~
Mikeb85
> Is it because we're all making those sweet 1% salaries in tech?

Probably. People need to realise it's not the normal state of affairs, nor
will it last forever.

Where I live, everyone was making 6 figure salaries out of school working for
oil companies. Now unemployment is over 10%, and every single person my age
who worked for an oil company was laid off, most are back to being bartenders
and servers with no future in sight. Many are in tons of debt, a few on the
verge of declaring bankruptcy now that they have a car/house/whatever they
can't afford anymore.

When you look at economies in the western world as a whole (take out a few
boom towns), it's pretty dreary for our generation (I'm on the upper end of
what's considered a 'millennial'). Globalism and automation have decimated
entire industries, where jobs still exist wages are being driven downward,
inequality is increasing, leaving the 'working class' to struggle.

We'll survive, but the future won't look like the past, we'll have a lot less
than our parents did (comparatively speaking). No single salary supporting an
entire family with 2 vehicles and a single-family home. More like dual income,
0.5 vehicles and a tiny condo.

It's not the apocalypse, but people need to start listening to economists,
open their eyes, and boomers need to take responsibility for the shit-show
they've created.

Also, as an aside, every single left-wing party in the world right now needs
to take a hard look at their policies. It's no longer good enough to be barely
right of centre, and support a token progressive cause. Right-wingers want to
fix the job situation by destroying globalism, putting up tariffs, and strong-
arming companies into bringing jobs back. And you know what, it'll work. It's
sound policy economically, in a game theory "fuck you, I've got mine" sort of
way, though far from progressive and won't build a better world. If left-
wingers ever want to realise their vision, it won't be by crying over straw-
men (Russians, Nazi frogs, etc...), they need to become truly progressive
economically. This means guaranteed income, an end to our lottery society. But
right now, the left doesn't have answers (well, they do, but not the political
willpower). The right does, and all across the western world nationalist
governments are going to pop up. The writing's on the wall.

~~~
MicroBerto
Given the energy policies our President is going to be taking, I'm willing to
bet your friends in oil will be employed within two years. We'll see, but
there's quite a bit of excitement with my chemical engineering friends.

~~~
Mikeb85
I'm not so optimistic. I live in Alberta, Canada, and we have a few things
going against us. For one, not much conventional oil. The cost of extracting
oil from bitumen is still very high. Second, most of the lost jobs have been
white collar jobs in Calgary (2016 was far worse than 2015, and 2017 is
looking dismal). Oil companies have packed up and left town altogether.
They're not coming back, because why would they? They're all massive
multinationals, wound down operations, and can administer whatever activities
they engage in from their offices abroad. So in the case of our city, a slight
oil 'comeback' won't help us. Trump's policies won't help us. Even though oil
prices have stabilised and drilling is resuming in many places, companies are
still laying people off here and commercial vacancy is still increasing.

~~~
MicroBerto
Ahhh, my bad, I didn't dig enough to see that you were Canadian. If Trump's
policies "work" with respect to employment, you may certainly see similar
dominos fall. TBD of course.

~~~
Mikeb85
No worries. As far as Trump's policies go, I think they'll work well enough
domestically. Not too long ago, tariffs and deregulation were fairly orthodox
economic policies.

And his pro-pipeline stance will be good for Canada, though for Alberta macro
issues affect us more than any policy issues.

------
speeder
Note that even in countries where the absolute amount of money is better, the
stuff on this article still applies.

I am from Brazil, and many boomers told me when I was young how awesome I was
to be young, because I was living in a golden age where I didn't had to walk
uphill both ways to school, could have computer, and whatnot.

But it is me that envy them now, I am 29, have zero income, lots of debt, and
own no assets (not even a bicycle).

The same applies to almost all my friends and aquaintances, and even so, the
"almost" is because one of them is an absolute exception (he was already rich,
and made a hit game, his game is probably on top20 most sold on Steam right
now...), and some of the humble and smart ones decided to ignore the "adults"
advice, don't go to college and deliberately choose professions seen in bad
light in the social sense (construction, plumbing, car mechanic, CNC operator,
security guard...)

The few friends I have that have families, did it by accident (ie: accidental
pregnancy), and all of them are unemployed, and their spouses (when they
actually have one, some are single parents) are unemployed too, the "least
worse" couple are the ones that have moderately rich parents, and they have
both sides of the family giving their child the stuff the child needs.

And the thing is, although this is mostly about my country (Brazil), I have
lots of friends outside Brazil too, that are also in this situation, one guy I
know is an absolute crazy coding genius (And his game is rumored to have
inspired No Man's Sky) and he is 40, and also childless, and own only a very
old (20+ years I think) car, I have some Canadian friends also with problems
like that, I know people that worked in AAA game studios around the planet and
still failed to make enough money to pay student debts and start a family.

To be honest, the situation just feel hopeless, sometimes I get myself with
the intruding unwanted thought of wishing someone would start WWIII just to
see if at least life would be less boring. And from what I am seeing in the
"mood" in social media and elections worldwide, I am not alone in this...

~~~
freshhawk
> I get myself with the intruding unwanted thought of wishing someone would
> start WWIII just to see if at least life would be less boring.

That is a damn good description of why accelerationists are gaining
popularity. I think a lot of the alt-right obsession comes from this as well.

~~~
Mikeb85
> I think a lot of the alt-right obsession comes from this as well.

Ironically the alt-right seems to be anti-war (at least when it comes to war
with other superpowers, namely Russia), but there is definitely nihilistic
tendencies within the movement. Sort of a "globalism sucks, so let's kill it
with fire" thing...

------
ChuckMcM
I cannot say I'm very impressed with the article. I could pick out a number of
millenials who are doing better than their parents at the same age. But I
wouldn't use that to argue that everything is okay.

One thing that has stuck out at me has been the ways in which people have
money drained from them. I think there is a huge student loan problem where
young people were "sold" a crappy education. But setting that aside for the
moment there is a huge difference in lifestyle that I see in people; going out
to eat more, paying for basic entertainment, communication charges, credit,
and transportation.

Something that seems to be missed on people is that debt is very corrosive to
your future wealth. People who carry a balance on a credit card, month after
month, may feel like its "okay" because they always have enough to at least
pay the minimum but it isn't. When they don't take the time to each bag
lunches, breakfast and dinner at home they are sending more of their money out
into the world and out of their future. When the world tells them every car
has to have backup cameras it means they are going to have bigger car
payments. Coffee habits, in app purchases, cable TV instead of free over the
air TV.

Some people budget badly, some don't. But before you slam an entire
"generation" I think it makes sense to look a bit deeper at the forces at
play.

~~~
closeparen
_You_ are slamming an entire generation by claiming that the problem is
spending irresponsibly on frivolous things. I don't blame you - it must feel
great to feel that the problems of the world are rooted in others being less
virtuous than you.

The trouble is, my generation faces lower real wages and higher housing costs,
and those effects are so large that Starbucks habits are basically noise in
comparison.

That narrative doesn't pat you on the back for your superior discipline, so
you're not impresssed with it, and you pivot to anecdata about the moral
weakness of kids these days.

~~~
echlebek
Millennial here. I just got the property assessment notice on my modest 1
bedroom condo. The "value" of it has gone up by $200,000 (around 30%) in the
last two years according to the assessment office. So I can expect a nice fat
tax bill later this year.

The boomer generation, in full control of politics my entire adult life and
for the foreseeable future, has made real estate in my city into a ponzi
scheme, and I don't ever expect to live in a house here.

What I can expect is to shoulder the tax burden of a large population of
people who have not saved nearly enough for retirement, are leveraged against
their massively overpriced properties, and are projected to live for a very,
very long time. And the data shows that quite clearly.

> Between 1982 and 2010, mortgage debt grew from $99 billion to $994 billion
> (in current dollars), while consumer debt increased from $48 billion to $460
> billion. [1]

> The average market value of an owned dwelling quadrupled, from $71,800 to
> $303,500 (current dollars) between 1982 and 2008. [1]

> The indebtedness of Canadian households increased from $147 billion in 1982
> to $1,454 billion by 2010—in current dollars. [1]

> More than 1.5 million families who have a main provider between 45 and 64
> had no private pension savings in 1999, the agency reported Friday. These
> households will have to rely almost solely on public retirement plans Old
> Age Security and the Canada or Quebec Pension Plans. [2]

[1]
[http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2011002/article/11429-...](http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2011002/article/11429-eng.htm)
[2] [http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/many-not-saving-enough-for-
ret...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/many-not-saving-enough-for-retirement-
statscan-1.270403)

~~~
jknoepfler
I'm sorry, did you just complain about making 30% ROI on $200k over two years?
Oh no, your tax burden.

~~~
EliRivers
This is nonsensical. I have to pay that extra tax NOW. That's _real_ money
that I have to pay out. An extra 30% on something I nominally own? That's not
real. I can't pay the taxes with that. What should I do to get that extra 30%?
Take out an extra mortgage on that alleged increase in house value? Sell it
and move to a worse house in a worse neighbourhood, somewhere I don't really
want to live that I can still afford the taxes?

I bought a house that I wanted to live in, that I could afford the taxes on,
and now I can't afford the taxes through no fault of my own. There is no
solace to be taken in the fact that if I sold it, I might get 30% more than I
paid. I don't _want_ the money. If I wanted the money, I wouldn't have bought
the house to live in, in the first place. I _want_ what I bought two years
ago; the house I could afford to live in. 30% increase in alleged value is of
no use to me, and it's costing me money.

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
That is exactly the kind of thinking that brought Prop 13 to California back
in the 70s.

~~~
EliRivers
The thinking is fine. The thinking is identifying a problem. Prop 13 was
wrongfooted and created a new set of problems. We shouldn't ignore a problem
just because someone else once royally screwed up a solution to it.

------
gnerix
The boomers inherited the only advanced country in the world that hadn't had
its industrial capacity reduced to rubble over the course of two world wars.
The US was the only manufacturing supplier left, so naturally every working
age adult had a wealth of employment opportunities. Another way to look at the
plight of the millennials (full disclosure, I'm a millennial) is "hurray,
society hasn't faced a major setback in the form of a catastrophic global war
in 80 years!"

~~~
hibikir
The situation is not just unique to the US though: Many countries which had
their industrial capacity reduced to rubble are still in the exact same boat:
People that started working in the 50s 60s and 70s did a lot better
comparatively than those that started after 2000. The 50s were far less happy
in Europe than in the US, but there was just so much progress to be made that
hit everyone. A big part of it was also population growth.

There's plenty of progress to be made in this decade, but a much smaller
percentage of the population is part of this boom: Even for those of us that
saw the dot com boom, tech is a picnic.

I look at the outcomes of people that went into science, for instance, and I
see them against a wall of tenured professors that will not retire, and an
industry that has less demand than there's supply. Those that just picked the
wrong major in college are struggling, and those that didn't even go to
college, even more so. The only ones ahead of their parents went to tech or
got a career by using their connections as a stepping ladder: It's easy to do
well in law when daddy makes you partner, stays a few more years and then
retires.

As a society, we have to do our best to avoid becoming Brazil, and find ways
to improve total outcomes. Having a small group of people that make a whole
lot of money, and who give their advantage to the next generation, while a lot
of people have worse outcomes than their parents is not exactly a recipe for a
happy, peaceful society.

~~~
candiodari
I like how you've identified what the key difference is.

Demand-limited. Not supply limited like we have been for the past 60 years.

I think it applies to more than just academic jobs though. Oil. Cars. Fridges.
Laptops. Computers. Dolls. For all of it demand limits seem to be the problem.

------
saosebastiao
Now throw in the fact that we:

1) have much higher housing costs, due to housing policies created by boomers

2) have much higher out of pocket education costs, due to education policies
created by boomers

3) have much higher out of pocket health care costs, due to health care
policies created by boomers

4) have much higher payroll taxes due to social security raiding and general
mismanagement by boomers

5) have much higher sales taxes due to erosion of property tax revenues from
policies created by boomers

6) have much higher future income taxes due to decades of deficits from
policies created by boomers.

And they after they are done FUBAR-ing us, they call _us_ entitled for wanting
reform.

~~~
maxerickson
Social Security tax rates haven't increased a lot since 1984.

The maximum income they apply to has increased since then though:

[https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/policybriefs/pb2011-02.html](https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/policybriefs/pb2011-02.html)

(using the inflation adjusted numbers, 20-25%)

I'm not real sure what you mean by _social security raiding_. Of course the
government has borrowed and spent much of the Social Security trust fund, but
this has little bearing on the future of Social Security, as the borrowing has
been fully accounted for. Some future government could decide not to pay the
money back, but they would be responsible for that, not the government that
borrowed the money.

~~~
saosebastiao
If I take out a loan from a bank, _I_ am the one who benefits from the loan,
and _I_ am the one that pays it back. But if you borrow from social security,
the benficiary and the payee are not the same person, or even the same
generation of people. One generation benefits, the next is on the hook to pay.

And that is exactly what happened. Boomers borrowed from social security
because they weren't willing to raise taxes on themselves. They promised to
pay it back using Millenials' taxes. They got the benefits, we got the debt.

~~~
maxerickson
Oh sure, the debt is not good for the future but in that sense it doesn't
matter a great deal who they borrowed from.

------
tomohawk
A boomer I know bought a house right out of college. He graduated with a civil
engineering degree. The house cost twice what his salary was as a brand new
CE. The house is recognizable today as a standard split foyer.

College for me (in the 80s) was still fairly inexpensive compared to now, but
when I graduated with an EE degree, houses started at 4x or more than what I
made.

I see millenials taking higher risks with their housing. Instead of living in
the burbs, they're in the city where they get the crime and no decent schools
discount. I often see them head for the burbs after getting mugged or when
they have kids that need to go to school. But by that time, they're more
established and can afford it. Or, they live way out in the boonies and
commute.

And now, even the good jobs are being offshored via H1B, paid for by our tax
dollars.

~~~
cobookman
> College for me (in the 80s) was still fairly inexpensive compared to now,
> but when I graduated with an EE degree, houses started at 4x or more than
> what I made.

In silicon valley housed started at around 10x what I made starting out of
college.

I'll mention that more millennials should consider leaving to live in non 1st
class cities. Just look at atlanta vs sf ([https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-
living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...](https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-
living/compare_cities.jsp?country1=United+States&city1=Atlanta%2C+GA&country2=United+States&city2=San+Francisco%2C+CA)).
I can tell you that SF wages are not 1.8x ATL's.

------
paulddraper
There're also _more_ of them working too. Because women work nowadays.

~~~
yasp
Yes. Most two parent families require both parents to work, whereas in the
past most middle class families required only one parent to work while the
other would take care of the children. "progress"

------
shoefly
Most of them went into the workforce when the Great recession hit.

The ability to write off a student loan as a bankruptcy was removed in 2005.
While part of this law has been thrown out, many people are still stuck as
indentured servants to the loan sharks.

Housing is insane... around here in the bay area, but from the older people
I've chatted with, it was always a tough market. Now, if you moved to my
hometown, you could get a beautiful home for $200k.

------
astrostl
Income in a vacuum isn't all that useful a metric. What matters more is what
you can do with it, leading to what matters most: your actual quality of life.

Without feeling compelled to do a deep analysis, taking a 20% hit in exchange
for, say, being able to afford broadband and a smartphone/notebook to use it
is a deal I'd make all day.

------
malandrew
Did they control for education attained and area of study in
college/university?

------
corndoge
I can't find the link to the study in the article, I must have missed it.

------
Altay-
More people go to college today so we're 4 years later into the labor force.

This will only mean something when we hit prime working age for millennials.
Let's see the numbers then.

~~~
untog
Shouldn't college get you a higher salary? If all it does is delay your
earning potential for four years why would anyone do it?

~~~
jdavis703
If for no for no other reason, to become more knowledgeable. I have to be
honest, the only reason I went to university was because I could do that or
try to find a job during the Great Recession with only a highschool diploma.
Wouldn't it be great if college was for people who genuinely wanted to learn
information, and not just buy a $20,000 employment certificate?

------
snarfy
There is no mention of purchasing power. My hunch is it's even worse than the
20% less income.

~~~
thisnotmyacc
I reckon you'd be wrong.

It cost $1,000,000,000 to own a computer for baby boomers. I have (depending
on how you count) between 3 (PCs - 2 mac and a Windows), and 11 (3 PCs, 2
phones, 2 console, an appleTV, 2 iPads and a Kindle).

That was impossible for my parents, heck for 18 year old me.

People think life is harder now because the equations of life are:

* Happiness = Reality - Expectation. * Success = MAXIMUM_POSSIBLE_WE_ARE_EXPOSED_TO - what I achieve.

Most people expect a lot these days, and get slightly less and as a result are
miserable.

On top of that, MAXIMUM_POSSIBLE_WE_ARE_EXPOSED_TO has increased, as we have
more means of communication.

In mathematical terms, the gap between the each of these values of a good
life: 1\. The absolute highest possible value 2\. The MEAN existence. 3\. The
MEDIAN existence

is increasing. In 1970, there were lots of limits. Today, you can be a YouTube
star at home. As some people have it really good, this bumps the maximum and
mean values, whereas the median hasn't moved as much since 1970l even though
it has increased.

As examples, there are people like Casey Neistat and various Vloggers that
live seemingly great lives. There are pro skaters, pro-surfers, musicians,
actors, and then the tech billionaires. There are digital nomads, off-the-
griders and other niche communties, and I'm sitting here reading Hacker news.

But that is BECAUSE we have just so many more options today. We also live in a
world where the possibilities are vast - from travel (I have been to every
continent except Antarctica), to work (so many more jobs in niche areas), to
lifestyle, range of hobbies, foods available (baby boomers thought Pizza and
pasta where exotic), even better COFFEE.

As there is so much possible, and the hours in week has remained static, we
all fall short of the MAXIMUM_POSSIBLE_WE_ARE_EXPOSED_TO by a very long
margin. No one is eating enough new or interesting foods, has enough cool
hobbies they get paid for, plays enough games, has enough sex or spare time or
earns Zuckerberg money - and by no one I mean no one person can ever achieve
all of those things at once, so when we compare someone else's 100% dedication
to our 0.1%, we feel inadequate.

But man, what a world! I am in Australia, writing a response to a person who
commented on a system hosted in the USA that was impossible in 1970, using a
pocket computer I use to communicate with literally the WORLD, about an
article published in USA Today today (well, in some ways technically yesterday
as I am a day in front of the west coast of the USA) that would never have
reached my country in 1970. What is that worth? Certainly not nothing, even if
many people deluded believe they would rather the 3 bedroom house in 1970
without a computer, air conditioning or the internet, not to mention the raft
of socially limiting conditions.

Rant over!

~~~
pikachuisntcool
> As examples, there are people like Casey Neistat and various Vloggers that
> live seemingly great lives.

What seemingly great times we live in indeed.

------
RichardHeart
Hey at least house prices are rising though amirite?

------
ArkyBeagle
How do you compare these things? "The same stage of life" comes successively
later in every generation.

~~~
ElectronCharge
That is only because of bad parenting really. Discuss...

~~~
chc
Alternatively, it could be because of increasing lifespans and ballooning
educational requirements for the average job.

~~~
ArkyBeagle
It's because the barrier to entry into employment rises because the overall
productive sector is - despite all the horror stories - quite effective at
producing. They don't really need your help.

My father, born in 1930, had to perform manual labor on farms because that was
how stuff got produced. There was no barrier to entry. He then worked until
retirement on mechanical phone switches, which are now beyond obsolete.

------
ry4n413
[http://i3.kym-
cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/489/946/057...](http://i3.kym-
cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/489/946/057.gif)

------
soared
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/millennials-to-
sna...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/millennials-to-snake-
peop/jhkibealmjkbkafogihpeidfcgnigmlf?hl=en-US)

~~~
sean_patel
I don't get it. Why are you calling my generation 'Snake People'? Please
explain yourself.

~~~
positr0n
I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but many people feel that
"millennials" is an overused term in the media by journalists that either
don't have a deep grasp of the subject or are just trying to get clicks. Or
that it's stupid to divide people into arbitrary generations then assign them
a bunch of personality characteristics. Etc Etc.

Similar to how "the cloud" is used so often it is just a meaningless buzzword.
You've probably heard of the cloud-to-butt extension[0]. This is its less-
famous sibling.

[0]: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cloud-to-butt-
plus...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cloud-to-butt-
plus/apmlngnhgbnjpajelfkmabhkfapgnoai?hl=en)

------
tmuir
In other news: when you look at a complex, multidimensional problem on a
single, linear axis, you arrive at misguided conclusions.

~~~
ElectronCharge
The "complex, multidimensional problem on a single, linear axis" is the
economy - mismanagement of same over the last eight years results in where
we're at. It should improve going forward... :-)

~~~
untog
Given the state of the economy in 2008, I think we're going to need to back a
little more than eight years I'm afraid.

------
elmerfud
Millennials prioritize entertainment and free time more than boomers as well.
Millennials also start families later in life.

These are the values boomers taught that money doesn't buy happiness. So this
is not really shocking to see that they are not in the same place monetarily.

I would view this is at least some measure of success. The boomers were able
to teach a value system they believed was better than their life.

~~~
throwaway2016a
Anecdotally, most millenials I know who are waiting to start a family are
doing it because they can't afford to, not by chose.

~~~
elmerfud
All the comments show my point. These are the values that were taught by the
boomers. Ask a boomer, were they ready for a family when they got one? No, but
it was the thing to do, so they did it, made it work, and life was hard. Go
back and look at the old childhood photos and you'll see what I mean. These
people clearly weren't ready for kids in our modern sense of being ready.

This is a quite complex subject, but the simple view is priorities. There is a
priority of short term thinking with millennials focused around instant
gratification. That's not to say that it's wrong but it is a priority which
has and effect on how life plays out. An easy example of this is how
everything is described as a "hack" and not a "grind".

Boomers, whether they knew it or not, were more long term focused. Part of it
was a function of the world of the time. You had to wait for the Sears
catalogue to come in the mail. You don't have a credit card so you make
layaway payments etc... You just had to focus farther out. They scarified a
lot of short term and gained a long term benefit.

Sadly most, including this article, equate education with motivation. It's not
the same thing. Going to college because you don't know what to do next and
mom says go doesn't mean that the education will give you a leg up in life.

~~~
candiodari
Do you think a focus on instant gratification is anything new ? I mean you
clearly do, but it seems such a weird point to make.

~~~
tmuir
The internet has shown us how wonderful instant access to the world's
information can be, and we've decided that everything is better with internet.
Its an extremely coherent point to make, in my opinion.

