It has been noted we will be the first generation who will not do as well as our parents.
Noted, but in no way proven. There is a long term US tendency for generations to prosper relatively more or less, according to whether the included birth cohorts are larger or smaller than the preceding generation. There was a baby boom from the end of WW1 to the crash in 1929. Then a baby bust from then until the post WW2 years. The Boomer Generation that began after WW2 created the Boomer name, because it was so much larger than the small birth cohorts of the 30's and War Years. This "Big Boom" peaked in 1957, but continued with relatively high birth cohorts until about 1964-66. After this began a series of low birth years, during which the average fertility per woman decreased from well above 3 children to just slightly above 2. This period ended in the mid eighties or so, with the advent of the echo boomers. Fertility per woman remained low, but there were so many women from the post war boom having children, that the absolute number of births again reached 4 million as it had in 1957. The Big Boom is actually a tough generation to belong to, lots of competition on the job, lots of competition to buy a house, lots of competition to buy stocks and other retirement assets. Even with almost all women working, the boomers are in sad shape heading into retirement.
If things hold true to form, x-ers should be the beneficiaries of boomer pain, buying stocks and other assets including houses from them at relatively good prices, and then selling them much later to "echo-boomers" at newly inflated prices.
This is only a theory, although it has played out in the past, and it makes sense. There is a rich academic literature on this topic. I think it is very likely to hold true, especially with respect to stocks. After all, the "bubble" of the second half of the 90s was caused by boomer excesses and retirement panic.
In may not hold true of houses, especially on the coasts, because of intense immigration. Many immigrants have good incomes (Chinese, Indians, Russians and Ukrainians) and many groups that don't nevertheless band together and can afford a suburban house. To some one used to living in a tin shack made from Coca-Cola signs in Guatemala, are 15 or so people in a suburban house a problem?
Mikey