Current fiscal policies represent a massive wealth transfer from young to old. Framing national service as a direct, large-scale investment in youth counteracts this economic imbalance, shifting national priorities and resources back to the next generation, effectively fighting a 'generational war' through policy.

Young people feel a sense of betrayal after following the prescribed path—good grades, college—only to graduate with immense debt into a job market with few opportunities and an unaffordable housing market. This broken promise fuels their economic anxiety.

Despite the best earnings season in four years for companies like Apple and Amazon, consumer brands like Chipotle, Shake Shack, and Crocs report slowing sales from 20-somethings. This demographic faces soaring unemployment and slowing wage growth, creating a hidden weak spot in an otherwise strong economy.

Extreme wealth inequality creates a fundamental risk beyond social unrest. When the most powerful citizens extricate themselves from public systems—schools, security, healthcare, transport—they lose empathy and any incentive to invest in the nation's core infrastructure. This decay of shared experience and investment leads to societal fragility.

The top 10% of earners, who drive 50% of consumer spending, can slash discretionary purchases overnight based on stock market fluctuations. This makes the economy more volatile than one supported by the stable, non-discretionary spending of the middle class, creating systemic fragility.

Despite economic pressures, Millennials and Gen Z still desire traditional success milestones like homeownership. The key difference is that the path is no longer linear and the timeline has shifted. Financial planners must adapt their advice to this new, less predictable journey.

The American housing market is increasingly inaccessible to younger generations. The median age of a homebuyer has hit a record high of 59, the same age one can access retirement funds. Even the median first-time buyer is now 40, indicating a systemic affordability crisis.

Extending mortgage terms doesn't solve housing affordability because it primarily boosts demand for a fixed supply of homes. This drives asset prices higher, as sellers adjust prices to match buyers' new monthly payment capacity. The historical example of Japan's housing bubble, fueled by 100-year mortgages, illustrates this danger.

The massive investment gap in education ($75k/year at elite private schools vs. $15k at average public schools) creates an insurmountable advantage for the wealthy. This financial disparity, which translates to a 370-point SAT gap, is a more powerful determinant of future success than individual character or talent.