Posted on 02/19/2026 5:30:12 PM PST by jcon40
The elderly are physically and financially healthier than ever. So why do their needs keep taking priority over younger generations?
Demographics, rising profits and soaring asset values have together wrought a quiet transformation in the American economy. Much of it is now in the hands of the elderly.
As of the third quarter of last year, people 70 and over controlled roughly 39% of all equities and mutual funds owned by households, compared with 22% in 2007, according to Federal Reserve data. Their share of net worth—assets minus debts—
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
You know nowadays, it’s the old man
He’s got all the money
And a young man, he ain’t got nothin’ in the world these days, no
Ain’t got nothin’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkv_Aa45-dc
“”””The elderly are physically and financially healthier than ever. So why do their needs keep taking priority over younger generations?
What does that mean?””””
It means the WSJ wants to take away the hard earned savings of people over 70 and give it to some 20 year olds.
Ha.
Sure.
DEFINITELY not true for me!
I added a caveat, “on the average.” No doubt that there are still ambitious and industrious young people. I know that in the medical field, the younger generation of physicians prioritize time off work, in a way doctors my age never would.
And so will you when it's your turn to receive the benefits of your lifelong contributions and some pink-haired, nose-pierced, tattooed, something in a dress starts insisting that they don't want to pay for "selfish" you.
-PJ
“””And IMHO, it means the paper is trying to play to a younger generation to build up a new market as their older readers age out.”””
I was an avid reader/subscriber of the WSJ from 1970 to 1995.
I did not age out. No, I saw the WSJ no longer had any good reporters on their staff.
And since 1995 the WSJ has only gotten worse.
I’d wager that the vast majority of elderly are prisoners of the economy rather than owners of it, Many live on their monthly Social Security or Pension.
Many of those that are more financially comfortable are still slaves of Wall Street, even if they think that they are Stock investing geniuses who rule their economic security.
And I agree with Harmless Teddy Bear’s #13.
Only the white ones.
"Oh, it is worth so much money!"
We have poured 13 years of blood, sweat and tears to bring the place back to life and all we are getting is higher taxes ever time we turn around.
High housing prices are apparently our fault because we... bought, improved and stayed.
“So why do their needs keep taking priority over younger generations?”
More sour grapes from our MSM.
“Over 65? Congratulations, You Own the Economy ... people 70 and over controlled roughly 39% of all equities and mutual funds owned by households.”
39% means you own the economy? Last I heard, 39% was less than a majority. The headline sounds more like 100% than it does 39%. I guess the misleading headline and sour grapes come from a relatively young man.
Where are the editors? It seems that today’s Wall Street Journal represents resentful young socialists more than it represents capitalists.
It means that the “elderly” didn’t take endless exotic vacations, or have Starbucks every day for breakfast, or spend money they didn’t have (at least, not for very long). In other words, we lived within our means, worked hard, and provided the necessities for our families, but didn’t worry too much about our “wants”.
These next generations are not at all like that. At least, some of my kids aren’t. Those are the ones that bellyache.
They are not satisfied with separating us by race or class. Now it is between generations. No matter how much you hate the media it is not enough.
‘ 39% means you own the economy? Last I heard, 39% was less than a majority.’
Boomers have @40 percent of the wealth and are about 20 percent of the population.
You can’t convince me that the MD energy costs aren’t meant to beggar people like me and force us to sell our homes so the rich libs can get them.
My light bill is almost my widow pension.
I can choose to starve or freeze.
Not feeling the joy here.
Learn to code.
I hope that’s sarcasm.
Kind of.
> What does that mean?
It means the author of this article believes we could have utopia, if only the government provided a minimum basic income and free medical care for all young people and a MAID program for all old people with medical issues.
“We keep pouring resources into making the elderly comfortable and happy”
For example? Does he oppose social security and Medicare? We paid for those things (as required). As for the stock market, anyone with stocks bought them. I’m not aware of anyone “pouring resources into making the elderly comfortable and happy.”
My wife and I started in a one-bedroom apartment, and it wasn’t in New York city where the author probably lives. We always had at least one job.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.