By 2030, one in four Americans will be over 65. At the same time, millennials and Gen Z are struggling to buy homes, save for retirement, or even cover rent. This isn’t just coincidence-it’s policy failure. The way we tax, fund housing, and design benefits today isn’t just unfair to younger people. It’s unsustainable. Intergenerational equity isn’t a buzzword. It’s the math of survival.
Who Pays Now? Who Pays Later?
Right now, older adults receive far more in government benefits than they paid in taxes. The Social Security Administration reports that a 65-year-old today will collect an average of $350,000 in lifetime benefits-more than double what they paid in payroll taxes. Meanwhile, today’s 30-year-old will likely pay more in taxes over their lifetime than they’ll ever get back, even if they live to 90. This gap isn’t accidental. It’s built into the system.
Medicare and Medicaid are even more lopsided. The Kaiser Family Foundation found that a typical retiree spends about $170,000 on healthcare in their final years. Most of that is paid by younger workers through payroll taxes and federal spending. But those same younger workers can’t afford to see a doctor without a $5,000 deductible. The system says: you work now to pay for someone else’s care. Then you hope someone else pays for yours.
Housing: The Great Generational Divide
In 1980, a median-income household could buy a home with 2.5 years of income. Today? It takes 7.5 years. And it’s not just prices. It’s access. Older homeowners, many of whom bought homes in the 1980s or 90s, still live in them. They paid off their mortgages. They benefit from property tax caps and homestead exemptions. Meanwhile, young adults face rising rents, zoning laws that block new apartments, and mortgage rates that are nearly double what they were a decade ago.
Property tax systems are designed to protect long-term owners. In states like California and New York, homeowners over 55 can transfer their low tax base to a new home-while renters and first-time buyers pay full market rates. That’s not fairness. That’s a wealth transfer from the young to the old. And it’s not just about money. It’s about stability. A 28-year-old who moves three times in five years can’t build community, save for a child’s education, or plan for the future.
Tax Policy: The Silent Generational Theft
The federal tax code is full of perks for older Americans. The mortgage interest deduction? Mostly claimed by people over 50. The property tax deduction? Same. The capital gains exclusion on home sales? A $500,000 tax break for married couples who’ve lived in their home for two years-mostly retirees downsizing or moving to Florida.
Meanwhile, younger workers pay higher effective tax rates on earned income. Social Security and Medicare taxes hit wages up to $168,600 (2024 limit). But investment income-what most retirees live on-is taxed at lower rates. A retiree living off dividends and rental income might pay 15% in federal taxes. A 32-year-old nurse earning $70,000 pays 22% on her last dollar. That’s not economic logic. That’s generational bias dressed up as policy.
Benefits: Locked In, Not Locked Out
Retirees get guaranteed inflation-adjusted pensions. Young people get 401(k)s-voluntary, market-dependent, and often underfunded. Only 56% of workers under 35 have access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan. And even when they do, many can’t afford to contribute more than 3%.
Childcare is worse. A family in Texas pays $12,000 a year for infant care-more than in-state college tuition. No federal childcare subsidy exists for most families. Meanwhile, Social Security pays $1,900 a month to every eligible retiree, no matter their income. That’s $22,800 a year, guaranteed. For a single parent working two jobs, that kind of security doesn’t exist.
What Does Fair Look Like?
Intergenerational equity doesn’t mean taking from the old to give to the young. It means fixing the system so no generation is exploited.
- Cap property tax breaks for high-value homes-only protect primary residences under $500,000.
- Phase out the mortgage interest deduction for homes over $750,000 and redirect savings to first-time buyer grants.
- Replace the current Social Security formula with one that reduces benefits for high-income retirees and increases them for low-income seniors.
- Create a national childcare subsidy tied to income, not employment status.
- Require employers to auto-enroll workers in retirement plans with a 3% employer match.
These aren’t radical ideas. They’re common sense. Australia caps superannuation tax breaks for high earners. Canada gives first-time buyers up to $10,000 in tax-free savings. Germany links pension payouts to life expectancy, not fixed retirement age. These countries didn’t wait for crisis. They adjusted.
The Cost of Doing Nothing
If we keep going like this, we’ll see more young people leave the country. More families delaying children. More people working past 70 because they can’t afford to retire. The U.S. Census Bureau projects that by 2040, the ratio of workers to retirees will fall from 3:1 to 2:1. That means every two workers must support one retiree. Right now, it’s three to one. That’s why Social Security’s trust fund will run out of money by 2034-unless we change the rules.
And it’s not just about money. It’s about trust. When young people see their parents’ generation enjoying low taxes, free healthcare, and rising home values while they struggle to pay rent, they stop believing in the system. That’s when civic engagement drops. That’s when political extremism rises.
It’s Not Too Late
Change is hard. But it’s easier than collapse. The oldest Americans didn’t plan this. They just followed the rules. The same goes for the rest of us. The system was built for a different time-with more workers, lower life expectancy, and cheaper housing.
We can fix it. Not by blaming. Not by stealing. But by rebuilding. With fairer taxes. With housing that doesn’t reward hoarding. With benefits that protect everyone, not just those who got lucky.
It’s not about who deserves more. It’s about who can survive.
What is intergenerational equity?
Intergenerational equity means fairness between age groups in how society shares resources, costs, and benefits. It asks: Are younger people paying more than their share for services they’ll never fully receive, while older generations enjoy guaranteed benefits built on their taxes? It’s about balancing today’s needs with tomorrow’s sustainability.
Why are younger people paying more in taxes than they’ll get back?
Because current systems like Social Security and Medicare are pay-as-you-go. Today’s workers fund today’s retirees. But with fewer workers per retiree and longer lifespans, the math doesn’t add up. A 30-year-old today will pay over $500,000 in payroll taxes over their career but may only receive $300,000 in benefits-even with full retirement. The gap grows as life expectancy rises and birth rates fall.
How do property taxes hurt younger generations?
Property tax laws often protect long-term homeowners with caps, exemptions, and transfer rules. A retiree who bought a home in 1990 might pay $2,000/year in taxes. A new buyer today pays $8,000 for the same house. That’s a hidden subsidy from renters and first-time buyers to older owners. It drives up housing costs and makes ownership impossible for many young adults.
Is Social Security unfair to younger workers?
It’s not unfair by design-it’s outdated by demographics. Social Security was created when people lived to 65 and had 3-4 workers per retiree. Now people live to 80, and there are only 2.5 workers per retiree. Younger workers pay more in taxes but get lower returns on their contributions. Reforming benefits based on income and life expectancy-not flat payouts-would make it fairer for everyone.
What’s the biggest barrier to fixing this?
Political power. Older voters turn out in much higher numbers than younger ones. Politicians respond to who votes. So policies favor retirees-even when they hurt the future. Real change requires younger people to organize, vote consistently, and demand structural reform-not just temporary fixes.
Without action, the next decade won’t just be tough-it’ll be broken. And no one will be left out of that.
