[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The Boomers definitely had it easier when it comes to housing. They also had better job security, and they could reliably invest for retirement in their prime earning years.

But Boomers are also right that people in their 20s and 30s today in many ways enjoy a lifestyle that they could only dream about. Yes, Boomers could afford to get into the housing market at 24. That also means they were married at 23, paying a mortgage at 24, and starting a family at 25. And back in those days, before we entered a knowledge economy, wages were tethered tightly to experience. So at the time Boomers and earlier generations were starting families, they were making crap money (one of the reasons why air travel with young children was almost unheard of until recently).

Today, there are whole sectors of the economy reliant on the discretionary spending of childless 20-somethings and 30-somethings. A splurge holiday for a 24 year old used to be a ski trip to Whitefish. Now it's the Mayan Riviera. There are dozens of expensive restaurants and cocktail bars in Calgary patronized by 20-somethings and 30-somethings. Those didn't exist 25 years ago. Spending on the average wedding has tripled in the last 20 years. Destination weddings have become a thing. Dining out is far more common than it used to be.

The irony is that many of these things are affordable only because Boomer parents are supporting their kids rent-free, enabling them to spend most of their income on consumables and experiences. Before Millennials came of age, as soon as someone earned enough money to pay for a 1/2 or 1/3 share of rent in an apartment, they were out the door. Now, you have young adults earning 40-70k a year and not paying rent, bills, or groceries.

So both groups are right. Boomers had the big things in life easier due to the post-war boom. And many Millennials enjoy a lifestyle of consumption that was unthinkable 30 years ago.

Again, this isn't really borne out by the evidence. If we take the people aged 25-34 now as a proxy for millenials and compare them to the same age cohort in the early to mid '70s, the spending on the things people are talking about (alcohol, tobacco, eating out, and entertainment/travel) has actually seen a huge drop. Today's 25-34 year olds spend about 11.2% of their income on those categories. In 1972 that number was 15.6%. So as a portion of their income, young adults in the early '70s spent about 40% more on those things than they do today.

As for the millenials making $70K a year and living their parents, they make up such a small share of the population (a fraction of a percent of millenials) that they're not really relevant. True, there are more adult children living with their parents now than in the past, but that has much more to do with economic factors than it does peoples' preferences. When you combine post-secondary education being more expensive, it being far more of a requirement even for entry level jobs than in the past, the increased cost of housing, and the relative dearth of opportunities for young graduates, then it's not surprising that the rate of young adults living with their parents has increased.

As it stands, about 19.5% of people aged 25-34 live with their parents (and this is heavily skewed towards people in the 25-29 age range). Of that group, very few fit the profile people seem to be talking about:

-nearly 60% have some form of post-secondary education
-another 15% are enrolled in school
-only 44% have full time jobs
-more than 75% earn less than $30K a year
-11% have some form of disability

To me, that looks like a group that is mainly made up of people burdened with post secondary school expenses and/or debt who can't find good enough employment to live independently. This is backed up the fact that the rate of 18-34 year olds living with their parents increased by over 30% after 2008. In 2005 the rate was closer to the rate in 1975 than it is to today's.