I find this to be an incredibly irritating way to present this data. Why the obsession with finding out where I fall in the distribution? Why prompt me to sign up for email? Do you have anything to say, or is this like a BuzzFeed quiz?
I work in big tech, I dont see any american undergrads almost anywhere. Its all foreigners. Older americans at the top, who joined over a decade ago, overseeing this odd workforce. A strong word, but somedays it feels like a soft genocide is occuring
Not sure what "american undergrads" means? If someone graduates from an American university wouldn't that make them an American undergrad? Or do you just mean someone who was born in the US that then graduated from an American university? Also how can you tell where someone was born just by looking at them, especially in the US?
If I think about why these differences show up across generations, in the end what matters seems to be whether or not you can be at the forefront of a new field in a new era's industry. In the case of today's younger generation, there simply isn't such a new industry.
But this site looks like GPT made it, doesn't it? I can see GPT's characteristic green button UI and beige color scheme. GPT 6.1 tends to use a green-toned UI.
This is a generic comment of course, but anyone else feeling immediate distrust when data is presented in an obvious vibe design (I have "built" sites with that exact font combo and general vibe ffs). Ideally one should distrust any data on random websites to begin with, but at least my human psychology deducted many extra points here.
Thanks for sharing the link. What I get from all that data is that the "households under age 35 from 2022-2025" was chosen specifically for a narrative, not because it is particularly interesting on it's own. There's lots of interesting moves in the data well beyond that one narrowly focused metric.
Yeah, personally I would be shocked if this wasn't like botted or something to make it onto the front-page. It's not much further from blogspam in how little effort has been put into presenting this particular page. Just head over to the home page and behold the default Claude design and ridiculous $150/yr plan haha.
And I'm not even sure where the part is on the site detailing this '23% fall' mentioned in the title is. Cause there certainly isn't any historical data provided on the page...
the economy is essentially completely broken at this point and the youth are getting angrier and more checked-out. i think recent events in france are indicative of the future for most western nations in the next few years, especially as things continue to collapse and governments realise they cannot just keep kicking the debt-can down the road.
The interesting thing is how unanimous it is. The zoomers on the left and right disagree on just about everything, except they both agree that radical change needs to happen. Maybe the more moderate zoomers would disagree, but I wonder how many would even identify as such by now.
I'm not exactly sure what's going to happen in the future, but I'm sure that it's going to be wildly different from the current status quo in a number of countries.
> The zoomers on the left and right disagree on just about everything, except they both agree that radical change needs to happen.
This is how the two party system evolved to sustain the status quo. When people are mad about something, divide the people into two parties and have them each demand a different solution while demonizing the solution of the other party, so that their votes cancel out and then nothing changes.
Extra points if you can get them to demand something unnecessarily polarizing, disproportionate or simplistic when there are better solutions available, because then you can get them to fight against the moderates too.
Notice also that when you point this out to a partisan, they have a tendency to violently agree and then immediately mischaracterize the problem as being that the other party is bad and wrong and the solution is to have everybody do their party's thing.
The two party system allows both sides to be mass victims of the other side at all times while also being the perpetrators.
Both sides are victims, fueled by endless excuses and reasons why the others are responsible. Dems and repubs both do it in various ways and because its mostly "vibes and energies" nobody is really wrong.
We're a vibes and hype culture that refuses to hold itself accountable. It isn't about fixing anything, its become about telling people they're not responsible. Its nobodies fault except the others, they did it.
Let's hope we don't get radical change. I can't think of an instance where it worked well.
The American Revolution wasn't radical change from the British system, but thoughtful improvements on it. The French Revolution, and the Communist revolutions were all disasters. The slave revolt in Haiti has produced long-term poor results compared to the Dominican Republic. The American occupation of Japan is arguable, but given that they kept the emperor and one party was in power for the next 50+ years just like before, I have some doubts.
doesn't need to be radical or violent at all. a collapse to a simpler state, with less bureaucracy and more sustainable spending would be enough, and it wouldn't even look that much different.
What is your point exactly? Yes, radical change tends to bring chaos in the short term. Radical change in the form of domestic revolution also often only happens when the status quo is so bad that the chaos of a revolution is seen as an acceptable alternative.
Power rarely voluntarily relinquishes power.
> I can't think of an instance where it worked well.
Worked pretty well for most of the ex Warsaw pact.
> The French Revolution, and the Communist revolutions were all disasters.
What came prior was also a disaster, except it was a disaster for regular people and the unelected Monarchs didn't feel the pain.
What exactly were people supposed to do? Wait patiently for their autocratic rulers to stop acting like autocrats?
> The slave revolt in Haiti has produced long-term poor results compared to the Dominican Republic.
This shows a complete ignorance of historical fact. French Haiti was 90% enslaved, Spanish Santo Domingo was majority free people. It simply isn't a comparable situation.
Again, what were Haitians supposed to do? Sit around being beaten, raped, and worked to death hoping that the slaveowners eventually see the error of their ways?
If the source is Fed SCF then I think it's _supposed_ to include student loans, retirement accounts, real estate, etc.
It might be worth just downloading the data from the Fed yourself and having the coding harness of your choice build whatever data visualization you want:
There are these charts, studies, and articles about global wealth inequality that make the rounds every now and then. They often make the point one would expect them to make. I was nonetheless surprised to learn that because of the way assets and debt are used to calculate these numbers, the poorest people in the world aren't those surviving on $0.10 of daily income in some underdeveloped part of Africa as one might think, but rather an odd mix of med or law school graduates in the US and stock traders or gambling addicts in rich countries. One French dude alone is at the bottom with a net worth of -$8B.
Households is an interesting metric to choose.
If fewer people get married, then average household would have fewer people.
But I don't see data for 2022 on the page?
I searched for "2022" and found nothing?
What makes it odd to me is that real median incomes for both individuals and households rose 6.2% over that period. That includes all people, but what I can find specifically on younger people is even more optimistic.
I suppose it’s almost exactly the right metric if you want to look at affordability of houses. Almost since a bigger household needs a bigger house/flat but only up to a point, a young couple needs barely more space than a young single person occupying their own flat.
The median is actually surprisingly high. How did someone who is in their early 30s and has been in the workforce for only about 10 years and presumably has university debt, manage to accumulate $68k?
That's $7k per year, which they have to save from the surplus after paying their rents, groceries, healthcare, university debts and everything else.
I don't see the headline claim in the linked page. Also seems implausible that net worth would drop that much over a 3 year period when stock markets are rising.
One thing it doens't do is account for cost of living for a given city. Sure it looks nice that NYC, SF is higher than everyone else but I'm sure there's a very large group living in LCL areas that have far less stress compared to the bigger cities when it comes to budgeting.
I'm in Austin and money goes seriously far compared to the seven cities above it. There's a 2015-built home on Zillow for $199,000 1346 sq ft just 2 miles from the Tesla factory.
I'm somewhat familiar with the area as I like to go to events at Circuit of the Americas often.
It's out there. There's really not much close nearby other than more houses. It's not like there's a lot of outdoorsy stuff, almost all the land around there is owned by private entities, almost no public park lands so it doesn't even have the "but at least there's nature!" aspect to it.
You're probably going to drive a private toll road everywhere you need to go. You'll have a hell of a commute to work anywhere but the Tesla factory.
If you're one to pretty much never leave a 1,300sqft home with next to no lot and get everything delivered it's probably not bad. Outside of that I wouldn't want to live there, at least not for another decade of development or something. Which it's not even like you've got some amazing investment in the land, you have a tiny lot with a builder spec cheap structure on it.
It's a weather condition that isn't typical for the city and therefore not properly prepared for. Stuff like that happens. People die during "heat waves" (even average summer temperatures are much higher in Texas) in European cities because no one has AC
A lot of those cities have half-way decent public transit so you kind of have the option to not deal with traffic, but yeah. Having lived in both cities, traffic in Austin doesn't hold a candle to traffic in Boston
The house looks nice inside but the yard is the size of a postal stamp. This looks like a downtown house and if it was it would be worth 3-5 times as much (10 if you move it to another city). The problem is the area and no yard makes it not desirable at $200,000 and the other issue is people are moving to Austin for the scene/vibe/culture so everyone needs to be downtown where the average home price is over a million. Otherwise you could just move to Des Moines or Oklahoma City where average home prices are $100,000.
“Kids these days” are lazy and entitled. Can’t blame them; they grew up with a screen in front of their face all the time. Their attention span is limited and their critical thinking skills are lacking. However, even with these major disadvantages, I still believe a young’n could make a great living if they just put their head dow, gain a skill, become knowledgeable (no short cuts) and then try hard. Great recipe but most don’t want to actually do work.
59 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 31.2 ms ] threadThe Dow, the Dow right now
Is over fifty thou
I don't know why you're laughing
That's what we should be talking abou
The Dow, the Dow right now
S&P is almost seven thou
The American people need to know this,
Need to know, how is the Dow?
You really think someone would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies?
Never believe “nothing leaves your browser” unless it’s a locally saved SPA and the network is unplugged.
But this site looks like GPT made it, doesn't it? I can see GPT's characteristic green button UI and beige color scheme. GPT 6.1 tends to use a green-toned UI.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm
And I'm not even sure where the part is on the site detailing this '23% fall' mentioned in the title is. Cause there certainly isn't any historical data provided on the page...
I'm not exactly sure what's going to happen in the future, but I'm sure that it's going to be wildly different from the current status quo in a number of countries.
This is how the two party system evolved to sustain the status quo. When people are mad about something, divide the people into two parties and have them each demand a different solution while demonizing the solution of the other party, so that their votes cancel out and then nothing changes.
Extra points if you can get them to demand something unnecessarily polarizing, disproportionate or simplistic when there are better solutions available, because then you can get them to fight against the moderates too.
Notice also that when you point this out to a partisan, they have a tendency to violently agree and then immediately mischaracterize the problem as being that the other party is bad and wrong and the solution is to have everybody do their party's thing.
Both sides are victims, fueled by endless excuses and reasons why the others are responsible. Dems and repubs both do it in various ways and because its mostly "vibes and energies" nobody is really wrong.
We're a vibes and hype culture that refuses to hold itself accountable. It isn't about fixing anything, its become about telling people they're not responsible. Its nobodies fault except the others, they did it.
The American Revolution wasn't radical change from the British system, but thoughtful improvements on it. The French Revolution, and the Communist revolutions were all disasters. The slave revolt in Haiti has produced long-term poor results compared to the Dominican Republic. The American occupation of Japan is arguable, but given that they kept the emperor and one party was in power for the next 50+ years just like before, I have some doubts.
Power rarely voluntarily relinquishes power.
> I can't think of an instance where it worked well.
Worked pretty well for most of the ex Warsaw pact.
> The French Revolution, and the Communist revolutions were all disasters.
What came prior was also a disaster, except it was a disaster for regular people and the unelected Monarchs didn't feel the pain.
What exactly were people supposed to do? Wait patiently for their autocratic rulers to stop acting like autocrats?
> The slave revolt in Haiti has produced long-term poor results compared to the Dominican Republic.
This shows a complete ignorance of historical fact. French Haiti was 90% enslaved, Spanish Santo Domingo was majority free people. It simply isn't a comparable situation.
Again, what were Haitians supposed to do? Sit around being beaten, raped, and worked to death hoping that the slaveowners eventually see the error of their ways?
It might be worth just downloading the data from the Fed yourself and having the coding harness of your choice build whatever data visualization you want:
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm
But I don't see data for 2022 on the page? I searched for "2022" and found nothing?
What makes it odd to me is that real median incomes for both individuals and households rose 6.2% over that period. That includes all people, but what I can find specifically on younger people is even more optimistic.
https://fortune.com/2026/09/22/gen-z-wealth-income-vs-boomer...
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/mehoinusa672n# https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
https://www.npr.org/2026/04/04/nx-s1-5760948/high-housing-co...
https://eyeonhousing.org/2025/04/house-sharing-is-not-just-f...
That's $7k per year, which they have to save from the surplus after paying their rents, groceries, healthcare, university debts and everything else.
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4611-Esper-Ln-324-Austin-...
I'm somewhat familiar with the area as I like to go to events at Circuit of the Americas often.
It's out there. There's really not much close nearby other than more houses. It's not like there's a lot of outdoorsy stuff, almost all the land around there is owned by private entities, almost no public park lands so it doesn't even have the "but at least there's nature!" aspect to it.
You're probably going to drive a private toll road everywhere you need to go. You'll have a hell of a commute to work anywhere but the Tesla factory.
If you're one to pretty much never leave a 1,300sqft home with next to no lot and get everything delivered it's probably not bad. Outside of that I wouldn't want to live there, at least not for another decade of development or something. Which it's not even like you've got some amazing investment in the land, you have a tiny lot with a builder spec cheap structure on it.
So much traffic and nonsense to deal with in Texas. Its not worth living there, lol.
There are many cities that people consider to be "top-tier" that have much worse traffic than Austin
https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/articles/10-cities-with-t...
A lot of those cities have half-way decent public transit so you kind of have the option to not deal with traffic, but yeah. Having lived in both cities, traffic in Austin doesn't hold a candle to traffic in Boston
The fact that it has a yard at all is something. Countless people never have one in their lives. Plus it’s a perk not a necessity.
Having this house over an apartment is great but an apartment downtown will cost you more than your mortgage here.
Plenty of middle aged and older people are addicted to their screens and spend their lives glued to them.