A younger generation of politicians is scoring victories around the U.S. on the back of grievances about affordability and a perceived narrowing of longtime avenues of opportunity. This upheaval has reached Congress and been most noticeable among Democrats, especially progressives or socialists.
Although many Millennial and Gen Z Americans stand ultimately to reap considerable inheritances from the wealth amassed by their elders, there’s indeed a generational-equity concern for the next decade at least. And part of that inequity is the result of traditional breaks extended to “seniors” at the federal, state and local levels–a legacy of the days when fixed-income households lagged behind the general population.
This imbalance no longer applies generally, thanks to COLA-based pensions and especially to the rise in equity and other asset prices, such as homes. Universal favoritism toward the elderly, loosely defined (the American Association of Retired Persons–AARP–is “dedicated” to those over 50), isn’t justified. Means testing for all benefits is appropriate, not just for outright transfer programs. But this has been politically toxic, thanks to lobbies such as AARP and mainstream elected officials. Social Security is a prime example.
Might the new wave winning office change the calculus? So far, not so good. The Democratic Socialists of America, for example, appears to oppose the idea of means tests–it wants to expand public-benefit levels across the board. This reflects a preference for massive tax increases over any re-slicing of the fiscal pie. As yet, however, no sea change in favor of European levels of taxation is evident in the broader American polity. Unless and until that occurs, only a shift of the spoils is going to square accounts for younger cohorts who sense they’re being shut out. –June 28, 2026
Tim W. Ferguson 