8 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 23.0 ms ] thread
The irony of another article about AI that appears to be written by an LLM...
First and foremost: I think HN needs a reliable way to leverage downvotes for LLM generated articles. This crap is not worth discussing 99% of the time. This is clearly a draft scribbled by someone and then post-processed by chatGPT.

That said:

>> When boomers hold ~50% of national wealth while comprising 20% of the population, and millennials hold ~10% despite being the same share, the game reveals itself to be fundamentally broken.

These numbers mean nothing. Also, the byproduct of billionaire-driven inequality is the collapse of the American Middle Class. That’s what’s under attack and the reason why the road is closed has nothing to do with those lucky enough to still make it into it. Look up, ffs.

Articles like this are unfair to boomers. Yes they have 50% of the wealth or whatever despite being 20% of the population, but they also have had time to earn that wealth fair and square and are not quite elderly enough to have spent it all on average. I'm sick and tired of articles blaming normal people who worked for what they have for issues that amount to geopolitical struggles.
No doubt OP had something great to say, but it reads like an LLM was used to explode their ideas out to a long, “professional” essay.

Extra words rarely have more content, only potential surprises - forcing your reader to go through it all in case of something unexpected..

LLM use doesn’t help you stand out. To make your writing professional in 2025, use as few words as possible.

> Companies offered pensions. … Staying at one company for 20 years is now a career liability, not an asset.

This was already old news during the dot com era. The question is whether 401k plans and job-hopping still works out in the end.

To do that, though, you need to be able to switch jobs enough times, which isn’t easy when jobs are hard to find.

> The question is whether 401k plans and job-hopping still works out in the end.

It can, but it is a fragile "still works out in the end." It fails when a damaging event occurs near the time you need the money, such as a late-in-life divorce, job loss, illness, or financial collapse of investment vehicles. Winning at the 401(k) game means enough people losing their money through unlucky investments, and you get a cut of their losses.

Thought experiment: imagine everyone had enough income that they could save 10% in a 401 (k). BLS numbers say 10% of us wages is 1.1 trillion. Can you imagine the impact on the stock market if it received $1.1 trillion every year for 30 years? Where would that money be invested?

So much to disagree with here.

The path to gathering wealth is simple, and anyone has a good chance of success. See Bogleheads.org for details. ( Once the path is clearly understood, discipline is the primary factor. You have to live below your means, there is no exception. Also, a long compounding timeframe is useful. )

You can live YOLO like the rabbit or you can live like Warren Buffet the tortoise. You don’t get rich quickly, you get rich slowly with large gains at the end, after compounding has done its magic.

Financial literacy is easy to obtain, but watch your sources. Trust the Bogleheads!

My takeaway, right or wrong, is that I agree with the overall point about “betting” and how we’ve seen this trend over the last handful of years. What this is really revealing is the wealthy taking advantage of the less fortunate, which seems to be rapidly growing.

It’s no different than telling a desperate person to get on a boat where work and income are waiting for them, but in reality they will be enslaved once they reach their destination. We are rapidly heading this direction worldwide as more and more people become desperate and those in power will be waiting to take advantage of the situation.