Baby-boomers are loaded. Why are they so stingy?
The mystery matters for global economic growth
![Illustration of a hand holding a coin purse with a twisted and locked clasp preventing it from opening.](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1424,quality=80,format=auto/content-assets/images/20240601_FND001.jpg)
Baby-boomers were born between 1946 and 1964—and are the luckiest generation in history. Most of the cohort, which numbers 270m across the rich world, have not fought wars. Some got to see the Beatles live. They grew up with strong economic growth. Not all are rich, but in aggregate they have amassed great wealth, owing to a combination of falling interest rates, declining housebuilding and strong earnings. American baby-boomers, who make up 20% of the country’s population, own 52% of its net wealth, worth $76trn (see chart 1).
This article appeared in the Finance & economics section of the print edition under the headline “Live a little”
Finance & economics June 1st 2024
- Baby-boomers are loaded. Why are they so stingy?
- Foreign investors are rejecting Indian stocks
- Xi Jinping’s surprising new source of economic advice
- Young collectors are fuelling a boom in Basquiat-backed loans
- OPEC heavyweights are cheating on their targets
- When to sell your stocks
- Why any estimate of the cost of climate change will be flawed
More from Finance and economics
![](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1424,quality=80,format=auto/media-assets/image/20240706_FNP502.jpg)
Why Chinese banks are now vanishing
The state is struggling to deal with troubled institutions
![](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1424,quality=80,format=auto/media-assets/image/20240706_FNP001.jpg)
How Starbucks caffeinates local economies
Call it the frappuccino effect
![](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1424,quality=80,format=auto/media-assets/image/20240706_FND000.jpg)
How much cash should be removed from the financial system?
Undoing quantitative easing provokes fierce debate