Millennials are being outpaced by Gen Z in almost every way, and I'm starting to feel sorry for them

In fact, the ONS suggests that the millennials were the peak libertines, with a higher rate of binge drinking, for example, than those coming before or since. Drowning their sorrows I guess

No wonder they feel that their dreams of property ownership, suitable employment with a 'fair' wage and general economic security are receding (iStock/Getty)

I have to admit that I am almost feeling sorry for millennials. According to the Institute for Fiscal studies, a highly reputable organisation no one should argue with, a 35-year-old in 2018 is earning about £3,000 a year less than their equivalent would have been getting back in 2008. All age groups, sad to rate, have seen their incomes drop, age group for age group (ie not, for example, a 35-year-old in 2008 who is 45 years old now). But the collapse has been the most pronounced for those born, roughly, in the 1980s and 1990s.

No wonder they feel that their dreams of property ownership, suitable employment with a “fair” wage and general economic security are receding.

Worse still, the next wave of youngsters – Generation Z or Generation Sensible as they’re being called – seems to have things rather better than their slightly older peers. The Office for National Statistics is producing a fascinating run of reports on “Being 18 in 2018”, tracking the shifting fortunes of those born on the cusp of the new millennium (but not so-called millennials).

Those post-millennials are striking in a number of ways. Some, to me, are laudable. They are “sensible” in that they drink and smoke less than, I should imagine, any previous generation since Sir Walter Raleigh brought the evil weed, tobacco, back from the New World. (Some of this, it has to be said, is down to vaping but that is probably still a relatively healthy development.)

In fact, the ONS suggests that the millennials were the peak libertines, with a higher rate of binge drinking, for example, than those coming before or since. Drowning their sorrows I guess.

Yet the post-millennial Gen Z are also a pretty reclusive bunch. They have, literally, retreated to their bedrooms. They socialise – I mean face to face human interaction, not sitting around on an iPad tweeting or on Instagram, whatever that is – far less than their predecessors – about three or four hours a week less. Some claim that they are the generation of the meme, a hotly (though unfathomably) contested claim. Whatever.

Gen Z is, certainly, a generation brought up entirely in the digi-saturated society of today, and their awakening adulthood spent during the Great Recession that followed the financial crisis. Their earnings seem not to have been as hard-hit as the millennials’, and, as with every generation before them, they can look forward to long life with miracle cures covering so many of the diseases once thought incurable – well into their nineties. A significant number of Gen Z will see in the 22nd century. Globally, Gen Z will outnumber millennials next year.

They also seem willing to take on the financial risk of higher education. For the first time, working 18-year-olds are outnumbered by those who don’t work, termed “economically inactive”. The phrase “economically inactive” is not meant to be offensive – it merely means that more are not looking for work, overwhelmingly because they are going to college. Good for them.

They will also be reaping the full benefits of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and innovations such as artificial intelligence. There they will, most likely, get a better deal out of life than the millennials, who increasingly look to be the poor relations of the baby boomers and Gen Z alike. What’s more, they seem more likely to reproduce than their immediate predecessors, so the UK’s demographics will improve towards the middle of the 21st century – meaning a better ratio between workers and the retired. That will help us all. Gen Z is not, though, keen on marrying young; only 1 in 1,000 18-year-olds are getting spliced, an all-time low. You can draw your own conclusions about that.

These trends are all very interesting, but I doubt they should have any political bearing. The thing I regret about the whole “intergenerational fairness” debate is the way it distorts politics, setting age groups against each other. It makes no sense, anyway. Was it fair that a previous generation had to live though the Great Depression and two world wars? No, but nothing can be done.

So-called intergenerational fairness seems to be about fighting over getting a bigger slice of an existing economic pie, rather than concentrating on how we can make the economic pie bigger. How can we raise productivity and produce more? How can we do so sustainably? Do we need to improve incentives for work and enterprise? Reduce taxation on wealth creators? Not pay ourselves more than we earn? Save more and invest more? I’d suggest so, and add that that is the way for every generation to make itself wealthier than the one before. Seems fair.