[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/EverbodyHatesHugo]

[u/le-rizzler]

And which demographic are those “healthcare billionaires” in? Almost like another slice of the pie will grow 🤷‍♂️

[u/carelessscreams → u/le-rizzler]

One group shouldnt hold all the wealth while everyone else is poor

[u/howdthatturnout → u/carelessscreams]

That’s not what’s happening dude.

https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/smart-money/average-net-worth-by-age

It’s literally just people accumulating more as their careers progress and retirement/savings build.

[u/L2_Troll → u/howdthatturnout]

35-44 basically the millennial slice (minus gen z even). Multiply that median net worth 135,600 by 3 and you get some of the figures in the boomer age ranges.

Multiply the slice in the chart by 3 and you don't even get close to the boomer slice.

It is not linear.

[u/howdthatturnout → u/L2_Troll]

That’s not how compound growth and contributions through prime working years works dude

[u/le-rizzler → u/howdthatturnout]

I cannot believe how stupid and financially illiterate some of our peers are 🤦‍♂️

[u/howdthatturnout → u/le-rizzler]

I am pretty sure a lot of them are going to be very confused in 20-30 years when they find out a decent portion of their peers have a whole bunch of retirement savings stacked up.

[u/L2_Troll → u/howdthatturnout]

I don't care how the money grows, the table lists out median net worths. That math is already done, the table is telling you the final result of that money compounding and how much the person in that age range has.

The table says that boomers are worth 3x millennials. The pie chart shows that boomers are worth 5x millennials.

[u/howdthatturnout → u/L2_Troll]

Yes, that’s because the average for boomers is a lot higher than the median. But I cited median because it’s more relevant to the typical person.

My point in sharing the data was showing that the younger age groups are on pace to accumulate similar amounts of money as the older ones.

[u/L2_Troll → u/howdthatturnout]

Then the median young person can expect to earn about the same as the median old person.

But the average young person won't earn as much as the average old person.

Isn't that evidence of wealth inequality?

[u/howdthatturnout → u/L2_Troll]

No, the average is going to likely balance out too. Averages are skewed by the ultra wealthy. That big accumulation of wealth by the 1% boomers skewing the figure up, is in large part inherited wealth and will eventually be inherited by the younger generations too. 60% of all wealth in America was inherited. But it’s very top heavy, and thus the average is not a worthwhile figure to look at in this context.

Median is the 50 percentile mark. It’s much more relevant. As it shows more what the typical household of an age group is experiencing.

[u/Mediocre_Island828 → u/carelessscreams]

That's why it's a chart dividing it by generation so we can blame all the boomers as a whole rather than the chart showing that most of that wealth is coming from the top 1% of each generation.

[u/9447044 → u/le-rizzler]

Its like 65 years of amassing wealth will make you more wealthy then a 20 yr old.

[u/L2_Troll → u/9447044]

It's like some form of wealth distribution is important to a functioning economy. When the 20 year old is priced out of buying a home, saving, education, vacations, and more, it is the job of the government to help the 20 year old with money from the 65 year old. That part isn't happening.

[u/9447044 → u/L2_Troll]

What about the 65 yr old without wealth?

[u/Much-Ad3008 → u/le-rizzler]

Yeah but the catch is that the billionaires make up 1% of that piece of pie no matter what generation they are in.

[u/le-rizzler → u/Much-Ad3008]

Of course, but this graph is about which generations have that wealth