There are a few claims that people who don't understand economics make all the time when trying to compare economic conditions across generational gaps that everyone should avoid:
Comparing minimum individual wages to average housing costs;
Comparing the cost of a 1,600sf home from the 1960s to the cost of modern homes, which average 2,500 sf which aren't made with asbestos or lead paint and are stocked full of amenities like air conditioning, vastly more powerful and plentiful electrical wiring systems, more bathrooms, high end finishes, granite counters (instead of formica laminates and chipboard), etc.
Forgetting that few households had more than one car even as recently as 40 years ago, and a very small percentage of the population regularly got on a plane. A large percentage of people even in the 1980s and 1990s had never been on a plane at all.
Comparing standards of living across generations without recognizing massive differences like quality of goods, availability of goods, affordability of transportation, internet / media, etc.
Failing to adjust for inflation.
Everyone seems to be so desperate to paint the economic realities for younger generations as being vastly worse than they were for their parents, but a more serious analysis that compares apples to apples will usually reveal that the numbers across generations are pretty comparable... but even that doesn't tell the whole story, because the standards of living young people can acquire on their existing incomes, even in spite of massive inflation, are vastly superior to what their parents could get.