The Baby Boomers' reign is over. Long Live the Boomers!
Demographically it had to happen. The breezy age cohort which sprung from the loins of weary wartime parents has reached its use-by date.
Or so some might have you believe.
Democratically the bird has not yet flown. Baby boomers, who hatched between 1946-1964, still hold much more wealth, if not the absolute numbers.
The latest census data trumpeted that Millennials 25-39 years old have caught up to Baby Boomers 55-74 as the largest generational groups in the land.
But which is the most influential politically, economically or socially and for how long?
Both groups are about 5.4 million strong. Eleven months ago, the Boomers outnumbered the Mills, aka the Net Generation or Gen Y, by just 5662, and since then, the balance must have switched.
To show you how much has changed: in 1966, almost 40% of the population were Boomers. Now we are a shadow of our former numbers at 21.5%. But is that necessarily bad?
In other data, as might be expected, the Millennials are less religious than the boomers but do you recognise yourself in any of the census revelations?
A few years ago, The Grattan Institute found that the average Boomer household is doing OK thanks to the appreciation of housing and superannuation assets.
A home headed by someone aged 65 to 74 had more than $1.3 million in net assets, up from $530,000 in real terms for the same household in 1994. Take that, Millennials.
But there is a bonanza heading their way. Boomers will bequeath an estimated $224 billion in inheritances annually by 2050, mainly because of asset appreciation and fewer heirs!
The Productivity Commission study on wealth transfers said there'd be $3.5 trillion coming to the younger generations, including many Millennials.
So the chips are down. Do you think there is any kind of rivalry between the Boomers and the Millennials, or is it just a phony war?
And are the Boomers overrated or worthy of praise?
