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

Also what ages people are when they are earning this really matters too


sort by: page size:

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).


Why is someone's age relevant? Whether you are 25 or 72, how much you earn is based on how much value you provide. A 72 year old has 47 more years of life to have potentially capitalized on.

Is it that important? That age group isn't known for it's disposable income.

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.


> Your earnings at age 25 determine your total lifetime earnings

Do you have more info on this?


For your second question see [1]. Average income tops out for most people around age 40 and they stay at that level for most of the rest of their main career.

[1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.t03.htm


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.

What is the connection between aging and wages? Sure, most people make more money when they get older, but this was looking at ~40 to retirement when people are already at their peak earnings.

I wouldn't take it for granted that the older you are the more you make.


You sure the under 25s are the most profitable demographic? Us over 25s often have more cash to spend.

This is kind of an unhelpful statistic. Thanks to extended adolescence and over education many Americans don’t really start working until their mid to late 20s. So the fact that younger workers have no savings doesn’t say much about the economy. It also ignores social security. Even if you earn $15,000 a year, so long as you work 35 years, social security will keep you around the poverty level. It also ignores pensions, which 13% of workers (and almost a quarter of baby boomers) are entitled to receive.

Check the final figure, where payouts minus revenue for 50+ year olds is flat across quintiles. Note that even this figure omits earnings from 18-50, which will be higher from the higher quintiles.

Literally everybody, and likely adults more than teens, since adults usually have more money.

One of the most important points that the paper makes is that everyone’s income and wealth tend to follow a kind of natural pattern during their life. [People under 40] haven’t been working for many years, so they don’t have an opportunity to save as much; they also need to make investments in things like education and new home ownership. [People in their 40's and 50's] have worked long enough they start to accumulate wealth rapidly.

I don't mean to SHOCK you, but did you know there's a massive age gap between young and old people? Also, an experience gap. Something Must Be Done About This!


Wealth is best measured in terms of age. A wealthy 25 year old with only 3 million in the bank is in a very different situation than a 70 year old with 3 million. The difference is 'earning potential' over their lifetime.

The title says "someone" but the article is talking about families that make $75,000. There is a big difference between a 23-25 year old making $75k and 2 30-35 year olds making 75k combined.

We are much worse off when measuring the amount of time it takes to hit milestones.

At what age are people moving out, having children, buying a home, retirement?

The age for all of this has gone up massively. Because it takes much longer to earn enough money to afford to do these things.


Why? Someone who starts at 40 is probably earning more than someone at 25. And someone at 40 has fewer years left to support themselves after their 15-20 years of saving are up.

In this economy!?

Anecdotally, I had 20000x more money at 22 than 28. If I remain employed for the rest of the year I might be on par by the end of it. Graphing my income over the last 10 years would look like a memory leak


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

Legal | privacy