Yeah, well, I deleted that bit, on the grounds it was too divisive (ironically enough).
There's a fundamental difference between intergenerational inequality and, say, race inequality. The old will die off and the young will eventually take their place. Youths with wealthy parents generally benefit from that wealth.
What's really happened is that inequality _within_ generations has increased. The advantage (some of) the baby boomers had was that the least well off among them got a rare chance for advancement, to keep up with their peers. That wasn't present before (it seems to have been a product of the post-war boom), and it's fading away again.
But those of the younger generation from comfortable backgrounds are still doing perfectly well, its just that the gap between them and their peers from less affluent backgrounds is greater than it used to be.
So it's not a purely generational issue, its completely mixed in with all the other forms of inequality.