The graph was posted on X by Brian Portnoy
This not only matches the stereotype every other generation has of Millennials (by convention, those born 1981-1996*), it wildly exceeds it. One looks at it and thinks "Okay, even if that is based on some real and accurate truth, there must be something wrong with this number."
I offer the following as a possibility: it is not that their expectation of what they should and will be paid that is that far out of whack - though I would bet it is considerable - it is their definition of feel happy that is askew. It simply must include the idea that it is a condition of having no stress or worries about anything. Without that utter calm, there is no happiness. This has never been anything like the definition of happiness in any society. There have always been individuals who feel this way, but they are few.
People in my generation and after tended to develop the idea that they should have no suffering, and that would prevent happiness, but even then stress, worry, and uncertainty were expected, and one had to learn to be happy in spite of them. Prior to that, I think most (not all) people expected that some suffering was going to come their way sometime, and happiness would consist of dealing with that.
This topic is fertile without me adding in any extra bits, but I can't help but relate this to the difficulty of Christian witness in our society. People are no longer looking for a way of dealing with suffering - it is completely unfair that it exists in their lives at all! Nor even a way to deal with stress and disappointment. They are increasingly looking for a way to have none of it.
Does it really take only two generations for this to happen?
*That would put Sons #2-5 in that generation, though the oldest (1983) is on the edge and has a personality that expects bad things, #3-4 were born in communist Transylvania to abusive and neglectful parents and don't fit the American norm entirely, and #5 (1996) may belong more to the next generation.
8 comments:
Z, X, and Boomer all are pretty much the same.
That's a pretty wide range--all our kids fit in it--and that militates against my proposal, but here it is anyway: kids picked up on a pop culture reference for income and use that. That would manifest as a spike way out on the right in the histogram of "minimum for happiness" income for the M's.
There might be something like that in all of the distributions--"A million a year" is a nice round number that comes readily to mind.
Think they're adjusting for expected inflations?
They are increasingly looking for a way to have none of it.
Rather than even consider exploring spiritual answers to mental wellbeing, they seem to often turn to comfort dogs, comfort monkeys, comfort llamas or what have you. Or maybe comfort incomes?
If they're adjusting for inflation, I suspect they're low-balling it. There's a lot of federal debt they're going to have to inflate away.
Yes, James is right. Another issue is that they're focused on "income," which is taxable, rather than wealth which is somewhat less so and somewhat more inflation-resistant. You can choose when to realize a capital gain, for example, or when to sell real estate; and you'll sell it for current-inflation-adjusted dollars (or whatever replaces the dollar).
In terms of housing, until the recent rise, the price was a little better for them compared to incomes versus cost in the 1980s. Everyone has the impression that this is not so, that prices have been much higher in the 21st C, but tyhat is only the last few years.
Having bought a house in 1977 and 1986, I recall those things well.
As a millennial, I rather enjoyed the Atlantic piece on the myth of the broke millennial:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/millennial-generation-financial-issues-income-homeowners/673485/
Every generation has challenges, and I do think millennials have been fed a narrative that they are uniquely more challenged than others. Maybe every generation is, seems like a lucrative message. But it seems like looking at what we have that other generations didn’t is a valuable exercise as well. I’m always humbled when I see charts on the economic conditions in the late 70s/early 80s and recognize what my own parents faced when they were setting up their lives.
Hmm. Where's that graph of student debt, and how does it overlay, one wonders.....
Post a Comment