Global Wealth Shift: Disruption and Reconstruction of Investment Strategies in the Next Decade

null

Author: Wang Lijie

We are standing at multiple rupture points in history, and a new normal that is more intense and disruptive than we imagined is approaching. The three pillars supporting global economic prosperity over the past forty years—demographic dividend, globalization and division of labor, and inclusive technological progress—are simultaneously disintegrating before our eyes. This is not alarmism, but a reality we must face squarely. In the next decade, from 2026 to 2035, the world will undergo profound changes that will deeply impact our wealth distribution and investment strategies.

“The 4B Movement” and “Birth Strike”: Deep Cracks in Social Structure

Let’s first focus on a shocking phenomenon: the cliff-like decline in global fertility rates. This is not just a simple numerical change but a signal that social structures are undergoing profound transformation.

Take South Korea as an example: in 2023, its total fertility rate plummeted to an astonishing 0.72. This means that, on average, each woman will have only 0.72 children in her lifetime. Such a decline far exceeds normal fluctuations in fertility rates and directly threatens the social foundation. Neighboring Japan’s situation is also concerning; although its fertility rate is slightly higher than Korea’s, its projected births in 2025 will fall below 670,000, reaching the lowest point since 1899 with statistical records, and the decline is much faster than the government’s most pessimistic forecasts.

Behind this trend are complex socio-economic factors intertwined. In Korea, young women have launched a massive “4B Movement”—meaning “No Marriage, No Birth, No Dating, No Sexual Relations.” This sounds like science fiction, but it is happening in reality.

Essentially, the “4B Movement” is a form of “reproductive strike” against patriarchal capitalist society. Korean young women, under the multiple pressures of workplace gender discrimination, “widow-style parenting,” and social stereotypes, have chosen this form of resistance. When they believe they cannot achieve upward social mobility or even maintain a decent standard of living, “cutting off descendants” becomes a rational, final act of rebellion.

The consequences of this phenomenon are devastating. Korea’s aging rate is the fastest in the world; by 2065, the population over 65 will account for half of the total. This not only means the pension system will face enormous pressure but also will cause a comprehensive blow to national finances, healthcare systems, and even military recruitment. In Japan, young people are generally caught in a “low desire” state—no marriage, no childbirth, no longer believing that working hard can lead to a good life—and instead pursue low-cost personal entertainment. This is a “gentle despair,” a Zen-like attitude of “lying flat.”

Economic Nihilism and Climate Anxiety: Reshaping the Life Views of the Younger Generation

You might think this is a phenomenon unique to East Asian countries. However, developed Western nations are also experiencing similar demographic trends, albeit for different reasons.

Today’s young people, especially the post-2000 generation, are generally permeated with a sense of “economic nihilism.” They deeply feel that no matter how hard they try, the traditional “American Dream” or “middle-class life” is out of reach. Sky-high housing prices make homeownership a luxury; a single property may require draining two people’s incomes for over a decade. When the traditional path of “owning a house and a car, establishing a family and career” is blocked, young people naturally choose to “live in the moment,” seek instant gratification, or invest their funds in high-risk cryptocurrencies, seeking a “big gamble” to turn a bicycle into a motorcycle.

Having children, for them, is a typical “high input, long cycle, low immediate return” project, and naturally gets cut from their life plans. This rational consideration has led to a widespread decline in fertility willingness globally.

Besides economic factors, “climate anxiety” has also become an important influence on young people’s decisions. Many Western youth, worried about climate change, are reluctant to have children. They believe “bringing children into a world that is destined to burn is immoral,” which is not only an economic consideration but also a profound moral and ethical reflection. When people lose confidence in the future of the Earth, the instinct to reproduce can be overwhelmed by this rational worry.

This “active contraction” of population is spreading globally and will trigger a series of macroeconomic consequences in the coming years:

Permanent tightening of the labor market: The decline in young populations will lead to labor shortages, especially in healthcare, construction, and low-end service industries. In the short term, wages may rise, but the cost of living will increase even faster, and real purchasing power will not strengthen—in fact, it may trigger persistent inflation.

Collapse of total consumption demand: No marriage, no childbirth means the disintegration of the basic consumption unit—families. Demand for durable goods like houses, cars, and appliances will shrink long-term. Future consumption will shift toward experience-based and instant gratification types.

Rewriting the social contract: Our existing pension system is essentially a “Ponzi scheme,” relying on a continuously growing young population to fund retirements. When the pyramid’s base shrinks, a pension crisis will erupt fully in the 2030s. Governments will face tough choices—either cut benefits or trigger hyperinflation.

In this context, can traditional investment methods still work? The answer is clearly no.

The Underlying Logic of Wealth Transfer and the Explosion of Digital Assets

Understanding the demographic background outlined above allows us to see why the next decade will witness the largest intergenerational wealth transfer in human history, and how this transfer will trigger a sharp revaluation of asset prices, becoming a key precondition for the explosion of digital assets.

In the next twenty years, especially from 2026 to 2035, up to $84 trillion of wealth will transfer from the Baby Boomer generation to Millennials and Post-00s. This is not just a numerical change but a fundamental shift in the “character” of capital. Baby Boomers’ wealth is mainly concentrated in real estate, blue-chip stocks, and traditional pensions, and they believe in “long-term holding” and “value investing.” But will the Post-00s, who grew up amid the internet, financial crises, and asset bubbles, still follow their elders’ logic in asset allocation?

The answer is, most likely not! This huge sum of capital will become the main fuel for driving up digital assets, especially cryptocurrencies and alternative investments. This aligns perfectly with the “economic nihilism” logic mentioned earlier.

Why digital assets?

Distrust in traditional financial systems: Post-00s have experienced the 2008 financial crisis, the 2020 unlimited quantitative easing, and subsequent high inflation. They see fiat currency constantly devaluing, and traditional banking systems as inefficient and manipulated by a few. Therefore, decentralized digital assets like Bitcoin are not just investments but also “hedging assets” and “silent protests.” They believe that in the new digital world, fairer competition opportunities can be obtained.

Inaccessibility and substitutability of real estate: When housing prices are prohibitively high, and long-term preservation of value is uncertain due to population decline, young people prefer to invest their wealth in highly liquid, low-threshold, high-potential digital assets. They seek digital wealth that can be carried everywhere and freely transferred globally, rather than traditional real estate.

High risk appetite and “get rich quick” desire: Young people are no longer satisfied with annual returns of 4%-5%. They seek “exponential growth” capable of changing their fate. Data shows that the adoption rate of cryptocurrencies among the young is more than three times that of their elders, and they are more inclined toward speculative positions. This “one life only” gamble mentality will profoundly influence market volatility over the next decade.

De-dollarization and digital assets: seeking new financial anchors

Driven by intergenerational wealth transfer, the period from 2026 to 2035 will be a critical decade where de-dollarization and the mainstreaming of digital assets converge. This trend is not only driven by geopolitical factors but also deeply influenced by young investors’ preferences.

U.S. debt will enter an unsustainable exponential growth phase in the next decade. As interest payments erode fiscal revenue, the Federal Reserve will be forced to implement more covert but larger-scale “fiscal deficit monetization,” i.e., continuous money printing to solve problems. This will undermine global confidence in dollar assets.

For central banks, gold may be the preferred alternative reserve. But for individual investors with large sums of money, Bitcoin and stablecoins will serve as “digital gold” and “digital dollar.” They are not only seen as speculative tools but also as “Noah’s Ark” against the dilution of fiat currency’s purchasing power.

Meanwhile, we will witness a large-scale trend of “real-world asset tokenization” (RWA). Young people are accustomed to 24/7, fragmented trading. Putting houses, artworks, or even government bonds on the blockchain can increase asset liquidity and aligns with the Post-00s’ new definition of “ownership”—“My private key is my ownership.” This will be one of the biggest upgrades in financial infrastructure over the next decade. Previously high-threshold quality assets like commercial real estate and private equity will become accessible through tokenization, realizing “asset democratization.” This can alleviate young people’s economic anxiety and inject new liquidity into traditional assets.

AI and Robots: The Cantillon Effect of Technology and Wealth Non-Inclusiveness

The progress of AI and robotics is irreversible. However, there is a common misconception that technological progress will automatically benefit everyone. In reality, the AI wave from 2026 to 2035 is very likely to exacerbate social inequality, which we call the “Cantillon Effect of Technology.”

The traditional Cantillon Effect refers to the fact that when central banks print money, those who receive the new money first become richer, while those who receive it last face rising prices, transferring wealth from the masses to those closest to the printing press.

In the AI era, this logic applies equally. The core production factors of AI are computing power, data, and algorithm models, which are extremely expensive and highly concentrated among a few tech giants and early investors, such as Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google. Ordinary people can hardly own these core assets; we can only access their systems as consumers or managed users.

When AI significantly boosts productivity, the new wealth first manifests in soaring profits and stock prices of tech companies. Shareholders and executives of these companies are “closest to the money printer,” enjoying the benefits of asset appreciation first. This “capital bias” in technological progress means that capital returns will far outpace labor returns, and wages’ share of GDP will further decline.

For ordinary workers, AI initially brings not benefits but competitors. Although long-term AI may create new jobs, during the transition over the next decade, the primary risk is “being replaced.” Even if nominal wages grow, they often cannot keep pace with asset price increases driven by technological dividends, such as housing, stocks, education, and healthcare. The general public is effectively paying for the dual effects of technological deflation (wage pressure) and asset inflation (widening wealth gap).

With the advent of robotics, especially the combination of humanoid robots and large language models, both blue-collar and white-collar jobs will be impacted. This wave of displacement targets human cognitive abilities. If the wealth generated by explosive productivity growth cannot be fairly distributed through wages, society will face a severe purchasing power crisis, potentially leading to “overproduction” and “structural underconsumption.”

Therefore, our investment strategy must be clear: go long on companies owning robots, and short on human labor costs that will be replaced by robots. We must become shareholders of technology, not its cost.

Financial Trends: From Value Investing to “Event Betting”

Macroeconomic turbulence and changing investment behaviors of the younger generation are causing a profound alienation in financial markets. The traditional “value discovery” function is weakening, while “event prediction markets” for hedging uncertainty and speculation are rapidly emerging.

Have you paid attention to platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi? In 2024 and 2025, these prediction platforms will experience explosive growth. Users can bet real money on the outcomes of specific events, such as U.S. elections, Federal Reserve interest rate cuts, or geopolitical conflicts. Especially after Kalshi received regulatory approval, trading volume surged, once accounting for over 60% of the global market share.

This is not just simple gambling; in the eyes of institutional investors, prediction markets are becoming an extremely important new derivative tool:

Precise hedging: Compared to vague traditional hedging tools like gold or government bonds, prediction markets can achieve event-level precise hedging. For example, if you worry that a certain candidate’s election victory will hit the renewable energy sector, you can directly buy contracts on Kalshi for that candidate’s victory to hedge potential losses.

Information discovery: The prices in prediction markets are often more accurate than polls and expert forecasts because they aggregate collective wisdom with real money. As the saying goes, “Where the money is, the truth is.” This mechanism makes prediction markets highly efficient information aggregators, providing clear probability anchors for complex macro environments.

However, as funds flow from traditional markets into prediction markets, we also face two major risks:

Financial nihilism: Capital no longer flows into companies supporting real economy production but into pure zero-sum games, making financial markets more like “gambling casinos.” When young people find researching company reports less appealing than “betting” in prediction markets, the foundation of value investing will be further eroded.

Distortion of reality and “Soros Reflexivity”: When prediction markets grow large enough, serious “reflexivity” phenomena may occur. Massive funds, aiming to win bets, may attempt to influence real-world outcomes, such as manipulating public opinion or spreading false news. This could cause financial markets to enslave reality, turning “truth” into a plaything of capital.

Therefore, asset allocation must incorporate “event-based assets,” serving as necessary insurance against extreme macro volatility, while remaining vigilant about the systemic fragility that this “over-financialization” might bring.

The Great Filtering: Extreme Barbell Strategy

Based on the above analysis, I propose a core asset allocation strategy for the next decade: traditional diversification is no longer sufficient. We need an “extreme barbell” approach to cope with the “active contraction” of the population and the “Cantillon Effect” of technology-driven wealth distribution.

On the offensive side, embrace “technological monopoly” and “digital scarcity”:

Long “beneficiaries of the Cantillon Effect”: concentrate capital in tech giants that control core computing power, proprietary data, and general-purpose large models. In the “winner-takes-all” AI era, the survival space for second-tier tech companies will shrink.

Long “digital scarcity”: Bitcoin, as a hedge against fiat devaluation and a vehicle for intergenerational wealth transfer, should occupy an important position in growth-oriented portfolios. As Post-00s gain wealth influence, digital assets will enjoy liquidity premiums.

Seek residual “demographic dividend” in emerging markets: avoid East Asia, focus on regions like India and Southeast Asia with healthy demographic structures, but carefully assess their infrastructure capacity and political stability.

On the defensive side, hedge against “chaos” and “event risks”:

“Prediction market strategy desk”: institutional investors should establish dedicated strategies, using compliant platforms like Kalshi to hedge specific risks such as geopolitical conflicts and policy shifts.

Physical assets: given the “economic nihilism” driving young people away from real estate, high-quality residential and land assets in core cities will maintain value due to supply-side stagnation and as safe havens for the “old rich.” However, beware of property tax risks and focus on regions with extremely limited land supply.

Gold: as the last de-politicized monetary reserve, gold remains a core holding to hedge sovereign debt crises.

Which assets should be avoided?

Low-end labor-intensive service industries: face double pressure from rising labor costs and AI substitution, with profit margins severely challenged.

Traditional consumer stocks relying on population growth: in an “active contraction” society, their growth logic is broken. Baby products, mass apparel, and consumer goods dependent on family formation will face long-term market shrinkage.

In summary, 2026–2035 will be a brutal “big screening” era. Whether we can see through the despair behind population “active contraction,” the deprivation behind AI “Cantillon Effect,” and the nihilism behind financial “gamification” will determine whether we can preserve or even increase wealth amid this major transformation. The future will no longer have inclusive beta returns—only highly differentiated alpha. In this new world, we must either become stakeholders in technology or winners in events; otherwise, we risk becoming footnotes of the era.