An interesting article, but I'm not sure that a purely fiscal review of intergenerational equity is fair and reasonable (although it's relatively easier to do). Surely other aspects of the differences in quality of life experienced by each generation have to be taken into account. Just to name a few effects that come to mind:
- the interwar generation suffered through the great depression, and apparently this suffering was considerable, given that it was apparently the trigger for introducing much of the welfare state apparatus.
- later generations had benefited from accumulative spending on and development of medical science. The benefit of this can be seen from the increasing life expectancies of the successive generations. Which is better, 5 years of retirement on a full, non-means tested pension, or 30 years of a largely self-funded retirement?
- living standards in general have increased. So paying 20% average tax rate in later generations may well be less of a "burden" that paying, say, 10% average tax rate would have been for an previous generation.

Regards
http://enoughwealth.com