Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Generation isn't the same as age. Being 30 means I'm part of the "millennial" generation which only takes $106,500 to be in the top 1%.


sort by: page size:

It's more about reaching the 10 million dollar mark that the average person on 30 under 30 has than it is about being on that list.

If you look at age adjusted percentiles, 1% income is much lower than $750K/yr. 30 yr olds making $350k/ are 1%ers, and when they reach 40 or 50 they have substantial investment gains bolstering their compensation.

Everyone viewing this thread is likely an extreme outlier. The majority of millennials are prob making less than 50K until their 30s/40s.

> Heck, the average 30-year-old doesn't even have close to $10 million.

I'm going to do a wild guess here and say that the average 30-year-old, outside the valley bubble, doesn't even have $1 million.


If you reword the title to "More than Half of 30-Year-Olds Earn More Than Their Parents" it sounds completely different.

This is true.

If you earn $85,000 and are 25-30, you're in the top 15% of earners in that age bracket in the U.S., iirc.


You know the median millenial salary is like 28,000, right?

So it would be nice if they contrasted this again other generations - "About 66% of people between the ages of 21 and 32 have absolutely nothing saved for retirement". So? My impression is other generations at this age also hadn't exactly been saving a lot. Is this just saying the millennial general is just the same as others? Or way out wack?

HN bias in these statements is wild. The average 30-year old probably has closer to $5k in savings and somewhere around that in net worth.

Me, I'm 29 and at about 320k. Fluctuates a lot because a good chunk is in crypto.

Interesting! Now I wonder why this is. Could it be age brackets being stretched? That's just off the top of my head, but I'd be very interested to hear people who know about these kinds of things.

EDIT: Probably this:

https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-highest-earning-...


I think you'd want to adjust for age, source of wealth, and income level to have a reasonable definition.

Are they in their 30s with inherited wealth that allows them to spend like someone with a top 1% incone?



> Second, 18 to 35 is sort of a crazy range, it seems to me, since the net worth of the group is likely going to be dominated by those in their 30s who are mid-career.

And yet, it still

> has dropped 34%

If you break it down to two sub-demographics, I suspect there'd be an even larger disparity within e.g. 18-25 than there is with 26-35 for reasons such as student loans, but 18-35 would seem appropriate for what's perhaps an overgeneralized view of when most career trajectories and preferences plateau/harden.

Not sure if it's at all related to the key TV demographic of 18-34, but that wouldn't surprise me either for largely the same reason (hardening of preferences).

But I think that's kinda the point. People were previously building more wealth at a time in their lives when said wealth would have a more profound impact as they approached retirement age some number of decades later. The current generation occupying that demographic has been tragically stunted by stagnation in wage growth + inflation of education charges, and here in the United States, this may well impose a cascading detrimental impact on the health of the economy as a whole.


$30 a day is almost $1000 per month, that's completely unrealistic for 90+% of under 25s, most people don't hit that kind of saving power til they are 30. And I don't see any evidence in your post that previous generations did that? My parents certainly didn't, they started saving at 30 on teacher's salaries and bought a house three years later. That house (in Cambridge, UK) is now worth £800k, I can't afford that, despite earning far more than their salaries at retirement put together.

Sounds more like a typical 29 year old to me. Doesn't have a retirement plan.

a couple hundred thousand is not enough to retire at 30 though ....

accepting "only" $30,000 at the age of 22 is a lot less stupid than accepting "only" $30,000 at the age of 52. people's lives and motivations are vastly different, especially the most qualified, smartest people's lives.

I think it's also important to distinguish by age. For instance, I'm 27. I likely do not make as much nor have I amassed as much as a 45 year old.

This is a good comparison for this:

https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-by-age-calculator/

People at age 25 year olds are likely to make half of 35 year olds. But 45 year olds in the top 1% are roughly equal to the 35 year olds (no real increase).

next

Legal | privacy