 So as we mentioned I work for the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank with Ray Bishara and as an employee of the Federal Reserve Bank I have to mention that these are my own views and not necessarily the views of the Fed and the Fed system, Board of Governors, etc. So I'm just going to dive right in because I know I have limited time here. I liked that reteed up a lot of the themes I'm going to be talking about today. It makes my job easier considering the amount of things I'd like to get to and tap. Reed mentioned the very wide range of experiences and ages within the millennial group and that's why in our work we actually focus on a more narrow group. Just those born in the 1980s headed by a family headed by someone born in the 1980s because it's pretty easy to say, okay, I was born in this decade. It allows for better comparisons in our view. And as Reed mentioned, their financial outcomes are poorer than the generations before them. So if we look at what their wealth should be based on the experiences of all families regardless of what age they are, we see that the 1980s, these older millennials are behind and quite a bit further behind the expectations set by previous generations. This is another look at the generational wealth gap. If you look at the top, the very top that people are born, the people who are 65 to 75 at the bottom is 25 to 35 year olds. We see that that gap has grown over time and in fact is from this time spanned at an all time high. If you look at the very, very top of those people who are 75 compared to the very, very bottom, people who are born who are 25 in 2016, we see that their gap, the actual numbers is about 150,000. It was in 1989. Now in 2016, that gap has grown by almost 100,000. So that's a significant growth, not just in the proportion but the actual numbers as well. So our estimates, and I'll show you a graph of this, is that older millennials are actually about 34% below where we would expect them to be in 2016 for wealth. For income, there doesn't seem to be as much weakness. It's only 3% below. There's a different story going on here and if we have time we can get into why that might be. So we looked at perhaps some of the causes. We have one short term re-talked about the influence and the importance of the great recession on this generation. Many of them were just entering the job market. Many of them decided to go back to school and get further degree, etc. Some of them were just entering adulthood. The youngest born in 1980 were 18 in 2007 at the beginning of the Great Recession. So that's why we also focus on this group as opposed to say those born in the 1990s because we can compare their outcomes before and after the Great Recession or adults. Two long-term trends that I'll talk about too are just wealth redistribution from less to more educated families as well as from younger to older families. All of these things combined, we believe, have an effect on their lower and poorer wealth outcomes. I apologize for the busyness of this slide. It was supposed to be built, but that unfortunately did not transfer over. So bear with me. I'm going to try to explain it. I'm happy to go through it at a later time as well. So the horizontal line, the zero, that's where we would expect families to be. So if they're above the horizontal line, we're saying that they're doing better than we would expect them to be doing at the same age as other families in the past. If they're below, that means we're doing worse than our expectations would say. The groupings of blue bars, those are income in 2007. Right before the Great Recession is that data. 2010, our point after the Great Recession that we have. And then 2016, the latest data that we have available. And the green bar grouping of bars are wealth. So if we just look at income and wealth on the line down there, that's whatever year the birth, the year of birth the families were in. So 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s. So from older to younger generations left to right. And what we see is that typically all families were doing pretty well at the peak of the housing bubble. They all had higher income and higher wealth than we would expect. The housing bubble when that burst, it pushed them below, almost all families were pushed below both income and wealth. And then there was some recovery. We tended to see recovery, so that's the solid bars. The solid blue is income, the solid green is wealth in 2016. There tended to be some recovery by that point. And many families, particularly these older generations, 30s, 40s and 50s, they were actually regained above average expectations, what we would expect them to be. For younger families, the story was a little bit different. So those born in the 60s, 70s or 80s, on the right side here, is my mic on. When I move over, okay, sorry. But those in the 60s, 70s and 80s, you can see those solid green bars are below the horizontal line, meaning that they're below expectations. And the only group, those older millennials born in the 1980s, those were the only ones to not only lose wealth that we would expect from the Great Recession, but they actually feel further behind between 2010 and 2016. They're the only family to do this. And that's why this group is really concerning as to whether they're going to recover in time to meet major life goals. All right, so I talked about the short-term cause. There doesn't really seem to be anything unusual about their savings. In fact, they're saving a little bit higher of a rate than the 1970s group. They weren't heavily invested in housing. So hopefully in this discussion, I get to talk about some of the reasons why their wealth might be a little bit lower. Two of the longer-term causes I want to get to really quick are wealth redistribution from younger, or excuse me, from less educated to more educated families. Here, I'm just showing you wealth. And the blue bars are non-grad families, what we call non-grad for shorthand. Those are families headed by someone with less than a four-year college degree. And the green are families headed by someone with at least a four-year college degree or grads. And what we can see is that if we cut out the 1930s, the very far left, we just kind of take them as an anomaly. They're a little bit older here. And we just look at the 1940s, 50s, 60s, and 70s. Those green bars are all kind of around the horizontal line, meaning that grads are all kind of hitting the mark more or less, right? Even millennial grads aren't that far behind the expectations we would predict. The story is totally different for non-grads, right? Each younger generation is farther and farther below that line. In particular, the story is really worrisome for non-graduate younger cohorts. This just shows, I know it's kind of, there's a lot going on in this slide, this just shows that there has been wealth redistribution from younger to older families. The more those lines separate, the older families are on top, the younger at the bottom. That means that compared to 1989, there's been separation between those groups that we would expect. In other words, the generational wealth gap is growing. In 2007, that's again right before the Great Recession, and then there's even more expansion, and younger families are pushed below the levels of 1989, whereas older families are still doing better. This is another way to look at that. And so here we have wealth from 2016 compared to the same-aged family in 1989. If they're above the horizontal line here, that means that if you're older in 2016, compared to the same-aged family in 1989, you have more wealth. But younger families, that wasn't the story. So if you compare, say, a 25-year-old in 2016 to a 25-year-old in 1989, they're almost 50% below the wealth that we would expect. So there's huge wealth disparities here, growing wealth gaps, and age 60 appears to be a demarcation point where that trend sort of flips. One final note that I wanted to make sure I got to was on, as Reid said, millennials, the millennial group, even the 1980s group, is one of the most diverse that we've studied. It's certainly the most diverse up until that point generation. And so we'd be kind of remiss to not talk about race and ethnicity. And so here what I'm showing you on the left, that's income, the income wealth gap for those born in the 1980s, or excuse me, the income gap for those born in the 1980s by race. And then on the right is the wealth gap for those born in the 1980s by race. And so what we see is that just like in the overall population, the income gap is smaller than the wealth gap. But the wealth gap is pretty, pretty massive. And in the overall population, it's roughly the same for the millennials group. So the black-white wealth gap, at least. So black families, millennial families had about 11 cents per every dollar of wealth that white families had. Hispanics were doing better than the overall population numbers, so their gap was 49 cents to every dollar, so still a pretty large gap there, but much smaller than in the overall population. Which, as Reid said, because this Hispanic group has been growing so fast, that that is a little bit more hopeful, but the gap remains, right? All right, I think I have just about a minute left, maybe less. So just kind of wrapping up. The millennials, we've seen that they have poor wealth outcomes, poor income as well, but especially wealth tends to be below 34% below our expectations. They're both short-term and long-term causes because of this. And really only time will tell. There are reasons that we can be optimistic. We'll have a lot of time. They're still fairly young, but they're getting older, as we mentioned. And so if they are going to recover, we need to see recovering the next data set, the 2019, which we'll get in the fall. So beyond the look-out for that, we'll have an update to this report. Have they recovered any wealth at all? We'll see. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Reid, and New America Foundation for the opportunities to share some facts and some figures from our chapter. Let's see. The other one. That's worn off. There we go. Okay. So to share some facts and figures from our chapter in the book, we're so excited about the book. And the chapter is the Wealth and Credit Health of Young Millennials. This is joint work with Caroline Ratcliffe, who's here today, and with Trina Shanks. So as millennials age and they become a greater share of our workforce like we've heard, their overall financial health matters more and more for our economy. It's increasingly important. So what is their wealth position? We've just heard a lot about it. And is there a natural point that we can intervene in terms of helping with this? I'm also seeing my colleague, Cassie Martin, who helped with this chapter here. So great to have you here too. So what is wealth? Wealth is what you own minus what you owe. It's your assets minus your debt. And so why are we seeing the generational wealth differences that Anna described? A lower millennial home ownership rate, maybe one explanation. And we're going to hear a little bit more about that from my colleague. And then a closer look at the debt side of the balance sheet provides some additional insight. So this slide here shows debt for people under age 30 and how it's changed over time. So student or educational loan debt, it clearly stands out. And what you see is that it's increasing sharply in recent years. Even as other forms of debt such as vehicle loan debt and credit card debt, they fell after the Great Recession and then they remained relatively low. So for people under age 30 in 1989, student loan debt was a relatively small component of their debt. And that's what you can see on the left side of that graph there. It's pretty close to zero. But by 2016 on the right side of the graph, it was a large component of debt. The average young millennial had nearly $12,000 more in student loans than the average young family had in 1989. So what is the millennial balance sheet? And how does it compare with all families just turning to current time? The most recent data here in 2016. And what we see is that on the asset side, vehicle equity makes up a relatively large share of millennials assets. 27% versus 15% for all families. And if you look at home equity by comparison, it makes up a relatively small share, 6% for young millennials and 21% for all families as shown in the graph here. So this in part reflects that millennials are at a different stage of life than older families and it also reflects some of the trends that we're seeing. So what about the debt side? On the debt side of the balance sheet, several categories dominate for this younger generation. Specifically, young millennials hold the largest share of their debt in student loans. That's 38%. With car and mortgage loans tied for a distant second at 21%. In contrast to young families, all families hold the largest share of their debt in mortgage loans, 44%, and the smallest share in student loans. That's at 8%. So this gives us an idea of what's on millennials' minds, student loans and car loans, and how it differs for what might be on the minds of all families. And that is, they're going to be mostly focused on mortgage debt. So let's take a closer look at millennials' credit health, starting with some of the reasons why it's important. Having a subprime credit score is costly. So this figure here shows the expected difference for three common purchases across subprime and prime consumers. A car repair, purchasing a refrigerator, and then buying a car. And a consumer with a subprime credit score can expect to pay almost twice as much for a car repair, almost three times as much for a refrigerator, and three times as much for a car loan. So that's nearly $4,000 in interest for that car loan, as compared with a little over 1,000 for somebody with a prime credit score. And we didn't include the difference that a prime versus a subprime consumer will pay on a mortgage because it's off the chart. Consumers with subprime credit could pay nearly $90,000 more when they go to buy their home. And that's if they're able to buy a home, right? Subprime consumers may be excluded from the mainstream credit system. And so by being denied a mortgage, for example, subprime consumers are excluded from one of the most powerful asset building tools that we've traditionally had in the United States. So turning more into that credit health, using 2017 data from a major credit bureau, we find that among people with a credit record, the share of millennials with a subprime credit score increases with age, especially for millennials who live in communities of color. So the first bar on this figure here shows the share of 18 to 20-year-olds with a subprime credit score. The second, the share of 21 to 24-year-olds, and the third, the share of 25 to 29-year-olds with a subprime credit score. And what you see is that compared with young millennials, the ones age 18 to 20, a greater share of those 21 to 24 have subprime credit. The levels are even worse for 25 to 29-year-olds. And this figure also shows large differences for youth who live in communities of color. They're 34% versus in white communities where 26%. That's a gap of 8 percentage points. And the gap doubles to 16 percentage points by age 21 to 24. And that's 47% versus 31%. And it remains consistently large. So not only is the share increasing with age, but it's being exacerbated in communities of color. So importantly, nearly half of millennials ages 21 to 29, who live in a community of color and have a credit record, have a subprime credit score. So the subcrime credit score leaves them vulnerable to high-cost predatory lending, and it can severely limit their ability to build wealth into their 30s and beyond. In fact, if we look at the average family and their wealth back in the early 1980s, what we see is that racial disparities are already evident about age 30, but that they grow sharply with age. So when people are in their 30s looking at one cohort here, whites have about three times more wealth than African-Americans. But by the time they reach their 60s, white families have about seven times more wealth than African-Americans. So the racial wealth gap has been growing over time, and if this trend holds true for millennials, then families of color will face increasing economic security and have fewer resources to pursue their dreams and their aspirations. So a common measure of financial distress is reflected in the credit bureau data as the share of people who are unable to pay their debts. So the data clearly reflect that millennials are struggling to pay their student loan debt. Student loan debt and collections increases with age overall and for millennials living in communities of color and for millennials living in majority white communities. So again, we see this pattern that financial distress is increasing with age. And once again, it's worse for millennials living in communities of color. We're an astonishing 29% of 25 to 29-year-olds have student loan debt and collections. So that's nearly every third person. And that's nearly twice the 17% share for those living in majority white communities. So what are some of the key takeaways from these facts and figures? That this generation is on a very different trajectory for wealth building. And not only are young millennials accumulating less wealth, but their debt holdings look fundamentally different. First, interactions with the financial system can set young adults up for success or it can place them in a precarious position for future years. So we need to catch them at age 18 to 20 as they start to interact with the credit system. Young adults' debt and collections, their subprime credit and other financial distress increase with age as do the racial gaps. And having a subprime credit score is costly and can hurt young adults' abilities to gain a firm financial footing. And this financial insecurity affects education, it affects social mobility, it affects how much medical debt and collections young people have and much more. So targeting financial health interventions to teens and young adults could be an important step in improving America's long-term financial well-being. So you can learn more about this in the book by contacting me, by subscribing to Urban Institute's Monthly Opportunity Ownership Initiative. And I'd like to thank funders for their support, especially the Annie Casey Foundation who funded much of this research. And of course, any views and errors are our own. Good morning, everyone. I'm Jung. Thanks for the invitation. So this chapter talks about home ownership and living arrangement among millennials. So as Reid mentioned in his presentation, the home ownership rate of young adults have dropped significantly, especially after the financial crisis. So if you look at the home ownership rate of young adults between age 25 to 34, right now it's around 38%, which is about 7% lower than the home ownership rate in 2000. So millennials right now have about 7 to 8 percentage point lower home ownership rate compared to the baby boomers in Generation X when they were around the same age. So if the millennials between this age group have the same home ownership rate as the prior generation, we will see about 1.3 million more young homeowner households in the current market. Okay, so not only millennials are delaying home ownership rate, a significantly share of millennials are deciding to stay longer with their parents. So this rate has actually kind of increased more than the drop in the home ownership rate. So between 2000 and 2017, the share of young adults living with their parents have increased from 12% to 22%, adding about 5.1 million more young adults living under their parents' roof. And as Reid I think mentioned, these young adults are not even within the home ownership rate calculation because you have to be independent households to be in that calculation, so this rate is not even captured in the decline in the home ownership rate. So there are also significant disparity in home ownership rate and living arrangement across the race and ethnic groups. So the blue line above there is the white home ownership rate, that's the green line. And the blue line underneath is the black home ownership rate and you see that the gap has increased significantly. I just want to point out here in the graph that, okay, for the blue line, the black home ownership rate, it has declined since 2000. So even during the housing boom period, the young black adult, young adults have not experienced an increase in home ownership rate. Also, I do want to highlight in this graph that if you compare the home ownership rate from 2015 onwards, you see that for all other race ethnic groups, you see a slight uptick. But then for the black young adults, you still see a decline since 2015. So for black young adults, we haven't really seen that the home ownership rate improvement in the recent few years. And also, the black young adults are most likely to stay with their parents for a longer period of time. So here you see that since 2015, all lines have increased, but the blue line is at the top suggesting that the black young adults are most likely to stay with their parents, followed by the Hispanic young adults, which is in the red line. And also, you see that for the Asians and white, the young adults staying with their parents have kind of leveled up since 2015, but for both blacks and Hispanics, we see a continuous increase over time. So with that, we kind of in the paper, we kind of discuss whether millennials are different from the prior generations. I'm not sure if you can see the slides very well, but then bear with me, I'll try to explain as clearly as possible. So a lot of media outlets have talked about, OK, millennials, they might have different preferences from the prior generations. So that might be a choice that they're delaying home ownership or staying with their parents for a longer time. But our study and also a lot of studies find that millennials, the desire for home ownership rate, is pretty similar to the prior generation. However, we do find that millennials are preferring to live in downtown or more high cost cities. But then this is not because they want to live in a more expensive area. It's more because they want to live in places with greater job opportunity and greater amenities. And these places just happen to have a greater housing cost increase over the past decades. And also, millennials are more racially diverse. And we know that the people of color have significantly lower home ownership rate. So this is also a contributing factor of lower home ownership rate of millennials. And also the decline in marital rate is also correlated with the decline in home ownership. So next slide shows that there has been a significant decline in the marital rate among millennials. The young adult marital rate in the 1990s was about 60%. Now it's about 40%. And we know that from this graph, we show that if you're married, you're more likely to be homeowner. So this is highly related to the fact that millennials have lower home ownership rate. I have two more slides and two minutes to go. So does millennial face greater barrier? With all this, we looked at several factors that are affecting millennials to delay home ownership rate and live with their parents for a longer period of time. So first is employment and income, especially since the financial crisis. The unemployment rate of young adults increased significantly. And although there has been recovery, that means that you have shorter time to save up for down payment. So that has affected young adults to delay home ownership. And second is student debt. As McNamara explained, there has been a significant increase in student debt, which is affecting millennials. It's increasing their debt to income. And also there's a lot of delinquency related to student debt. So that's actually also affecting the credit score of a lot of millennials. And there has been a significant reduction in the housing supply. Right now the new housing starts in 2018. 2019 is lower than that of 1960, where the population of the US was only 55% of what it is now. So there has been significant reduction in supply. So that is not only increasing the house prices, but that's also affecting the rent prices to go up. So it's more unaffordable to buy a home and it's more difficult to save for down payment. So because if you're a renter, you're paying more of your income on rent. And finally, the credit has tightened since the crisis. So the median credit score for mortgage origination right now is about 730 to 40, which is about 40% higher than what it was in 2000 when we think it's the period of reasonable lending standard. And as we know that millennials have on average lower credit scores than the older generation, so it's more difficult to access the mortgage market because of the tight credit condition. Finally, I'll briefly talk about the long-term consequences. So we kind of thought maybe if millennials stay with their parents for a longer time, it gives them a time to save for down payments because they're not paying for rent. But we find that that's not necessarily the case. When we follow them up for after 10 years, we find that the young adults who stayed with their home parents between 25 to 34, they're significantly less likely to be homeowners and former independent households compared to those who moved out of the parents' household earlier in their life. And also, we know that homeownership is a significant wealth-building tool in this country. So this graph shows the home equity at the age 60 and 61 for those who bought their house period before age 25, between 25 to 34, 35 to 44 and 44 over. And this green bar shows that if you buy your home earlier in your life, you have significantly greater housing wealth at the age near retirement. And finally, the thing that is really problematic here is that home ownership transfers from parent to children generation. So if you're a child of a homeowner parent, then you're significantly more likely to be a homeowner yourself. Thank you. Thanks. Hi, everyone. I'm Genevieve Malford with the Aspen Institute Financial Security Program. I'm going to make about five minutes worth of discussant remarks, and then I'm going to, just in the interest of time, I'm going to open it up to you. I'll also be thinking of your questions. And in about five minutes, I'm going to throw it to you. And I'll facilitate that Q&A until it's time for the next panel. Okay, so thank you so much to Read Into New America for inviting me to participate today and for inviting my program to contribute to this volume. And so our program, the Aspen Institute Financial Security Program, exists to highlight and help drive convergence around solutions to the most critical financial challenges facing American households. So obviously this topic is incredibly important and related to all the things we care about. So the three papers that we just heard do a fantastic job of reporting the top-line facts that we need to know about to understand what these challenges are, right? So Anna showed that millennial household wealth is far behind benchmarks set by prior generations and that debt composition is different, less mortgage debt, more student debt, and signatory documented similar points, also pointing out compositional changes in assets and debt and adding to the story with information on credit health, which is incredibly important because it plays a critical role in the price that people pay for credit and therefore their cash flows, what they have to pay on a monthly basis to service that debt. And Zheng showed the decline in home ownership among this cohort. So these are all top-line facts that I heard a lot of murmuring and even gasps from the crowd, like this is powerful stuff, it's important to see that. So what I'd like to spend my few minutes talking about is what I see as behind these findings, the broader economic context, household cash flows and how those relate to consumer debt. Because in order to save, invest, and build wealth, people need income that routinely exceeds their expenses. So we're seeing the outcomes in these wealth and debt and home ownership data, but I believe what's under that is cash flows, so that's what I'd like to talk about. So my first point is that there are systemic trends behind the millennial wealth gaps. So Reid talked this morning about how we're seeing both the stagnating and increasingly volatile household incomes, which when you pair that with systematically increasing cost of living, things like housing, childcare, and out-of-pocket medical expenses, together those create a cash flow situation that inhibits the development of liquid savings. Liquid savings that could cushion people from routine shocks and without it cause people to have to borrow to smooth their cash flow and pay for basic needs. So that's one really fundamental trend here. Another is the rise of non-loan debt, primarily from unpaid medical bills and also the growing trend toward funding local governments through fines and fees, which when households can't pay those fines and fees, have snowballing effects on debt and financial and general life distress. And the third key trend that I will note very briefly is that college costs have risen like crazy. At the same time that a college degree has become increasingly necessary, as we saw from Anna's data, that's how you get wealth in the long run. At the same time, since 2000, aggregate student debt has increased nine times faster than the number of borrowers. So that tells you like it's not just more people going to college, it's the amount they're borrowing and the cost of college is going crazy. And people don't really have a choice about whether or not they're going to go to college if they want to be on a firm financial footing. My second point, that seems to be more missing the headline there, but anyway, the second point is that we see these larger economic trends playing out in data on household cash flows. So a growing number of Americans don't have a level of income necessary to cover cost of living expenses, which in turn is keeping families from saving, investing, and building wealth for the future. So if routinely positive cash flow is kind of the cornerstone of financial stability, saving, wealth building, security, we don't see it. So according to FINRA's National Financial Capability Study, well under half of all Americans had household income that exceeded expenses in 2018. So to me that's just the starkest thing. Do people have extra cash flow to put toward savings, cushioning themselves from shocks and investing in mobility? No, most do not. CFPB National Financial Well-Being Survey finds that 43% of Americans find it difficult to pay all their bills in a typical month, and fully one in three of us have trouble paying for all of our most basic needs like housing, food, and medical care. So this pressure on cash flow then in turn leads to a rise in non-loan debt, right, when people can't pay their medical phone and utility bills, and it also leads to having to borrow to make ends meet. So I will not belabor this graph. You've seen them from other people, but basically, you know, this cash flow pressure and the rising cost of college are playing out then in the rise of consumer debt, over the last 15 years, particularly in student loans. And so as my colleague Ida Rademacher and I discuss in our piece in this volume, these trends have serious consequences for financial health and wealth, which we've all seen playing out in the analysis that our three speakers today have presented. So the story goes like this. First, without routinely positive cash flow, building and replenishing liquid savings is a constant struggle. And then without liquid savings, it's very hard to weather shocks and stay on track toward longer-term goals or to make wealth building and mobility enhancing investments. And then this is a vicious cycle, because if thin margins lead to debt, then that debt servicing adds to the expense side of the cash flow equation making margins even thinner. And that process that I just described is the exact inverse of the process that leads to wealth building. So for young adults, the concern is that all this debt is starting out asset building, such as in home ownership, retirement, and other investing. And in fact, at the Aspen Institute's Leadership Forum on Retirement Savings this spring, participants identified debt as the number one challenge to a secure retirement. So I think there's really a broad and growing recognition that this is true. So trying to end with the good news is that I think because all this data is bringing such a clear diagnosis of the problems, that means that we can solve them. So to boost the wealth of this and future generations, we need solutions that are systemic and targeted to the roots of specific problems. So I hope in a discussion we can get a little bit more into that. Our work in consumer debt has identified seven priority areas specifically related to debt, but I think there's work that can be done on any of these trends and underlying things. I'm not going to go into these details now, just to say that we have a very detailed solutions framework, specifically looking at consumer debt, addressing kind of four areas that relate to the life cycle of debt, from that lack of savings cushion I talked about, all the way to how liabilities can be resolved. And then three of them are product-specific because the root causes of some of these debts, like medical debt and student loan debt, are so idiosyncratic, and they have to do with the way we pay for those things in this country. So lots of details on potential solutions in our report on that, but I'm really looking forward to hearing more of the solutions discussion in other panels on the two subsequent panels. So I will end there and see if folks have questions for these panelists. It is on. Great. Hi, Paid Miller from Young Invincibles. My question's for Anna. I saw in your presentation you had broken down grad and non-grad, meaning four-year degree or anything before that. Do you have any data about two-year degrees, associate degrees, vocational education, and how much of a difference that makes compared to no college education at all? Yeah, thank you for your question. That's a great question. And when we get asked frequently, because I think in part we just say grads referring to four-year grads, even though of course those with a two-year degree are also grads, the reason we do that break is because if we look at wealth across time and we just, we look at those with a two-year degree or a certificate, they tend to mirror very, very closely and are very close to just those with a high school, terminal high school degree, whereas those with a four-year degree or higher are way above, three times as more as of 2016. And so that's part of the reason we do that break there. Income is a little bit of a different story as it tends to be, so the income outcomes of those with a two-year degree tend to be a little bit higher than those with just a high school. But there's a lot of overlap, right? We're looking at, typically we look at medians and there's a lot of overlap between those, like say at the 75th percentile with a two-year degree, there's overlap with the 25th percentile those with a four-year degree or higher. So there is overlap and that's something we'd like to look at in the future, but again that's why we make that sort of demarcation point and just the fact that that's such a very diverse group, right? And we don't have any information in our data about the types of schools that people attend or the types of majors that they choose and that I would assume has a very relationship with the outcomes of those who have two-year degrees. Just one really quick final thing that I'll say is those with a two-year degree and those who go to college but don't complete, a lot of them are saddled with student loan debt that someone with a four-year degree or higher has much more capability and ease to be able to pay down. So I think that's also very problematic. Okay, well maybe I... Oh, here you go. As my generation passes away, the infusion of wealth that we've accumulated and we pass on to the millennials, has that been taken into account as a positive infusion that will somehow skew this negative result? Yeah, I'd be happy to speak a little bit to that. We've done some research looking at kind of large gifts and transfers between generations. And what we find is that that is going to be likely to exacerbate the racial wealth gap. And that's because whites are five times more likely to receive a large gift or inheritance than an African-American or an Hispanic family. And so when you think about what that means in terms of paying for a down payment on a home or helping to pay college tuition, these are building blocks. So part of that could exacerbate the racial wealth gap that we're already seeing. So while folks are thinking, I have one question I'd love to ask all three of you, which is, so all of you have spoken some about some of these underlying trends and I kind of described a framework for thinking about that too, but if each of you could pick one systemic trend that if we solved that one, it would be a major bang toward addressing these problems. I'm not asking what the solution is. Feel free to say if you want. But what's the critical trend that you think that if we were able to intervene on it, we'd have a big impact on the household wealth of millennials? That's not the one that we discussed earlier. Yeah. That's a great question. This isn't necessarily a solution, but one of the things that we see is really just luck of when you were born as really contributing to this generational wealth gap, particularly if you were born in the 1940s, you're golden, right, at the median, at least, of the typical family. You came of age when things were going pretty well, and you've been able to accumulate wealth more rapidly than younger generations that we're seeing, and so it's not a perfect answer, a look at the draw, but it has a lot to do with whether or not you're going to be able to, say, invest in a market that is going to have your assets appreciate rapidly if you're going to be able if you're going to have to pay for college at a higher cost than generations past, so I think that is not just one thing, but I think it really impacts the trends we're seeing today. I guess I'd say wealth inequality, and just because it's increasing so much, and it's so large, I think we often think about income inequality, but the wealth gaps are so much larger, 30 times larger than income gaps by one measure, and they reflect not just past policy, which is being passed from generation to generation, but they also reflect current policy, which is exacerbating them, and so I'd say, you know, wealth isn't just for the wealthy. Wealth is where economic opportunity lies. That's that down payment on a home, that's that college education head capital to start a small business, and a savings cushion to land when 60% of Americans every year something's going to go wrong. You're going to have an income or an expense shock and you need that cushion. So I'd say wealth inequality. I have to highlight one statistic that was really concerning to me when I found out that black college graduates, the millennial black college graduates actually have lower home ownership rate than white high school dropout right now, and I think that is really related to the fact that there has been a great increase in college debt, especially among the minority population, and they're not getting enough help not only from the in terms of like getting help for our home ownership, they're receiving less from their parents, but then they're also receiving less to pay for college education. So there is this intergenerational transfer of wealth, which is racial inequality and wealth. Thank you. So I think that's a perfect segue because I'm actually hearing in tones of what all of you are talking about being born into a generation where the cost of college and the wealth you might have to pay for it are very different than in generations past. So with that, let's turn it over to our student loan panel.