My generation was told if it worked hard it’d have everything previous generations enjoyed. So why when that hasn’t happened are so many in the older generation saying it's our fault?

Okay, I realise any piece of research that begins with an article in The Daily Mail is built on quicksand. But perhaps the ground moving under our feet isn’t a bad way to begin on this topic. The researcher Dr Eliza Filby published a piece on The Mail Online entitled ‘How baby boomers really DID have it easier - and why it's only getting harder for Gen Z to get on the housing ladder’.

I think the responses it garnered shed some light into some pretty dark caves.

Filby’s research proved that:

1. Baby Boomers Dominate Homeownership

So Baby Boomers (those born 1946–1964) still own a disproportionate share of housing, often paying mortgages only 2–3%—far below today’s rates. This allows them to stay put, rent out properties, or move with financial freedom. It also allows them (and this is a separate story) to decide which of their children to financially help—or not.

2. Younger Generations Rely on Parental Help

For the UK, a 2019 Statista report found that 62% of homeowners under 35 received financial help from family or friends when purchasing a home, compared to only 7% of homeowners over 55.

3. There’s a Sharp Decline in First-Time Buyers

First-time homebuying has dropped from 50% in 2010 to around 24% in 2024, driven by high prices and mortgage rates. Gen Z (born 1997-2015) comprises only 3% of all homebuyers despite strong aspirations, often burdened by enormous (student) debt.

4. Older Generations Often Blame the Young for Their Challenges

As we’ll see in the—admittedly biased—sample of comments Filby’s article provoked, for some reason (and I’ll get into it, with my psychologist hat on) older generations often frame today’s challenges as a failure of youth’s self-discipline and work ethic. But most evidence points to today’s young people facing systemic barriers—not simply their lifestyle choices. Furthermore, that affordability challenges are structural.

In short, Filby found that today’s pensioners are better off than ever, that Triple Lock pensions and Margaret Thatcher’s Right To Buy policies benefited today’s pensioners in a way future generations won’t enjoy because we stopped building enough houses. Furthermore, the houses that were built are mainly owned by Baby Boomers, their value having increased exponentially. Stagnant wages and rising housing costs through the 1980s–2000s also made raising children more expensive and increasingly out of reach for younger generations.

But what was interesting to me (I say interesting—angering, depressing, ultimately enlightening might be a more honest term) was the reaction by Mail Online readers to these claims. The refusal of the bulk of Mail Online commenters to accept that it has got harder (judged by looking at the ‘Most Liked’ comments in the comment section, at least) fell into three areas.

1. The Argument Younger Generations Are Feckless

“CricklewoodBob” wrote (a comment that received 2,505 upvotes and 102 downvotes, making it one of the best-rated in the thread):

“When I was a young man I didn’t buy a take out coffee every day, nor did I go to the pub more than once a week, didn’t take holidays abroad or spend every weekend in a restaurant or ordering take aways, didn’t buy a new car every couple of years, didn’t have a mobile phone or cable TV or anything that wasn’t a necessity. Just kept saving. I paid a 12.5% interest mortgage on a first house with windows that didn’t shut and no central heating. If I had expected the lifestyle I see around me now I would never have bought a house either.”

Given how out-of-reach home ownership is, it can be argued that actually young people buying coffees is an adaptive response to a sense of helplessness the younger generations have about their quality of life. Basically, ‘Even if I stop ever buying coffee, I’ll never get near owning a home so might as well treat myself where I can. And perhaps, even, enough coffee might make me stop thinking about how the older generation told me that hard work would get me all they have, it hasn’t, and they’re now telling me it’s my fault.’

I’ve noticed a tendency for right-wing Baby Boomers to see this tendency to spend on inessentials as evidence of laziness. So let’s look into the evidence.

A coffee at £3.50 a day, buying one every weekday (20 per month), that’s £70/month → £840/year. Over 5 years, that’s a saving of £4,200; over 10 years, £8,400. To fund a 10% deposit on a £269k home, you’d need £26,900 upfront. We could do similar sums in relation to Netflix, and avocados (and here I would politely point out, I see an awful lot of baby boomers who not only have Netflix but who drink plenty of coffee in cafes).

Another problem with 'CricklewoodBob’s argument is that even with total lifestyle austerity, average saving rates do not allow for a home deposit in many UK cities within a decade. House prices rose far faster than wages. Nor does the ‘don’t live in London, move to the country’ argument hold water. Younger generations know they can’t do that.

CricklewoodBob’s comment reflects a common boomer narrative that, while grounded in some truth, becomes misleading when applied to today’s housing context. Yes, mortgage interest rates in the 1980s and early 1990s were high—sometimes over 12%—but crucially, house prices were far lower relative to income, with average price-to-income ratios around 3.5x compared to today’s 8x or more. Interest rates were high for periods, but using a single household income a home could be owned outright. Not just owned, not just owned with a mortgage on it that survived your death, but by your fifties owned outright.

As a result, even with lower interest rates now, the monthly repayment burden is often greater due to the much larger loan principal required. While many boomers did live frugally in their youth and avoided luxuries like takeout or international holidays, younger generations face essential costs today—like digital connectivity, student debt, and high rents—that weren’t part of the boomer experience.

“Sharpthinker88” says in the comments section: "My parents, baby boomers, didn’t grow up with Netflix or streaming. They lived frugally, saved money, and made do without all these modern luxuries. It wasn’t easy back then either."

I did some research, going deeper into the fact that Netflix wasn’t available to Baby Boomers when they were in their twenties or thirties. It found that as of 2024, according to a report by WARC Media, over 50% of individuals aged 55 and above now spend more than half of their media time with online content, including streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime Video.

The idea that modern young people squander money on frivolities ignores data showing that Millennials (or Gen Y) and Gen Z actually spend less on alcohol, clothes, and cars than previous generations did at their age.

More importantly, the notion that careful saving alone will get you on the property ladder is now deeply flawed—accumulating a £25k–£50k deposit while paying rent, student loans, and living expenses is simply not feasible for many.

Bob’s perspective likely reflects his real experience, sure, but when generalized to today’s conditions, it amounts to economic nostalgia that ignores structural changes and unfairly blames individuals for systemic problems.

He also overlooks the Boomers' extreme luck. Historically, they were one of the few generations to ever be middle class and asset-owning. They were born into a world that rewarded effort and compliance with real prosperity. They had little exposure to mass trauma (rationing may have been an issue for some as children, but unlike today’s young they did not stay at home during Covid to protect the elderly) did not have widespread poverty or fight in a war, or systemic collapse in youth or midlife. They benefited from public investment and community, then privatised it, and now struggle to understand why young people are angry.

Boomers are history’s luckiest generation—in terms of life expectancy, economic opportunity, political stability, social freedom, relative safety, long, comfortable retirement. Other generations may have experienced wealth, glory, or stability in small pockets or short bursts. But no generation has had it all, for so many people, for so long, as the Baby Boomers.

Older buyers may have faced high interest rates, but on much lower loan principals. Today’s buyers have low rates (until recently) but massive capital outlay. Overall mortgage affordability is often worse today.

A user called “britgrit1954” said; "Back in my day we put in the hours, saved every penny, and didn’t expect handouts. Today’s youth want everything now without putting in the graft."

So studies consistently show that millennials are more likely to take on multiple jobs, work longer hours in insecure employment, and are often subject to the ‘always on’ culture through digital connectivity. Burnout is the defining generational issue—not a lack of effort.

2. The Idea Housing Was Just As Out Of Reach Then The commenter ‘old fittzy’ got 302 likes for saying:

"Think I must be what you call a baby boomer but let me tell you I left school at 14 worked until 61 yrs old. My first husband and I lived for 12 month with my parents before we could afford to buy (small terrace house). No holidays or car for a number of years and no children for 6 years. Hand me down furniture. No stair carpet which helped as I had no vacuum cleaner. 71 now 39 yrs with second husband and enjoying life. Modest bungalow and two second property’s (one inherited) I’ve worked hard and been very frugal but also been very fortunate I feel for young folk but looking back it was just as hard for us."

So yes, Baby Boomers struggled too—interest rates were high, no luxuries, second-hand furniture, long savings periods. The important tension here is that it’s important not to deny the hard work of Baby Boomers- but the evidence disproves they had it hardest. The economic playing field was tilted more favourably in their favour. They had free university tuition. Cheap housing relative to income. More stable employment (we were pre the era of zero-hour contracts). Far fewer student debts with high interest rates. Affordable or even council housing options. And more generous pensions (with many pensioners today having used their vast voting power as a cohort to have inflation linked pensions the young today are not on course to have, and even successfully resisting attempts for the Winter Fuel Allowance to be means-tested).

3. The Argument Immigration Is The Issue A third argument I saw a lot of was offered by the likes of ‘lostinlondon12’ who got 512 likes for saying:

“Everyone talks about wages and housing but what no one wants to say is the UK’s population boom. It’s not just natural growth, it’s the massive immigration over the past two decades that’s pushed up demand for housing beyond what the market can supply. The government’s immigration policies haven’t done young people any favours. More people means more competition for jobs and homes, which drives up prices and pushes wages down. Until immigration is properly controlled, young people will continue to struggle.”

But again, this is misleading. While immigration does increase demand, it’s one of several contributing factors, not the root cause. The supply-side constraints (e.g., greenbelt restrictions, slow planning approval, underbuilding by government and private sector) are more impactful.

In fact, far from immigrants being the issue, it is often baby boomers themselves. Why? Many analysts and housing experts argue that Buy-To-Let landlords, especially from the Baby Boomer generation, have a bigger direct impact on housing affordability and availability in social and affordable housing sectors than immigration does.

So, the evidence is that it has got far harder for post Baby Boomer generations. But (on an admittedly quite entrenched right-wing discussion forum) this idea is being not only rejected, but consolidated.

An analysis of this shows us three big reasons why a generation, having enjoyed the best of it economically, having as a cohort voted for governments that stripped away these advantages, might then in addition be able to find amongst themselves agreeing amongst themselves they had it hardest.

1. Accepting The Young Have It Harder Challenges Their Pride

Baby Boomers have often enjoyed significant financial gains through stable jobs, rising property values, and accessible education. Acknowledging that Millennials and younger face greater economic hardships creates the psychological discomfort of cognitive dissonance. Their positive view of the past and their own achievements clashes with the reality of current struggles. To reduce this discomfort, downplay or deny the difficulties younger generations experience. Accepting the young have it harder? That means admitting you had it easier, and downplaying your hard work—which, of course, was real.

2. It Challenges Their Identity

Boomers tend to derive part of their self-worth from their generation’s perceived successes. Admitting that Millennials are economically worse off could feel like a threat to their legacy or imply that their achievements were not as meaningful or replicable as believed. This defensive stance helps protect their identity and pride in the societal progress made during their lifetimes. It also acts as a comfort in a digital world where, in fairness, it probably feels to Baby Boomers like the ground is shifting beneath their feet. Boomers grew up in a different economic context—with more stable employment, lower education costs, and more affordable housing. These experiences shape their worldview, often leading them to interpret Millennials’ challenges as results of poor choices or lack of effort, rather than systemic economic shifts. This misunderstanding can reinforce dismissive attitudes toward millennial struggles.

Yes, Baby Boomers lived under the shadow of nuclear threat and were active activists- but does that as hardship dwarf the young staying home to protect the old during Covid, the activism of future generations, and constitute any kind of sacrifice?

3. Admitting They Had It Relatively Easier Might Mean They Need to Share More

And here’s the nub of it.

Many Baby Boomers benefited from economic conditions that favored wealth accumulation, such as rising real estate prices and a stronger social safety net. Millennials face a labour market marked by precarious employment, student debt, and soaring housing costs. Boomers may overlook these structural changes or attribute them to generational attitudes instead, further contributing to their scepticism about millennials’ claims of economic difficulty.

Why? Because psychologically, if baby boomers acknowledge that millennials are struggling much more, it can create pressure to address those inequalities. That might mean sharing wealth or supporting policies that redistribute resources (like higher taxes, more social spending, or changes to housing policy).

Admitting hardship also challenges the narrative that their own financial success was purely due to merit or effort, opening up uncomfortable questions about systemic advantages they benefited from. So, by downplaying millennials’ struggles or blaming other factors, or overstating their own precarity in the face of all evidence, they reduce the likelihood of feeling guilty or responsible for change.

It’s a way to protect their wealth and social status, consciously or unconsciously, while preserving a sense of fairness and control over the economic narrative. This defence mechanism helps avoid the discomfort of potential loss or societal pressure to “give back.”

So These Baby Boomers Are Gaslighting Younger Generations?

When a dominant group—in this case, many baby boomers—minimises or denies the very real economic and social challenges faced by younger generations, it can distort reality and make those struggles seem exaggerated or invalid. Not all Baby Boomers do this, of course. Some, I have seen in these forums, are supportive of the young and feel the world’s been left in a terrible state: many share their wealth, or lack of it, to help the young.

But those saying the issues aren’t real? It shifts blame away from systemic issues or structural inequalities and onto individuals or other scapegoats. I’ve often found when I’ve presented the Millennial view that the response has been to assume I’m unemployed or should work harder, with no evidence of what I do in my life beyond a knee-jerk presumption. Perhaps I was being provocative. But this gaslighting effect can make Millennials and Gen Z question their own experiences and perceptions, feel isolated, or less justified in demanding change.

It’s not always a deliberate or malicious act—often it stems from self-protection or cognitive biases—but the impact can be really damaging. Perhaps they don’t want to admit helping their children onto the property ladder when property was cheap could have transformed the financial security of their children.

That’d mean painful regret. It’s easier to say, ‘it’s your fault, you didn’t work as hard as me.’

So when should millennials debate and contest what is really going on here? The need to do this can feel all the more urgent when not only does it not feel like matters are improving but in fact that the older generation are saying they had it worse, sealing off any chance of progress.

It suggests it can be worth millennials engaging with discussion forums about this, briefly, to reorient facts and challenge misinformation, but then withdrawing from prolonged debate. ‘Clarify, but don’t attack’ might be a mantra that the likes of me can bear in mind. Offering clear, calm corrections or sharing personal experiences can help plant seeds of understanding and counter harmful stereotypes. I have found as well some online communities can really help with the real issues younger generations are dealing with. There’s healthy and less healthy places to debate and all our own psychologies and back stories get activated as we get drawn in. For instance, I was a few years ago close to buying a Leasehold flat in a certain area until a very patient, kind community I engaged with on Facebook talked me through what this would entail.

There’s harmful places to engage, and good ones. And as we try to navigate a world with shifting sands under every generation, the good ones are all the more in need of treasuring.

• Eliza Filby, “How baby boomers really DID have it easier,” Mail Online, 2024

• Statista (2019): Financial help received by UK homeowners under 35

• This Is Money (2024): Sharp decline in first-time buyers and Gen Z homeownership

• WARC Media (2024): Over-55s spend more than half their media time streaming

• Ofcom Media Nations (UK): Media consumption by age group (2024)

• Deloitte Global Millennial Survey (2024): Millennial and Gen Z workforce trends

• Centre for Cities: “The Housing Crisis Explained”

• ONS Housing Affordability in England and Wales (2023)

• Resolution Foundation: Intergenerational Audit 2023