As per usual, you don't seem to understand the implications or the underlying reasons.

This is not a matter of some random statistics, its an agenda.

But if you really want to play the statistics game, you can look into things like stagnating wages, inflation and other statistics in the realm of family units, divorces, abortions, inequality etc.

And you can link that to various well known policies promoted since the WWII.

This is not normal or just a something that happens. Its a clear trend , driven by particular set of policies over generations. And it lead to this.

Which is the point that the original author is trying to point out. "Epic transfer of assets coming. "

In other words, the biggest wealth transfer/theft in history of America and possibly world history.

Funny, but if you want to learn how it happened, best person to ask are Marxist professors like Richard D. Wolff . Worst person to ask what should be done instead are Marxist professors like Richard D. Wolff. You see, Marxism is very good at critiquing what it thinks is capitalism, but very bad at understanding better alternatives.

Capitalism Hits the Fan - A Lecture on the Economic Meltdown (2009)

@Krunoslav
As per usual you don’t understand statistics.

I did not say any of those things you claim are not happening.
What I showed is that the graph is primarily due to the change in demographics.
Those things you mentioned I don’t disagree with, the graphs just do not show that.

Let’s do some statistics… I will keep it very easy so you can follow:

In 2000 the fraction of 65 was 12%. Now it is 16%. That is a ~33% increase.
Look at your graph. The 2000 ownership fraction was 24%, now it is 32%. Again a ~33% increase.
So no increase per fraction of population.

By FAR the biggest cause of the increase is change in demographics. By ignoring the largest contributor you will erroneously attribute significance to smaller or even insignificant factors and as come to the wrong conclusion… again as you usually do.

Then regarding “epic” transfer of wealth. That is happening all the time as it had for ever. It is just relatively slower because people live so much longer.
The only way you will see a sudden increase if there is a major disease that kills only old people….. oh wait, that was COVID and we did NOT see a sudden “epic” transfer or wealth.

@Hanno "By FAR the biggest cause of the increase is change in demographics. "

Demographics change didn't happen out of thin air, hence if one does not understand the underlying reasons, its not very helpful statistic. Demographics change is not the cause, its correlation.

"Then regarding “epic” transfer of wealth. That is happening all the time as it had for ever. It is just relatively slower because people live so much longer."

You don't get it, as per usual. but I repeat myself. Its not happening all the time and its not for the reasons that are benevolent or normal.

"The only way you will see a sudden increase if there is a major disease that kills only old people….. oh wait, that was COVID and we did NOT see a sudden “epic” transfer or wealth."

Oh, we didn't? lol Yes, we did. Don't be an idiot.

As for correlation of transfer of wealth and age group. That was two fold. But I prefer not to lecture someone who knows it all. Just like your Ukrainian post I disputed, pretty much all you posted, but somehow I doubt this will prevent you from making similarly ignorant posts in the future.

@Krunoslav

Let me get this straight?
Stagnating wages and inflation caused people to die later? The age profile to go up?

Not better health care for the old? Cures for cancer?
Seriously?

Increase in life expectancy has been going for the past 10 000 years and will continue into the future.
Steady and continues Demographic change has been happening for thousands of years and have nothing to do with anything you mentioned.
Love to see your explanation of how inflation is causing old people not to die.

The , we DID see a recent “epic” transfer of wealth?
Look at your own posted graph! There is no epic wealth transfer from the old dying boomers to the young!
And you call me an idiot?

Love to see your evidence of a recent “epic” transfer of wealth form the old to the young. (Hint: your original post said it is still coming… you are contradicting yourself because you are not critically evaluating your own thoughts).

Wealth transfer from old to young did not happen in the past?
Old people did not die and the young inherited? This is not normal and was not for benevolent reasons? This will not continue to happen?

Stop, think. I know it is hard but it you don’t and keep on posting stuff without thinking people like me will continue to point out the obvious.

You prefer not to lecture me?
Nothing you would love to do better.
However I again showed your inability to think critically about the propaganda you blindly believe and showed you are are out of your depth: completely unable to analyse numbers and draw logical conclusions.

But hey, just call me ignorant and feel better about saying the dumbest things.

@Hanno "Let me get this straight? Stagnating wages and inflation caused people to die later? The age profile to go up?"

Obviously you are thinking too straight. Stagnating wages and inflation caused people to not be able to afford owning homes or discourage from owning one. If you didn't get that from the graph, than by critic of how your brain works is on point. Unlike your comment.

Trying to explain to you anything is like Sisyphus trying to push the bolder up the hill.

@Krunoslav

No boy. You STATED that the demographics is going up because of inflation and stagnating wages. That is nonsense.
Let’s forget about that. You maybe just typed to fast and did not think things through. However you do this a lot.

I fully AGREE with you that stagnating wages and inflation is causing young people to be discouraged from buying houses.
It is also caused by personal decisions young people make regarding studying and marrying and starting families later.
I know this from other studies and many other graphs and correlations as well as personal experience etc.

However, your graph does not show that.
You need to be careful to read into graphs results that are not there.
You need to consider all the phenomena that affects an observation and be able to allocate some weighting to the most of them and from that derive conclusions.
For that you need to understand and consider many things and that involves basic statistics and logical reasoning.

Just jumping to the easiest conclusion when you see something will always lead to wrong solutions to the problem.

In this specific case, the observation directly correlates to the demographic change.
It does not mean that the other things you discuss are not true or not happening.
However you will need other data to justify that.

@Krunoslav
Oh, on my Ukrainian post.
I merely posted the Ukrainian economists view.
Did not say I agree with all they said.

@Hanno "No boy. You STATED that the demographics is going up because of inflation and stagnating wages. That is nonsense."

I stated that reason why demographics in correlation to house ownership is caused by stagnation in wages and inflation among other things to make it hard to buy houses or discourage from buying houses for the younger generation. The graph shows the trend of decreasing house ownership for the younger generation compared to the older generation. This is not caused by difference in age, and the original poster is trying to point out that once the older generation dies, house and releastate ownership will be even more concentrated at the top, not all related to age but blood ties and connections with influential people in the regime.

"However, your graph does not show that. However, your graph does not show that. You need to be careful to read into graphs results that are not there. You need to consider all the phenomena that affects an observation and be able to allocate some weighting to the most of them and from that derive conclusions. For that you need to understand and consider many things and that involves basic statistics and logical reasoning."

One graph cannot show what you say it should, but implication is for those who understand the underlying reasons, and you should to.

But to take full advantage of the interpreting the data correctly we often need experience.

"Information is pretty thin stuff unless mixed with experience. "
— Clarence Day, US author (1874-1935)

I could post a lot of extra information to explain the "experience" part, but I hoped I would not need to. This article only explains part of the story.

Most Important Measure of Fed’s Economy: My “Per-Household Wealth Effect Monitor” for Q1, Based on Fed Data

by Wolf Richter • Jun 21, 2021

How the “Wealth Effect” benefits Americans individually: Peanuts & extra costs for the bottom 50%, wealth for the top 10%, billions for the few.

[wolfstreet.com]

I won't post endless other videos and articles and books and interview to cover the rest of the story, I would have hoped some experience is expected.

But here is some more of the background story.

Wall Street Firms Are Now Buying Up Family Homes

Where does Wall Street gets the money? Mainly the FED. And I hope I don't need to explain how FED creates its mouse click fake fiat currency we often call mistakenly money.

however how does someone like BlackRock relate to FED...

Meet the Fed's New BFF

The Fed's Silent Takeover of the U.S.

Toilet-flushing the U.S. in 3 Exciting Fed Colors

Presenting America's Real Coup d'Etat [MORN_01]

I could go on and on and on, but suffices to say. Its the biggest robbery and wealth transfer in human history and its immoral, illegal, and very much real. I would expect people have at least basic understanding or at least instinct of what is happening.

@Hanno "Oh, on my Ukrainian post.
I merely posted the Ukrainian economists view.
Did not say I agree with all they said."

Well, as it happens they were wrong on everything, and you posted it, implying you agree with it by only saying how you don't like Chomsky either. If you did not agree with them, the economists, you should not post it or if you did, than leave a comment that you disagree with them. And not the person they were criticizing. That leave an impression you agree with them.

@Krunoslav

You miss the point whole point of intelligent conversation and growing understanding.

This can only be achieved by critical thought and considering all viewpoints. This means reading and considering other points of view and understanding them…. Only then can you ensure they are wrong and build your own understanding. This is a continuous process.
Jordan Peterson have a very good video on this, look it up.

You are unable to formulate critical thought and hence you say these embarrassing things…. Read the whole thread again.
Applying critical thought to your own beliefs and your understanding will grow beyond your wildest expectations.

Otherwise you will remain to be just another useful idiot that they will use to push their propaganda.
Sure, you earn a bit of money now from them to push their agenda, but you are nothing but a tool to them.

So yes, some of what the Ukrainians said may be wrong, but a lot is opinion that are neither right or wrong, and much they said were RIGHt as it was stated from an Ukrainian point of view of the Ukrainian point of view and hence are my definition correct.

Your statement that everything they say is wrong is the perfect example of your inability to think critically.
Or you can, you are simply paid enough to pretend you can’t.
That means you are no different to the main stream media who also push someone else’s agenda for money..

@Hanno "So yes, some of what the Ukrainians said may be wrong, but a lot is opinion that are neither right or wrong, and much they said were RIGHt as it was stated from an Ukrainian point of view of the Ukrainian point of view and hence are my definition correct."

Actually, virtually everything they said was wrong. There is not if's and buts about it. They are wrong. They are not some random opinions on matters of taste in regards to flavors of ice cream. They are matters of war crimes and corruption and history. Factually incorrect.

"Only then can you ensure they are wrong and build your own understanding. This is a continuous process. Jordan Peterson have a very good video on this, look it up."

Yes. I agree in principle. Sadly , or rather a matter or irony is that you mentioned Jordan Peterson and Ukraine, since he still gets that part wrong. I ,mean his first attempt to understand it could not be more wrong. When the whole thing got attention in the west , you know who he invited on his show to tell him about Ukraine and Russia? Frederick W. Kagan. lol

Frederick freaking Kagan. Of the Kegan family. The ultimate neocon family in the US and directly involved in war crimes and corruption in Ukraine. That is the guy Peterson invited to his show to tell him about the situation. And Peterson ate it all up. Unbelievable.

Few months later his best attempt to try to understand the situation was to describe it as civil war.

Russia Vs. Ukraine Or Civil War In The West?
[dailywire.com]

Dr Jordan B Peterson lists the reasons why we're seeing an extended conflict in Ukraine, and explains why a culture war in the West has fueled the Russian fire.

0:00 Russia Vs. Ukraine Or Civil War In The West?
9:04 The Caspian Sea
20:12 Does qualification even matter?
38:30 The Consequences

...................................

While there is some small merit in what he is saying, its too far off the mark. And this is something I see with him all the time now. He is a genius when it comes to philosophy and psychology. But soon as he ventures outside of that relm and tries politics , my God the man is absolute tool. He is being played like a violin. His book smarts, do not translate to street smarts. The man is absolute moron in anything other than limited set of specialized interests. And he should stick to those. So far he has not shown any improvement, in fact he doubled down by inviting more terrible guests that played him like a violin. And he comes back asking for seconds. Its embarrassing.

"Your statement that everything they say is wrong is the perfect example of your inability to think critically."

Hmm.

Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.

• Euripides

Get a clue, dude.

yup.