Your article almost perfectly mirrors, from a mental health standpoint, how anxiety is future focused (your brain's prediction engine) and depression is being mired in the past (trauma; unprocessed emotions). With both anxiety and depression skyrocketing in developed/Western nations, this tearing of the mind from the present makes a whole lot of sense. We're creating catastrophic internal dissonance between what the average person wants and what's realistically achievable. And people are responding accordingly.
Well said. This is a much more cogent version of the comment I was going to make. I feel like Ms. Scanlon's astute rendering of “things were better before” and “things will be better when my bet hits” mindsets are cautioned against by basically all religious and philosophical traditions (with the exception of medieval Christianity maybe).
Yes, and also consider that every form of therapeutic intervention I have ever encountered from corporate coaching, to counseling, to mindfulness training, etc., etc. call for you to be present, open and connected to the other people in our lives. Rich relationships and conflict resolution depend upon it. Nostalgia and speculation both run counter to what we need for strong interpersonal relationships and interpersonal relationships are deteriorating while nostalgia and speculation on the rise. Which is chicken, and which egg?
Appreciate the analysis as always Kyla, but I think you're really overstating this "nostalgia" point. I'm sure you've heard the comment "80s nostalgia has lasted longer than the 1980s." This brand of marketing as been on the table since at least Stranger Things' debut in 2016 and at the time it seemed like just another example of a broader trend.
The trend is not appreciation for the past, it is a disinterest in the future. The distinction is not that the present is so bad we need to turn back the clock to find something good — they just don't care about what is good today. The dominant generation in our economy has checked out for more than a decade.
Businesses leaned into 1980s nostalgia because they figured out you can make more money retreading with Boomers then you can with building something new. Why make a new franchise when you can repackage Ghostbusters 3 different times? Why stream Game of Thrones or the NFL when your biggest demographic uses cable boxes? Why launch a YouTube channel when your main demographic doesn't use it?
[incidentally, the reason "alt media" is so "alt" is because it's a group of people defined by a willingness to work outside of established structures which is necessarily unrepresentative of most people aka "extreme"]
There are many amazing things in the present, but the economy is focused on this older generation that just has no interest in it. This isn't a response to recent economic trends. MAGA has been on that for 10+ years.
And to some extent this business decision is correct. You can make more chasing a bigger audience with more money than marketing to smaller (and younger) generations with less money. The reason for the economic disparity isn't the recent trends of less labor needs. That's been developing as Boomers have aged into retirement — and continues with federal programs like the one you mentioned in this piece.
That strategy has been successful enough that now finally Gen X/Millennials are old enough and wealthy enough to get our own past repackaged to us, because the people making decisions don't want to be bothered to figure out what people are interested in in the present. It's just laziness. I don't think the whole culture is nostalgia tripping. This is specific to one aging demographic. For example: the average age of people watching the NFL is 62. I don't find the commercials during the Super Bowl to be representative of the broader economy or culture.
Maybe my disagreement with you is just on what's driving supply/demand of nostalgia. I think people are being served something they don't want by people who have no imagination for anything other than what is already known.
Eexcellent piece. That Gen Alpha point is a great finish.
Their return to the 'material' feels like a shift in collective consciousness.
Maybe the hostility of this 'statistical' economy is actually a necessary pressure—forcing us to stop looking for exits (nostalgia/speculation) and finally occupy the Present.
As Lao Tzu said: 'If you are depressed you are living in the past. If you are anxious you are living in the future. If you are at peace you are living in the present.'"
Insightful post Kyla. I think what we may be seeing is a recurring trend in which action in a younger generation is impacted by advice given from the generation above.
For millennials we were told “go to college”, we did. And “spend more on experiences than goods” we did (and often got blamed for “killing” industries because of it).
Now younger Millennials and Gen Z are telling Gen Alpha “get off the screens and get out in the world” and they’re listening too.
Very nice article Kyla - as a Gen Xer I loved the idea of the old ads but they did seem a little icky - phoney and fake, no freshness. I keep asking myself why the current generations cannot create their own movements - but if they are not existing in the material world, that would be a challenge.
The reason for my comment - I was wondering what you think about the Gini coefficient these days. I seem to have read somewhere that it is almost as high now in the USA as it was in France just before the French revolution and Marie Antoinette was beheaded while the Bastille burned.
I think the SB itself may be a bit outdated - old ads on an old platform.
Here in Texas where there's a huge Latino base, various businesses did make Bad Bunny (not SB) themed events. My yoga studio sold out their Bad Bunny themed class that Saturday. It's not on a big scale but is still creative.
Non alcohol ads also supposedly did well (which I consume).
I was thinking about what Jensen Huang said about the younger generation seeing too much.
I thought to myself: why am i reading this? I'm just making myself miserable (although i very much enjoy these articles).
I think the reason i enjoy these is because i feel like there is a community of people with the same problems that don't have any solutions, but atleast i have a community.
Then a question arises: what is this community good for if it doesn't help me find solutions?
Well it seems like it's only useful as a market analysis of a certain age groups needs and wants.
Maybe i am wrong but it seems to me that we are just not creative enough to come up with an economy of our own where we would satisfy our needs with the available assets we as a young generation have.
For example young people nowadays live with their parents because it just doesn't make sense to do otherwise.
Necessity is the mother of all invention. But what necessity is there if i can "just" live with my parents because i can't get a decent job that pays rent and food? Although i think young people would like to be independent.
"Speculation offers a sense of agency without real control. Nostalgia offers a sense of orientation without any real change. Neither rebuild material participation and neither can close the gap between a statistical economy that can grow without people and a material one that cannot." This observation captures something profound about our current moment, as does Jensen's reminder that "everyone deserves some time to be oblivious, and not wear all of the world's problems on their shoulders."
This is precisely what we're seeing in Gen Z's retreat to the tangible: prioritizing experiences over material goods, desperately seeking connection through summer jobs, yearning for ways to engage with the physical world because it offers something the digital cannot—the anchoring weight of the real, the controllable, the certain. As you wrote, "When you inherit the whole world through a screen, you inherit its volatility too." That inheritance manifests as an endless spiral of anxieties—when will I be able to buy a home, am I pretty enough, what's coming next—questions that compound without resolution until they collapse into paralysis and depression.
The turn toward small, material experiences isn't escapism; it's a survival strategy. When the abstract promises nothing but vertigo, the concrete becomes sanctuary.
Well finding out Kyla Scanlon is an AI skeptic really brightened my day. Thank you for your thoughtful analysis and for making it accessible to readers, both from a paywall perspective and in terms of how you break down complex topics. May this dark roulette wheel that is modern life land on all good things for you.
Wow—thanks for your eye-opening take on AI and its trick of enhancing the statistical realm rather than the real-world material realm. To me it’s the same insight as in this brilliant piece: https://t.co/bDCdltFo0A. AI is the next step in the great pretending that tech is making everything more productive and better. But more people are calling BS.
Kyla I am begging you to read more widely. When you say things like “No one has quite figured out how to support a material world for their young people.”, you are playing into the hands of an establishment (full of pedophiles mind you) who have a very vested interest in ensuring that as many people as possible believe that. Don’t proliferate that message!
In actual fact, many people have figured out how to support a material world for their young people. Solutions exist along a wide spectrum of political radicalness. At one end, Mamdani-Sanders style democratic socialism (the system that has been ticking over relatively well but not wholly without issues in much of Europe since WWII), which ensures that at the very least, some social safety net exists. Then there is a world where government monopolies on violence and power are used to build truly redistributive tax systems, to build out a proper social security system, where healthcare, childcare, and education are fully provisioned and where no one is permitted to accumulate so much wealth that they can simply buy their way into leading the most powerful country in the world. At the other end, you’ve got the classics: communism, socialism, (proper) anarchism. All these ideas exist, some have been tried but not have had the chance to be iterated and refined and developed because the capitalist class, over the last 200 years, have moved hell and high water to ensure that can never happen.
The material world is the only world that matters. I’m begging you to fight harder for it. People look up to you and respect your opinion, and rightfully so! You are incredible! But please don’t get into the habit of letting the literally cabal of evil that are so invested in the continuation of this system off the hook so easily.
The disconnect you mentioned between nostalgia and current reality is showing up clearly in the retail data right now. I just shared some numbers on how real consumer spending is finally starting to fall behind inflation. If you’re interested in that sentiment gap, check out my recent post and follow along.
The comment "When you inherit the whole world through a screen, you inherit its volatility too" reminded me of this scene from the movie The Fifth Element where its prodigious supreme being protagonist learns about the history of war in 60 seconds: https://youtu.be/9JVaXZ9Jl1g?si=KpCQuQ6NNkxn3tKe
"Material World" / "Statistical World" is an effective binary illustration for me. It echoes a David Brooks piece from a few moons ago where in his folksy style he offered an explanation of generation gaps via changing macro economics, emphasizing a "material" and "non material economy": https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/opinion/15brooks.html
Thank you for your continuingly well researched and insightful analysis, Kyla
How about, "This creates two very different worlds - a real world and a numbers world."
I have little experience with macro-economics and no interest in changing that. But I look forward to your posts, especially your ideas about how and why non-Boomers (like myself) are having such a hard time through an economics lens. Keep up the great work. 👍
Your article almost perfectly mirrors, from a mental health standpoint, how anxiety is future focused (your brain's prediction engine) and depression is being mired in the past (trauma; unprocessed emotions). With both anxiety and depression skyrocketing in developed/Western nations, this tearing of the mind from the present makes a whole lot of sense. We're creating catastrophic internal dissonance between what the average person wants and what's realistically achievable. And people are responding accordingly.
Very well put
Well said. This is a much more cogent version of the comment I was going to make. I feel like Ms. Scanlon's astute rendering of “things were better before” and “things will be better when my bet hits” mindsets are cautioned against by basically all religious and philosophical traditions (with the exception of medieval Christianity maybe).
Yes, and also consider that every form of therapeutic intervention I have ever encountered from corporate coaching, to counseling, to mindfulness training, etc., etc. call for you to be present, open and connected to the other people in our lives. Rich relationships and conflict resolution depend upon it. Nostalgia and speculation both run counter to what we need for strong interpersonal relationships and interpersonal relationships are deteriorating while nostalgia and speculation on the rise. Which is chicken, and which egg?
Great post. This resonates with the “Extraction Economy” video you posted a while back. Please keep it up.
(BTW, the Gen Alpha/Theater statistic feels a bit weak. I suspect you’re right, but I’d love to see other signals that supports this theory)
It was a bit of a reach! They also like shopping in stores
Appreciate the analysis as always Kyla, but I think you're really overstating this "nostalgia" point. I'm sure you've heard the comment "80s nostalgia has lasted longer than the 1980s." This brand of marketing as been on the table since at least Stranger Things' debut in 2016 and at the time it seemed like just another example of a broader trend.
The trend is not appreciation for the past, it is a disinterest in the future. The distinction is not that the present is so bad we need to turn back the clock to find something good — they just don't care about what is good today. The dominant generation in our economy has checked out for more than a decade.
Businesses leaned into 1980s nostalgia because they figured out you can make more money retreading with Boomers then you can with building something new. Why make a new franchise when you can repackage Ghostbusters 3 different times? Why stream Game of Thrones or the NFL when your biggest demographic uses cable boxes? Why launch a YouTube channel when your main demographic doesn't use it?
[incidentally, the reason "alt media" is so "alt" is because it's a group of people defined by a willingness to work outside of established structures which is necessarily unrepresentative of most people aka "extreme"]
There are many amazing things in the present, but the economy is focused on this older generation that just has no interest in it. This isn't a response to recent economic trends. MAGA has been on that for 10+ years.
And to some extent this business decision is correct. You can make more chasing a bigger audience with more money than marketing to smaller (and younger) generations with less money. The reason for the economic disparity isn't the recent trends of less labor needs. That's been developing as Boomers have aged into retirement — and continues with federal programs like the one you mentioned in this piece.
That strategy has been successful enough that now finally Gen X/Millennials are old enough and wealthy enough to get our own past repackaged to us, because the people making decisions don't want to be bothered to figure out what people are interested in in the present. It's just laziness. I don't think the whole culture is nostalgia tripping. This is specific to one aging demographic. For example: the average age of people watching the NFL is 62. I don't find the commercials during the Super Bowl to be representative of the broader economy or culture.
Maybe my disagreement with you is just on what's driving supply/demand of nostalgia. I think people are being served something they don't want by people who have no imagination for anything other than what is already known.
yes, I wrote about that a few years ago! I think we are in agreement thematically, but I appreciate your additional details here. Very clarifying.
Eexcellent piece. That Gen Alpha point is a great finish.
Their return to the 'material' feels like a shift in collective consciousness.
Maybe the hostility of this 'statistical' economy is actually a necessary pressure—forcing us to stop looking for exits (nostalgia/speculation) and finally occupy the Present.
As Lao Tzu said: 'If you are depressed you are living in the past. If you are anxious you are living in the future. If you are at peace you are living in the present.'"
Insightful post Kyla. I think what we may be seeing is a recurring trend in which action in a younger generation is impacted by advice given from the generation above.
For millennials we were told “go to college”, we did. And “spend more on experiences than goods” we did (and often got blamed for “killing” industries because of it).
Now younger Millennials and Gen Z are telling Gen Alpha “get off the screens and get out in the world” and they’re listening too.
totally - and thank you for the support!
As per usual, phenomenal essay Kyla
Wow, great piece, if only for showing that nostalgia and speculation are flipsides of the same coin, both being idealized.
Very nice article Kyla - as a Gen Xer I loved the idea of the old ads but they did seem a little icky - phoney and fake, no freshness. I keep asking myself why the current generations cannot create their own movements - but if they are not existing in the material world, that would be a challenge.
The reason for my comment - I was wondering what you think about the Gini coefficient these days. I seem to have read somewhere that it is almost as high now in the USA as it was in France just before the French revolution and Marie Antoinette was beheaded while the Bastille burned.
I think the SB itself may be a bit outdated - old ads on an old platform.
Here in Texas where there's a huge Latino base, various businesses did make Bad Bunny (not SB) themed events. My yoga studio sold out their Bad Bunny themed class that Saturday. It's not on a big scale but is still creative.
Non alcohol ads also supposedly did well (which I consume).
I was thinking about what Jensen Huang said about the younger generation seeing too much.
I thought to myself: why am i reading this? I'm just making myself miserable (although i very much enjoy these articles).
I think the reason i enjoy these is because i feel like there is a community of people with the same problems that don't have any solutions, but atleast i have a community.
Then a question arises: what is this community good for if it doesn't help me find solutions?
Well it seems like it's only useful as a market analysis of a certain age groups needs and wants.
Maybe i am wrong but it seems to me that we are just not creative enough to come up with an economy of our own where we would satisfy our needs with the available assets we as a young generation have.
For example young people nowadays live with their parents because it just doesn't make sense to do otherwise.
Necessity is the mother of all invention. But what necessity is there if i can "just" live with my parents because i can't get a decent job that pays rent and food? Although i think young people would like to be independent.
"Speculation offers a sense of agency without real control. Nostalgia offers a sense of orientation without any real change. Neither rebuild material participation and neither can close the gap between a statistical economy that can grow without people and a material one that cannot." This observation captures something profound about our current moment, as does Jensen's reminder that "everyone deserves some time to be oblivious, and not wear all of the world's problems on their shoulders."
This is precisely what we're seeing in Gen Z's retreat to the tangible: prioritizing experiences over material goods, desperately seeking connection through summer jobs, yearning for ways to engage with the physical world because it offers something the digital cannot—the anchoring weight of the real, the controllable, the certain. As you wrote, "When you inherit the whole world through a screen, you inherit its volatility too." That inheritance manifests as an endless spiral of anxieties—when will I be able to buy a home, am I pretty enough, what's coming next—questions that compound without resolution until they collapse into paralysis and depression.
The turn toward small, material experiences isn't escapism; it's a survival strategy. When the abstract promises nothing but vertigo, the concrete becomes sanctuary.
Well finding out Kyla Scanlon is an AI skeptic really brightened my day. Thank you for your thoughtful analysis and for making it accessible to readers, both from a paywall perspective and in terms of how you break down complex topics. May this dark roulette wheel that is modern life land on all good things for you.
Wow—thanks for your eye-opening take on AI and its trick of enhancing the statistical realm rather than the real-world material realm. To me it’s the same insight as in this brilliant piece: https://t.co/bDCdltFo0A. AI is the next step in the great pretending that tech is making everything more productive and better. But more people are calling BS.
Kyla I am begging you to read more widely. When you say things like “No one has quite figured out how to support a material world for their young people.”, you are playing into the hands of an establishment (full of pedophiles mind you) who have a very vested interest in ensuring that as many people as possible believe that. Don’t proliferate that message!
In actual fact, many people have figured out how to support a material world for their young people. Solutions exist along a wide spectrum of political radicalness. At one end, Mamdani-Sanders style democratic socialism (the system that has been ticking over relatively well but not wholly without issues in much of Europe since WWII), which ensures that at the very least, some social safety net exists. Then there is a world where government monopolies on violence and power are used to build truly redistributive tax systems, to build out a proper social security system, where healthcare, childcare, and education are fully provisioned and where no one is permitted to accumulate so much wealth that they can simply buy their way into leading the most powerful country in the world. At the other end, you’ve got the classics: communism, socialism, (proper) anarchism. All these ideas exist, some have been tried but not have had the chance to be iterated and refined and developed because the capitalist class, over the last 200 years, have moved hell and high water to ensure that can never happen.
The material world is the only world that matters. I’m begging you to fight harder for it. People look up to you and respect your opinion, and rightfully so! You are incredible! But please don’t get into the habit of letting the literally cabal of evil that are so invested in the continuation of this system off the hook so easily.
The disconnect you mentioned between nostalgia and current reality is showing up clearly in the retail data right now. I just shared some numbers on how real consumer spending is finally starting to fall behind inflation. If you’re interested in that sentiment gap, check out my recent post and follow along.
The comment "When you inherit the whole world through a screen, you inherit its volatility too" reminded me of this scene from the movie The Fifth Element where its prodigious supreme being protagonist learns about the history of war in 60 seconds: https://youtu.be/9JVaXZ9Jl1g?si=KpCQuQ6NNkxn3tKe
"Material World" / "Statistical World" is an effective binary illustration for me. It echoes a David Brooks piece from a few moons ago where in his folksy style he offered an explanation of generation gaps via changing macro economics, emphasizing a "material" and "non material economy": https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/opinion/15brooks.html
Thank you for your continuingly well researched and insightful analysis, Kyla
How about, "This creates two very different worlds - a real world and a numbers world."
I have little experience with macro-economics and no interest in changing that. But I look forward to your posts, especially your ideas about how and why non-Boomers (like myself) are having such a hard time through an economics lens. Keep up the great work. 👍