Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 394 posts

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#61

Post by jobu »

rhino369 wrote: post #40
djb_hackernews wrote: post #10

Compound that with the percentage of income 30 year olds spend on housing, education, health care and child care compared to their parents and we have a recipe for disaster.

The cherry on top is that our parents generation, who made more and had access to cheaper house, education, healthcare, etc., still barely saved for retirement. Unless, god forbid, your parents drop dead early, we are going to be stuck supporting them for a long time.

Maybe we should hope for more declines in life-expectancy then:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-li...

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#63

Post by godelski »

matchagaucho wrote: post #29
hajile wrote: post #14

About half earn more, about half earn less. Wouldn't that imply that the average earnings are about the same? If so, I don't know that I'd complain because that indicates stability.

Yeah, the title seems sensationalized relative to the actual data. It looks like a stable regression towards the mean.

Was the title changed? Says "Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds Earn More Than Their Parents". Which is exactly what the article talks about...

Though earning more than your parents was part of the American dream.

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#64

Post by x1798DE »

____nope wrote: post #47

It's really frustrating that articles like this never state if they are comparing inflation-adjusted numbers or not.

If they weren't using inflation-adjusted numbers, I'm pretty sure that would be MUCH bigger news. Assuming people have their kids at 25, that would mean, in inflation adjusted terms, that would correspond to a 40% DROP in inter-generational income for the population mentioned here.

Just assume that all newspaper headlines will use the version that maximizes sensationalism.

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#65

Post by rhino369 »

crdoconnor wrote: post #58
rhino369 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cherry on top is that our parents generation, who made more and had access to cheaper house, education, healthcare, etc., still barely saved for retirement. Unless, god forbid, your parents drop dead early, we are going to be stuck supporting them for a long time.

If the 0.1% can successfully convince people to blame their grandparents and magical robots for stealing all of the country's wealth then this trend is likely to continue.

It's not their fault we make less, but they should have personal responsibility for their own retirement, especially since the massive amount of growth in housing value and the stockmarket over their lifetime.

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#66

Post by cnnsucks »

This is WSJ red meat political controversy stuff. The story devolves into the usual "tax the rich" and anti-welfare state debate as any other political click-bait. I thought HN wasn't doing that for a week...

I actually agree with the premise and many of the conclusions, and if it popped up on Drudge or Breitbart or whatever I'd be fine with it, but why here? Why must every popular site devolve into either a virtual political cage match or another addition to the echo chamber?

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#67

Post by branchless »

djb_hackernews wrote: post #10

Compound that with the percentage of income 30 year olds spend on housing, education, health care and child care compared to their parents and we have a recipe for disaster.

Hacker news says: become a landlord! Yet amazingly compsci grads can't extrapolate this out and see that it cannot work at scale.

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#68

Post by notadoc »

CodeCube wrote: post #41
notadoc wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most consumers are tapped out, bad news for a consumer driven economy. There can only be so much more debt accrued.

This feels correct, anecdotally ... but is there data to support this claim? For example, savings rates going down, credit/debt going up, and consumer spending going down?

Sure, take a look at student loan debt for one glaring example.

Or the debt-to-income ratios required to get a home today versus 30-40 years ago. Credit card debt growth, medical debt growth, saving rates declines, etc.

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#69

Post by jat850 »

____nope wrote: post #47

It's really frustrating that articles like this never state if they are comparing inflation-adjusted numbers or not.

"In our baseline analysis, we measure income in pre-tax dollars at the household level when parents and children are approximately thirty years old, adjusting for inflation using the CPI-U-RS."

It wasn't easy to spot but was mentioned.

Re: Barely Half of 30-Year-Olds in the U.S. Earn More Than Their Parents Did at 30

#70

Post by kefka »

Well. I guess the "No Politics week" wasn't going to last.

This goes to the core of socialized healthcare, Social Security, Universal Basic Income, and the dismantling ofsaid systems that exist.

The Baby boomers pulled the ladder up when they climbed up, and left us all in the lurch paying for them. You know, "Get the government outta my life, but dont you dare touch my medicare".

Post reply on HN