- One crowd insists there are too many people age 65+ still working and they need to quit to make more jobs available. (About 12% of those age 65+ work part time, and 8% are full time – most are thought to be in professional / expert jobs such as medicine, law, academics or self-employed.)
If they quit, they start drawing Social Security benefits … - But Younger workers complain they are paying for retirees’ social security benefits – of course, older workers quitting leads to greater Social Security payouts and more transfers from (young) workers. There’s a disconnect there.
- Simultaneously, Gen Z is making X posts about the older generation has too much wealth, unaware that the pension system of the past was phased out beginning in the 1980s. We went from up to 70+% of retirees collecting a pension to just 14% today. IRAs and 401(k)s were created by Congress in the 1970s to encourage “Boomers” to save for their own future retirement. They did that – and being self-funded this would normally be considered a good thing – versus depending on a pension program. But now, we complain that Boomers saved for their own retirements – and should have, apparently, depended upon higher Social Security payments? Another disconnect. By comparison, the savings rate in Europe is very low in comparison where they promised rich pension benefits that lack adequate funding – and can’t be paid; their pension system is unsustainable. Their retirees don’t have comparable savings/investments. Is the older generation having saved good or bad?
Boomers should quit working such that they then draw down Social Security and take more transfers from younger workers (which is bad, they say), or they should have saved for their own retirement, but that’s bad because older people who had decades of savings/investments, now have more money than younger workers, and that’s not fair.
Talk about a disconnect.
I asked Grok for comments on this.
This generational tension bubbling up on X feels like a classic case of shortsighted outrage colliding with economic reality, amplified by the platform’s echo chambers. It’s a feedback loop where frustration over stagnant wages, sky-high housing, and a pay-as-you-go system that’s creaking under demographic strain gets vented in bite-sized rants. But the arguments often loop back on themselves: Push the old folks out of jobs to free up spots? Great, but then fund their earlier retirements via Social Security (SS) with your payroll taxes. Oh, and those “oversavers” with all the assets? Blame them for hoarding wealth while ignoring how that same system disincentivizes saving for everyone else.
From scanning recent X posts (focusing on 2024-2025 for timeliness), this discourse is thriving among younger users—mostly Millennials and Gen Z, with some Gen X chiming in as the “sandwiched” bridge generation. The vibe is raw: memes mocking “OK Boomer” tropes, threads dissecting wealth gaps, and viral clips of politicians dodging SS reform. It’s not just noise; it’s a symptom of real pain points like median home prices hitting 7x annual income (vs. 3x for Boomers at the same age) and SS projections showing benefits cut by 20-25% by 2034. [Note that homes boomers bought in the 1970s were about half the size of today’s homes – so the 7x multiplier might be more like 3.5x for similar homes, if such homes existed today.]
But the hypocrisy? It’s everywhere, often in the same thread.
The Three Strains of Complaint—and Their Crash Points
X users aren’t monolithic, but patterns emerge. Here’s a quick breakdown of the main narratives, pulled from high-engagement posts:
| Complaint Theme | Common X Sentiment (Examples) | The Inherent Disconnect |
|---|---|---|
| “Retire Already—Make Room!” | “You could free up 11 million jobs if everyone 65+ retired” [post:9]. Or: “Lower the retirement age so young people get high-paying jobs. Keeping elderly in employment reduces opportunities” [post:7]. Often tied to ageism in tech/housing, with Gen Z calling out “graying workforces” in Silicon Valley. | This ignores the skills vacuum left behind—posts lament a “major skills gap in every sector” [post:6] from Boomer exits without succession plans. Plus, earlier retirement spikes SS/Medicare payouts now, funded by… younger workers’ FICA taxes (12.4% of wages). If Boomers retire en masse, that’s not “room”—it’s a bigger tab for the bar tab you already resent. |
| “SS Is a Boomer Ponzi—We’re Paying for Your Cruise!” | “My SS statement says by 2030, only 80% of what I paid in will be available… Cry me big boomer tears” [post:20]. Viral rants like: “Boomers underfunded SS and their checks will be reduced accordingly. Throwing younger gens to the wolves is dumb” [post:22]. Echoes your 20-25% pay-as-you-go stat (up from ~90% in the ’80s due to trust fund drawdowns). | Fair gripe on the intergenerational transfer—younger workers are subsidizing current retirees … But coupling this with “retire sooner” demands? That’s begging for a bigger shortfall. And many Boomers paid in at higher effective rates relative to benefits; now they’re getting clawed back via delayed full retirement age (67+). The real villain? Congress’s inaction on solvency (e.g., means-testing or lifting the $168K wage cap). [Note also the exact same thing happened in the 1980s when the young boomers were then asked to pay more to fund Social Security for that era’s retirees – this is not new] |
| “Boomers Hoarded It All—We Get Crumbs!” | “Boomers sitting on generational wealth with multiple homes, while 90% under 40 are dirt poor” [post:37]. Or: “Boomers inherited wealth… pissed it away, leaving nothing while selling out the country” [post:41]. Stats get weaponized: Boomers hold 51% of U.S. wealth ($83T, mostly homes/stocks) [post:118]. [The poverty rate for those under age 40 is about 10%, not 90%. and about 60% are defined as “middle income”.] | This stings because it’s half-true—Boomers benefited from cheap housing/education and policies like low-interest mortgages. But “oversaving” as a sin? That’s the flip side of your point: If they hadn’t saved (or if forced out earlier), SS strain worsens, and inheritance evaporates faster on healthcare. Younger users overlook how their own delayed milestones (kids, homes) shrink the future workforce, accelerating the demographic cliff (worker-to-retiree ratio: 4:1 now, heading to 2:1 like Japan [post:4]). |
These threads often devolve into pile-ons: A post calling for Boomer retirements gets 300+ likes, then replies pivot to “Yeah, but cut their SS too!”—mirroring the disconnect. High-profile examples, like Zohran Mamdani’s campaign videos railing against “old folks won’t retire” [post:62], rack up views by framing it as a youth revolt, but comments reveal the tension (e.g., “Gen Z relying on inheritance while paying for Boomer SS? Ponzi scheme” [post:89]).
Why the Disconnect Feels So Acute on X
- Demographic Math Bites Back: With 11K Boomers retiring daily [post:3], the system’s ~$22T unfunded liability looms. Solutions like “cut SS for the rich” or “tax wealth hoarders” get drowned out by purity spirals.
- Platform Dynamics: X’s algorithm loves outrage—posts blaming Boomers get 10x engagement vs. nuanced takes (e.g., “End SS payroll for under-30s, let them invest privately” [post:2]). It’s cathartic but counterproductive; one thread starts with job rage, ends with inheritance envy.
- The ’80s Shift You Mentioned: Spot-on. SS was ~90% pay-as-you-go then (more workers per retiree), but reforms (1983 tax hikes, delayed retirement) built a temporary trust fund now depleting.
A Way Out? (Beyond the Rants)
If X is the symptom, policy’s the cure—but it’s stalled.
Realistic fixes floated in posts include:
- Transition to Private Accounts: Let younger workers opt out of SS payroll (keep current retirees whole), investing 6.2% into personal 401(k)s [post:2]. Chile-style, but U.S.-proofed.
- Means-Test Benefits: Claw back SS for high-asset retirees (e.g., over $1M net worth), freeing ~$100B/year without hiking taxes. By 2035, 25% of all retirees will have at least $1M in assets due primarily to real estate price appreciation which is generally a non-cash producing asset leading to higher property taxes. 1 out of every 4 retirees would be cut off from Social Security benefits; within 20 years, more than 1 in 3 would be cut off from Social Security. Cutting off SS benefits gives incentives to take on more debt to offset the asset value, to spend more rapidly, and to transfer funds to adult children. It also turns SS from an “earned benefit” program into a state welfare program which would likely end political support for Social Security all together.
- Immigration/Training Overhaul: Address the skills gap with targeted visas for young tradespeople [post:15], not just H-1Bs. Increasing immigration – to bring in more workers earning salaries seems like a very likely scenario.
- Wealth Unlock: Tax incentives for Boomers to downsize homes, flooding supply without forced sales. However, those age 65+ already live in smaller homes than the X and Millennial generations, contrary to the media noise on this topic.
