Why are Young People Unhappy?
by Benjamin Studebaker
I’ve noticed an interesting article floating around the internet. The piece, entitled “Why Generation Y Yuppies Are Unhappy” sees rampant narcissism and self-entitlement as the source of young people’s unhappiness. Does it have a case? Let’s take a look.
The piece opens with what it calls the “formula for happiness”. Happiness, it argues, is the quality of one’s reality minus the expectations one had for the quality of one’s reality. The piece argues that in the 50’s and 60’s children were raised to expect that, if they worked hard, they could achieve the American dream–steady employment, a secure income, a family, and so on. The baby boomers managed not only to achieve what their parents intended for them, but to achieve a considerably higher standard of living than that. As a result, their reality outperformed their expectations, and they were satisfied. By contrast, when these children themselves became parents and began raising their children in the 80’s and 90’s, they raised their children to believe they could do even better than they themselves did. The piece argues that, as a result, Generation Y has massively inflated expectations that its reality can never meet, and has therefore been led into unhappiness by its parents.
This amounts to a cultural explanation of youth unhappiness. Cultural explanations are seductive–they rely on broad, general claims that can often sound very convincing. They’re also very hard to prove, and consequently, to disprove. We can all think of anecdotal cases that seem to fit the bill of this argument. It certainly sounds plausible.
On closer expectation, however, it’s deeply flawed. The piece fails to ask one seemingly very obvious question–why is it that parents in the 80’s and 90’s thought their children could do so well? These parents saw tremendous improvement in their living standards between when they were born in the 50’s and 60’s and when they began having children in the 80’s and 90’s. These parents rationally projected out into the future continued improvements in living standards and opportunity along the lines of what they themselves experienced. From the perspective of someone born in the 50’s and 60’s, it was entirely rational to expect the 10’s and the 20’s to be as much better than the 80’s and 90’s as the 80’s and 90’s were better than the 50’s and 60’s. Parents expected at the very least linear improvement in living standards.
That did not happen. The economic growth we experienced in the 50’s and 60’s did not continue in the 80’s, 90’s, and 00’s:
The rate at which living standards improve is not exponential, it’s not even linear–it’s declining. In addition, what progress we do make is not translating into higher wages as it was for people in the 50’s and 60’s:
Adjusted for inflation, wages doubled between 1945 and 1970. Since then, they have remained flat. Furthermore, the old adage that if you work hard you can improve your economic station is increasingly no longer true–economic mobility has fallen precipitously since the 50’s and 60’s. The gap between the rich and poor in the academic resources they make available to their children has expanded vastly over the last 40 years:
The problem is not that young people were raised with unrealistic expectations, it’s that expectations that were at one point in time considered realistic no longer are. Now, young people are faced with a youth unemployment rate unmatched since the early eighties recession:
What happened here? Somewhere along the way, the opportunities and growth that young people’s parents rationally expected vanished. The youth are left in the lurch. They have aspirations to fit the economy that should be, but not the economy that is. Older generations not only failed to do their part to enhance the rate at which prosperity grows, they failed to maintain the rate of growth for future generations.
And, lest young people get any ideas about trying to invest their way into a better future, the older generations have locked down the majority of the state’s tax revenue in social security and medicare, programs that allow them to unproductively leech off the economy for increasingly vast periods of time. There’s no money available to give young people free college educations (let alone college educations at rates similar to those enjoyed by their parents) because the “greatest generation” is sitting in nursing homes and retirement communities consuming exponentially vast amounts of medical care in order to prolong increasingly poor quality lives by a few extra increasingly miserable years. And so Generation Y is burdened with supporting the very individuals who failed to invest in its own future, so much so that it cannot even invest in itself without taking on crippling student loan debt.
And, should young people attempt to change any of this, they will always be defeated numerically at the polls, as the portion of the population that is already done with college and into their careers will always vastly exceed them in number, and it is always in the interest of these old people to use the laws to further ensnare young people in a system that increasingly undermines their own ability to succeed. As we see healthcare costs rising and the baby boomers entering retirement, our unwillingness to put the kids first is very swiftly coming to bite our aging population in the rear. The wages Generation Y fails to earn will one day be the tax revenue it is never able to pay, and, consequently, the entitlement benefits the elderly never receive.
Who is narcissistic and entitled, the generation that expected to enter a world improving at the steady rate history indicated, or the generation that believes it is entitled to consume the majority of the state’s tax revenue without doing any work of any kind? A country that prioritizes the interests of the dead and dying over those of its young people feeds its strength to its own parasites, and hastens its own demise.
So why are young people unhappy? Young people are unhappy because the growth their parents promised them never materialized. That growth never materialized because their parents and grandparents made bad investments in the economy, squandering this nation’s wealth on inefficient, high-cost medical care for the unproductive nearly dead and on foolish investments into bubbles that have since popped. Yet these very people who inherited a system of such promise and such potential and wasted and destroyed all of that, these people have the nerve to write op-eds in which they accuse their children and their children’s children of narcissism and entitlement? Is the irony not lost on them? Have they no shame, or are they merely ignorant of the role they have played?
UPDATE:
This post has done quite well, as my posts go. I would like to offer a point of clarification–some individuals commenting seem to have gotten the impression that I want to start dumping the elderly into mass graves, and are consequently dismissing my argument on the grounds that it’s dystopian. This is a misreading. I advocate drastically reducing the amount we spend on health care for the elderly and redistributing that money to alleviate college costs, but this does not entail mass killings–Japan spends less than half as much as the United States does per capita on healthcare for its citizens, who nonetheless have an average life expectancy that is four years longer. Japan has a rapidly aging population, and has consequently had to make its healthcare system spectacularly efficient. By shamelessly copying their superior system, we could potentially free up a lot of money for young people without throwing our elderly off the Tarpeian Rock.
Very interesting ! I enjoyed it a lot !
I find it frightening that it is repeated over and over that older people are dead and dying. These people that have served our country and worked hard all of their lives. Maybe the we should put them to “sleep” and turn them into Soilent Green or however you spell it. It is sci-fi creepy this hatred for our Elders.
Maybe it is the cost of people on Welfare and foodstamps that is putting the country under? Maybe it is all of the free stuff that people who have not worked for it get rather than those who have contributed that is causing the problem.
And paying for school! HOWDY! I worked my way through junior college and beyond … worked during the day and went school at night. It was VERY HARD. But I did it.
And after reading this. I would probably have to say: I am leaving my money to my dog. Or maybe the animal shelter.
The dystopian slippery slope argument distorts the point–I’m not arguing for denying elderly people healthcare, but for reducing the cost of what healthcare they do receive and redistributing those funds so as to restore the cost of college to the level you enjoyed when you yourself attended school. This could be achieved by copying the health care systems of countries like Japan. Japan achieves a longer life expectancy (by about 4 years) while simultaneously paying half as much in per capita health care costs.
It is important to remember that the current generation does not attend college under the circumstances you benefited from. Today, many students work all the way through school yet nonetheless are forced to borrow vast amounts of money all the same. The opportunities that were available to you when you were younger are no longer available to people today.
Actually, I just recently got my BA and the cost was very similar to the cost I paid many years ago for my AS. I still cant afford a fancy school Never could and so therefore have chosen to live with less so that I wouldn’t be burdened with the pay back.
It is also a fact that I received an all expence paid scholarship to the college of my choice based on intelligence testing and personality testing and then I had it taken away from me. A $24,000.00 dollar scholarship was taken away from me because a new law was passed back in 1974 that made it wrong to give it to a white person to make up for the past. The testers could not find a black person in the tri-state area who tested as well on the intelligence scores as I did yet my scholarship was given to a black person based on skin color alone.
Maybe something else is wrong with the economic system that no one is talking about
If you’re smart enough to earn a $24,000 scholarship on merit, you’re smart enough to go to a stronger university, and your financial situation should not preclude you from doing so. It does, and that’s because our society puts an insufficiently high priority on equalizing education opportunities.
I’m also not a fan of affirmative action, for reasons I outlined in this post from June:
https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2013/06/25/a-critique-of-affirmative-action/
I will read this.
Meantime, I will add that: Old sins cast long shadows. And maybe that is what is bringing the county down. I believe we have paid back our debt except for restoring the misplaced people back where they came from. And that should be purely voluntary. But, assimilation is a choice at this point. It might be time for our country to become One Nation Under God again and do the right things each individual and all seek God Heroically instead of selfishly and we might see America rise again.
Great post. Its hard to see what the future will hold for this generation.
Did not find this approach or content appealing.
What did you find unappealing about it?
I have often thought that my generation (25 years old) would be the most disadvantaged because of the circumstances surrounding issues like the great recession, and the burden placed by baby boomers. When I graduated in 2011 with my BA, there were significantly less opportunities than even 5 years prior. People who had graduated in 2006 would say that when the graduated, they were offered much higher positions to start, even though they were laid off due to recession a few years later. This experience is still valuable for when the economy does pick up, and looks attractive to employers. However, for people who graduated with me, these opportunities were not so plentiful. Reduction in federal and private grant money was a major reason for the drying of opportunities and positions. So when things pick up in say 5-8 years, employers will look to older candidates with more experience, or slightly younger groups with more time to train and teach the position. My class will be in the middle with neither.
You have my sympathies–cuts to investment in young people appear to have once again been the culprit in your case. We’ve got our priorities all mixed up.
Thank you! I am 46 years old, and therefore not of the generation in question, but I was annoyed deeply by the presuppositions of the original piece about Gen Y Yuppies. I disliked the snarkiness of it, and noticed quite a few holes. I’ve been thinking of writing a piece about what I think is wrong with that article and its ridiculous unicorn cartoons, but for now I am going to share your words here. You’ve addressed most of my concerns.
To people calling Generation Y the “generation of entitlement,” I’ve wanted to say, “Really? Wouldn’t you just like to listen in to what they are saying about your generation?” And as I said to someone today, if they really think that the present generation is faulty they need to take a good hard look at the people who produced them. Us.
You’re very welcome! I’m glad I was able to help provide an outlet for your own dissatisfaction with the unicorn piece. Thank you for sharing it!
Reblogged this on Slice Of Thought and commented:
Thought for your food today.
Thank you for sharing!
And this was actually a rush of information that most of us and specially from my age do not even wish to question about.
nice!
I always question the statement that says gen Y’s can’t go to college because they don’t have the money to go because their parents don’t have the money to send them… Every college has programs for scholarships, especially for freshman who get more dollars thrown at them for the fact they are 18 and the rest of us have to fight blood sweat and tears to get 500 dollars for two semesters (yeah I am that person). Their are thousands and thousands of scholarships floating around on the internet waiting to be gobbled up by individuals (fastweb for example) and even more if you have some sort of racial tie. If you are married you have better chances of getting student grants.
Where is the money? Its there, you have to go get it.
overall I like the article though.
I’m glad you liked the piece–in my experience as a 21-year old grad student, most of my peers are in part-time employment and/or actively seeking scholarships where available, but nonetheless having to borrow large amounts of money. I know many people who have been deterred from following me into grad school due to lack of funds. That said, I would love to see some statistics–my own experience is purely anecdotal.
Good topic and supporting statistics. I am a very late baby boomer so I too personally felt the effect of a huge cohort before my time depleting oppotunities. Nevertheless, my awakening to history made me realize that every generation inherits the opportunities and burdens from prior generations. I benefited from the political will to support college education born of the economically disastrous 1970s. I was living day in and day out with the burden of the Cold War going nuclear, 25 minutes to the end of the world. I am proud that my generation did something about that. From the fear and the will to fight the Cold War also came the Internet, through which global voices become crystal clear without the hisses of shortwave radio and genuinely of the peoples. This is the opportunity that your generation must seize. Out of despair can come the will and the opportunities. The lnternet offers a chance for a global phase transition never before existed so use it well for the common good and ALL will benefit. In the U.S., we must take back our democracy!
Scholarships are a generally poor method of obtaining tuition money. The majority one can find on aggregators such as Fastweb are either very low amounts often selected via lottery which requires a large amount of entry time to have a statistical chance of winning anything or very large merit-based sums usually involving completing a large project which because of the sum attracts so many people the odds of winning are also low. Thousands of scholarships, sure, but the time to fill them all out is impractical (especially with the deadlines and opening dates) and they’re spread amongst millions of students.
Sounds like a poor investment of one’s time–the average reasonably good student would probably make more money working at McDonald’s than he would spending the same time applying for scholarships, and no matter how many hours one works at McDonald’s it’s a drop in the bucket when it comes to paying for college, particularly at most strong universities.
Reblogged this on advancethinking (jazzedmind) and commented:
True
Thanks for sharing!
[…] of the rest of the day, I hope to update myself on all the comments recently received on “Why are Young People Unhappy” which, by the relative standards of this website, has gone viral. I also managed to write a […]
Reblogged this on nateandtheworld and commented:
Interesting post!
Thanks for sharing!
Very good article talking about a very important topic topic. You clearly describe and debunk the delirious “spoiled generation” mentality sweeping those belonging to many individuals from older generations. however
I think this is a habit many a member of every generation (including millennial’s to follow) and therefore is a matter of personal perspective.
I’m a millennial and always find it strange how many a person when faced with these tough times are quick to point the finger and find some way to blame an individual or localized group to justify there own sanctioned standards of order or decency, when in truth many of these problems are in fact inherited from the very generation that seeks to judge them. In fact while this argument may be focused in terms of financial wealth and stability we must also include moral and ethical ideals for the sake of validity, for even in economics (and happiness) our powers of reasoning dictates what we choose to do in life. throughout the primary generations (60’s, 70’s etc.) the world wasn’t exactly a pleasing place either; you had hippie revolts and university raids (started with the yuppies if I remember correctly), Vietnam and, if you look far enough, crazy conservative fundamentalist Christian pastors with there anti-gay Campaigns trying to “Christianize” America. not to mention the craziness of certain presidents who were lucky enough to make it into office (i.e Richard Nixon and the Watergate scandal). Truth is America during those early years were plagued by intense cooperate and societal destruction, and i think that, while the economy may suck now it’s actually pretty good given what occurred during the past four or more decades. i’m not a history major but from what I’ve seen with expanding inequality and such this is just a bump in our road to recovery, the reason this problem occurred is largely something beyond our control at the moment, but will eventually subside and pass away, like most problems inherited by our children and our children’s children. our legacy in life is to inherit the problems of the previous generation and try to make things right our own way, then the next generation will pass along that tradition.
there’s a quote from a philosophy book i read a long time ago but will show it here since i think it applies to this topic (I totally forgot the Author, though, so I hope it’s not plagiarism.)
“Out of the darkness, light; out of the chaos, order”
Author unknown currently
Interesting thoughts–in the 50’s and 60’s older generations were indeed critical of the very generation that is presently critical of millenials, so it may indeed one day be true that millenials eventually find themselves making the same claims about their own successors. For my part, I hope my future self manages to avoid falling into that.
I do think it’s possible to identify the causes of the economic problems we have and rectify them. There are things we could do politically to increase educational opportunities for young people and/or eliminate existing gaps. It requires a change in our society’s priorities, and while such a change is, at present, politically infeasible, it is theoretically possible if opinions shift.
yes, totally agree. I’m just going to do my part and try to survive and do what everyone else in life wants to do–follow there dreams and fight for what we think is right. That is our human right no matter what status we have in life.
maybe young people are figuring out that this whole thing is absurd…
It’s slow going. The young generation has been told over and over that the path to success and happiness is to work hard within the confines of this system. Even with increasingly visible catastrophic system failures, it takes a lot to shake that paradigm.
Reblogged this on …now for something a little more serious and commented:
Yeah! What he said
Thanks for sharing!
This reminds me of an article I read a while back, titled something like “It’s ok to be normal.” I went to high school with a bunch of kids whose parents wanted them to be the best at everything, go to college, get a master’s, get a phd, change the world. I’m sure some of them will, but that’s not the destiny for everyone. Some people will be happy not going to college, and following their own path. While in the 50s and 60s the dream was to have a family and a good job, a lot of kids these days want more than just the cookie cutter life. I know all I want is to be able to look back and say “Damn, that was fun.” And sometimes when things are slow, I get crazy.
[…] Why Are Young People Unhappy? […]
Thanks for sharing!
Great analysis!!
great piece. so true. thanks for sharing!
I agree with your assessment that real opportunities declined from what young people’s parents thought they could achieve. However, I also think that emerging adulthood is just a very difficult period in life, but we’ve created a picture of what that developmental stage should look like that is wildly inaccurate. We tell high school graduates, in a word, that they are the future and anything is possible for them now. The message is that what lies ahead is exciting and exhilarating. But we never tell them that this is a period when their life is abundantly uncertain, they will struggle to find ways to support themselves and lack the skills that seem required, and they will consequently feel anxious, insecure, and worried a lot of the time. I think perhaps we don’t remember that it is: we tend to project who we are now into our memories of the past. So, not only is emerging adulthood difficult, but it’s also something we don’t prepare young people for. Everyone knows that being a teenager is hard. We seem to have worked that out as a culture. But we don’t seem to have figured out that being in your 20s is hard. It is.
A good point–there is an awful lot of benchmark 20’s angst that currently flies under the radar of our culture. The issues I mention in this piece merely add to that foundation for unease.
I’m a university student in Britain, and I could write a book about the pressures of being a young adult of our generation. Firstly, we live in an economical climate where there is a real feeling that if you don’t get a good degree and a well-paid job, you cannot even hope to live a debt-free life. My dreams are to follow music and travel, but I wouldn’t for a second dream of delaying a university education for these things, because I don’t want to still be living with my parents at thirty, which would be very likely if I wasn’t earning decent money by my early to mid-twenties. Secondly, we live in a technological era which does not allow for as great a breadth of genuine social connections as in the past. There have been many occasions where I have missed an invite to an event simply because I haven’t checked my facebook. I feel like personal connections are dwindling and that finding true friends is becoming harder and harder to do. Then we live in the age of new media and commercialism. I cannot go a day without panicking about whether what I’m wearing or what I own will be good enough, because I’m not in the habit of buying things just because they’re in fashion.
Ultimately, all I want from life to be happy is the security and confidence to follow my own dreams, true friends and enough money to not have to worry about it every waking moment. Unfortunately, I don’t see these things in my future and the struggle just to survive in this day and age and have a token of independence is frustrating on a level I wonder if the generations before us will ever understand.
A university student in Britain? Brilliant–I did my undergraduate degree at Warwick.
You raise interesting concerns about the loss of that sense of social community in modern society. There’s a rich communitarian literature criticizing that trend, arguing that our individualist/materialist values are destroying something valuable that we’re not really paying attention to. Of course, there was a cost to that sense of community–back when most people lived in small towns and everyone knew everyone personally, many people were limited in opportunity, both economically and socially, by happenstance. The internet frees us to talk to people all over the place and to forge new identities for ourselves outside of the sometimes limiting identity we have in our immediate communities. I wouldn’t be able to share ideas like this one otherwise.
I hope you find the necessary security to one day be able to find what you’re looking for, if it’s still out there somewhere.
I would have used those same words when I was in my twenties. I’m well into my fifties now. I haven’t heard of any generation that didn’t have struggles (although there always seem to be those who don’t). Throughout my life, tho, I have to say things DO feel like they’re getting progressively harder…
[…] Why are Young People Unhappy?. […]
Thanks for sharing!
what a great insightful read… I agree that help for generation Y is needed and yet no one seems interested in our countries future…
Being 24 and slowly putting together the pieces of my life, I think it’s very hard in this day and age to live up to someone’s expectations. Your parents’, your teachers’, and even your own expectations are so hard to live up to for so many of us younger people. Every day we are fed examples of success and ideal lives to the point where it becomes impossible to get out of that pond.
We live in a world that moves faster than ever before and if you can’t keep up with expectations that are thrown at you or the ones you have yourself, then you go to the dogs.
Reblogged this on hassanptisialkot.
Thanks for sharing!
[…] Why are Young People Unhappy? […]
Thanks for sharing!
The brainwashing of the female baby boomers by the radical, second wave feminists and socialists in the late 1960s and early 1970s to abandon their Christian priorities of faith, family and country have cost your generation its future. While in pursuit of their “independence” through pointless careers. these women have squandered the economic future of the country by voting for every ridiculous social program on the planet to make up for the traditional family support network they foolishly abandoned decades ago, including having enough children to support them in their old age. See kqduane.com for more.
The last of the major entitlement programs was enacted in the mid-60’s. Since then, the state has contracted social programs rather than expanded them, with 90’s welfare reform being the biggest example. Government policy has gotten quite a bit less socialist than it was during the 50’s and 60’s.
Don’t kid yourself. Government programs have been expanding for decades. Only a few states availed itself of Wisconsin’s welfare reform concept. Look at the percentages as compared to GDP. Used to be 16% now its 25%. That’s not better. Remember Founding Fathers set up fed govt. for only 3 purposes- print the money, defend the country and set foreign policy- everything else is, in one way or another, a social (socialism) program, designed to shift cash from the haves to the have-nots and/ or to expand political power. Socialism is for dependent-minded people (females) who can’t take care of themselves, and everyone looses. Capitalism is for independent minded people (males) who can take care of themselves, and nobody looses.
I’m not sure where you’re getting your figures, but here’s where I’m getting mine:
http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/09/news/economy/welfare-reform/index.htm
Reblogged this on kickstuff and commented:
Interesting and makes quite a but of sense.
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for writing !
Thank you for a new perspective.
When we describe our children, Generation Y, as entitled, I think it is in part because we as parents, hand them everything without making them work for it, and they do not learn financial responsibility, making it difficult to succeed financially. This is a terrible mistake on our part.
I never considered how we are also draining their future by supporting our elderly, something they will never receive.
You’re welcome! The young generation might learn a thing or two about managing money wisely from witnessing the economic consequences resulting from the unsustainable high levels of household debt we had in the run up to 2008. For some decades after the depression, a whole generation was much more cautious as a result of that memory. If older generations are unable to set good examples, they can still show younger generations what to avoid.
I couldn’t agree more with this post. I am twenty-two years old and I have almost nothing to show for the six years I’ve spent in the work force so far. I dream of turning a successful career as a novelist, but I cannot find a way to cover the college costs I need to solidify my credibility and refine my technique. Creative jobs are the first to go when the economy sags, and I’ve spent my entire adolescence up until now preparing myself for a career involving Creative Writing. I have little experience with anything else. Am I doomed to toil away in the minimum wage dregs of society until I’m too old to stand on my feet for ten hours at a time? What happens then?
You have my sympathies–as someone familiar with the craft of writing (albeit not novel-writing), it may still be possible for you to make some forward progress even in the absence of college. If you write something really good and you submit it to the right publisher, the quality of the work can stand on its own. Refining one’s technique is primarily a matter of reading and writing often, and while the college setting is wonderful insofar as it forces you to do both, it’s still possible to do some of that on one’s own. The cost of college has denied you considerable opportunity and made achieving your aspirations much more difficult, but it has not made them impossible–provided that your time is not thoroughly monopolized by the day job you have to maintain in order to survive, of course.
Reblogged this on The Literary Exploits of a Manic Depressive Oddity.
Thanks for sharing!
Well researched post I must say…explicitly supported by data sets…good job
Thank you 🙂
You’re right, it must be far more difficult to be happy in a lagging economy where families are stretched to make ends meet. A fatal point missed though is also how there is a system designed by corporations which has been telling Gen Y that happiness, self worth, identity and all great things are measured in money and other material things. Is it a surprise that once the vast majority can no longer afford these things that they slump into misery? The health care topic can be discussed to great lengths and an important truth to consider is that our elders hold much wisdom, and a losing that wisdom impacts the rest of society negatively, so we not only have a moral obligation, but also a very economically sound reason to keep our elderly healthy. Being born in the 80’s I remember some of my greatest moments were spent outside playing with friends, today, the once busy grass fields are empty. Kids seem to be inundated with toys that keep them locked in, instead of enjoying the world outside, so I believe that in the discussion on happiness, our addiction to. technology needs to be factored in. Forgive my typos and Grammer snafu’s since I’m writing this on the go. I was compelled to comment and I am extremely happy to see meaningful and important discussions taking place, so thank you.
Interesting thoughts, and I thank you for them.
I agree to a certain degree with you on the materialism point, but it must be noted that people need a certain level of financial security just to get by and have the time and energy to pursue all the other non-material goods in life. People need enough wealth to make ends meet, regardless of how materialist they are.
As far as our elders go, they are indeed wise, but most are not working, and so the workforce (and consequently, the economy) is not benefiting from that wisdom. That said, I’m not arguing that we should cut our elders off, but rather that we should reform the health care system to bring its per capita costs in line with other developed countries like Japan.
It’s tough I sold my car moved to a town Where I can ride my bike everywhere for my daily needs. Freeing up my cash to travel and plan my retirement. I quit my job so I younger person could have it. Otherwise, I would have worked till I am 65 with 6 weeks holidays, big deal I wanted freedom everyday, to enjoy my life, my family and live with less.
It sounds like both you and that younger person benefited from your decision to move on. Good for both of you.
Reblogged this on ECAupgrade.com and commented:
An article about why young people are unhappy. It’s a bunch of charts and science bullshit. I know the answer. YOUNG PEOPLE ARE ASSHOLES. EVERYDAY. COMMON. ASSHOLES. Look at pop culture. The prevaling cultural sense of entitlement. Obesity and laziness. If you want to be happy learn how to not be an ECA! Simple…no chart needed.
Thanks for sharing, though in my experience, things are rarely as simple as you say.
I enjoyed the article. Happiness is a destination. The unhappy people don’t seem to realize it is a choice to be happy. That’s why they are ECAs.
Are you familiar with Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs? I’d say we need those things to be happy, both material and purely psychological. It’s not a choice to have self-actualization, self-esteem, a sense of communal belonging and/or love, safety, and the basic physiological needs (food, water, etc.) These things we either have or we don’t, and without them we really are worse off.
Are you familiar with your “sphere of infullence”? Don’t go around blaming others for your circumstance. To do so is outside your sphere and therefore useless. I don’t read a conclusion? Blaming society is endless useless bullshit. Life is what you make of it. Period. Furthermore the hierarchy of needs isn’t in the article anywhere and I’m focused on your post. The post seems like a rant from a typical grad school student pissed about debt, maybe degree selection and future prospects.
You’re mixing together two separate propositions here.
On the one hand, there’s the question of whether or not the misfortunes in the world are the result of structural, societal forces.
On the other hand, there’s the question of whether it’s productive for individuals to wallow in self-pity about the state of those forces.
That the answer to the latter is “no” does not preclude the fact that the answer to the former is “yes”.
My own life doesn’t really come into this post–I have privileged access to a source of funds that keeps me living comfortably while I pursue my degree. I’m more concerned here with the state of the average person, not myself. This is a political blog and I am a person who studies and writes about politics, so that is to be expected.
This is a thoughtful blog about an interesting topic – economic perspectives as seen by different generations.
Looking at the Huff Post article and your counter response, I believe your analysis is more on point as economic changes have a lot to do with shaping peoples collective outlooks, but the missing ingredient is the true cause of the economic backsliding we are experiencing.
I don’t believe our falling prosperity levels are due to an aging population that is sucking up resources and guilty of making bad economic investments, but the economic rules as we knew them have changed dramatically in favor of being corporation friendly rather than country friendly.
The increase in productivity and stagnation of wages coincides with the growth of outsourcing of manufacturing jobs to countries where labor is cheaper. As the economic mantra goes, there is no free lunch- and as companies seek to find the cheapest source of labor in a global market, the cushy well paying jobs of the past are becoming more rare and requiring greater education and training. In the past, all one needed was just any college degree to land a decent job. Now, one must seek degrees in the hard sciences, engineering, medical or high finance to ensure the best chance at economic prosperity. That is, once they pay off their loans needed to now fund such degrees.
The trend is ominous for current American and “old-school” 1st world workers as the world becomes more globalized. Foreign counterparts are matching if not exceeding our educational levels while working for pat at levels far below modern western wages. An engineer in India is paid less than what a minimum wage earner makes in the US. The long term trend is western salaries and pay will keep dropping until parity is reached globally.
This of course means expectations across all generations will need to be scaled lower, with future generations now getting the shorter end of the stick instead of a boost.
We are now in a society where it is likely better to seek self-employment rather than work for others to escape the trend of lower incomes. It’s better to own your own business and make use of the global price differences rather than fall victim to them.
Have you seen those miniature “Hobbit Homes” now being displayed as “living quarters of the future”? The lower scaled living writing is on the wall, and those wishing to avoid it had better be making plans now.
There are indeed a variety of factors that play into the economic slowdown, ranging from the immediate depressed demand to the long-term current account deficit (fueled by the outsourcing you mention). I bring healthcare spending into the mix because it is an area in which the United States spends a disproportionately large amount of money that could go toward alleviating the college debt burden.
That said, I think you overestimate the extent to which globalization guarantees a universally flexible labor market. Global trade volumes did not exceed the pre-WWI period until the 70’s, and only grew further thereafter due to deliberate trade liberalization policies that could be reversed. They have limited room to grow due to the persistence of non-tradeable goods and services, which make up the majority of economic activity. Because most goods and services are non-tradeable, it is highly unlikely that all wages will be reduced to some global average, or that all living standards will trend towards such an average.
Even if I were wrong and such a change in trade was in the offing, wealthy countries would likely act to reduce their trade volumes in order to maintain their relative advantages over their presently poorer rivals. Trade liberalization can be reversed, and likely would be, if it came to produce the circumstances you describe. In sum, it is not likely that things are proceeding in the direction you forecast, and if they do begin to proceed that way, wealthy states will step in to avoid that outcome, because it weakens their international position.
All one needs to do in America is look around their surroundings and note where their everyday and essential products they use are made. The probability is overwhelming that the product will have its origins in a foreign country. That spells a key answer to the source of declining jobs and wages in the US, while increasing productivity for corporations.
You mention the persistence of non-tradeable goods and services- what are they? I’m not following your assertion that most goods and services aren’t tradeable as it appears the networking and collaboration of countries are allowing an ever increasing amount of tradeable goods.
Furthermore, even services deemed non tradeable in the past are now open with the advent and proliferation of H-1B Visas which will allow foreign labor into domestic markets. Combined, both outsourcing and “insourcing” will be a prime force in leveling wages. There is no occupation that is safe from this as fully educated people from other countries not bound by minimum wages or worker rights or benefits regulation are being put in direct competition with the American worker. These replacements are not limited to just lower service workers, but also includes the high level ones such as doctors, engineers, lawyers, or what have you.
Here’s a recent article on Indian graduate engineers getting a big pay increase that will raise their median salaries to about the equivalent of $400 US dollars/month:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Engineering-roles-see-biggest-salary-increase-in-2012-13/articleshow/18156953.cms
The $400 isn’t the amount of the raise, that IS the graduate engineer’s median salary.
Now compare that level of pay to an equivalent graduate engineer in the US, and the level of disparity is crystal clear.
You may wish to check what graduate economists are paid in India to get a more direct example. 😉
Your last point about government stepping in to reverse or moderate trade imbalances relies on government being in control of the actions of large corporations and businesses. However, government control has been eroding for decades and it is now Corporations that influence government activity instead of the other way around.
Politics run on campaign contributions and corporate America’s influence on politics and political outcomes grows as they continue to pump special interest money to fund candidates that will be beholden to them. The effects of Citizens United just adds much more fuel to the fire.
This should be clear from the lack of prosecutions regarding most of the major players of the 2008/2009 Wall Street meltdown who, by and large, wound up being rewarded for proven fraudulent activities rather than prosecuted for them under the “too big to fail” mantra.
It also explains the continued degradation of rank and file employees benefits while corporate execs see the biggest earning increases.
Corporations are largely globalized entities and have no allegiance to any particular country, and our current divided government has very little power or will in stopping the trend of globalization.
Here’s some evidence:
85 cents out of every dollar Americans spend is on domestically produced goods and services:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/16/not-so-global/
60% of US employment is in non-tradable sectors:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/10/globalization-and-keynesianism/
Oil depletion will slow down the foreign sourcing of goods production by the U.S. multinational corporations. When transcontinental shipments are too costly, corporations will stop outsourcing.
Insourcing of multiple Silicon Valleys’ worth of engineers year in and year out is under the direct control of the U.S. political system. I see no relief for the U.S. because of its current plutocracy. However, that will end too when the U.S. gets a rerun of the 1917 Russian Revolution, most likely after the U.S. dollar collapses rendering trillion-dollar quantitative easing meaningless. We flew awfully close to that blackhole and the next perigee will come in a few months. Stay tuned!
Inflation has fallen over the period I’ve described, and we’re presently in a liquidity trap, so it is unlikely to rise so long as that trap persists. If and when we escape the trap and inflation does rise, the central bank will raise interest rates, so I don’t see how your crisis comes about.
I’m wondering if money redistributed will in fact translate into higher education rates and more people getting college degrees. I come from a country where parents are willing to provide for their children’s education- very happily as well, might I add, but how many people from this generation ( to which I belong) actually want an education? Economic instability has lead to lay offs for everyone from waiters to tenured professors, and the importance of education for itself has been lost because a lot of students only want to see immediate tangible material gain from spending two extra years at graduate school, let’s say.
Interesting points though.
TW
I’d say it’s more important to reduce the amount of debt existing potential graduates come out of school with than it is to actually increase the number of said graduates–many (though certainly not all, particularly not math/science) degree fields are over-saturated at present.
You’re quite right that the focus for most graduates is on the salary and job prospects, not on the education for its own sake. Even in MA programs, a majority is still out for the cash.
[…] Why are Young People Unhappy?. […]
Hey man, your link appears to be broken.
Reblogged this on Waverhouse's desk.
Thanks for sharing!
Cheers,
How do you propose to reduce student debts though, just out of curiosity?
The first thing I would do would be to reform the healthcare system–at present, our system costs twice as much per capita as does the system in say, Japan, which nonetheless provides for a life expectancy that is four years longer. I would shamelessly copy the Japanese system and use the savings to reduce college costs, and see where that leaves us.
Great article!
I like your political/historical take on the claims made in the original article. I don’t disagree with the conclusions/advice given in the original article, from a personal happiness standpoint. I think the reality vs expectations equation should be a key part of anyone’s introspection when they find themselves discontent or unhappy, not just the demographic discussed here. I also think looking at the entire thing from an overall political perspective, as you’ve done, is important too- and not letting the older generations off the hook. After all, they were once the young “out of touch” generation too, in whatever way. Maybe by taking to heart the criticisms in the original article, those of us in “Gen Y” can build futures for ourselves in which we look back at our lot in light of your discussion and maybe, just maybe, use that perspective to have a positive political influence on how health care, education, etc. are administered for future generations. I also want to comment on how refreshing it is that you respond thoughtfully to most (all?) of the thoughtful comments on your blog– it lends enormous credibility to your original discussion that you are willing to field criticism and support your views.
Thank you–I do try to address all comments that engage with the content of my posts, given that those who commented have taken time out of their busy days to read my work. I am able to do this in no small part because my readership is generally not very high, though.
I agree that reality v. expectations is a useful metric for examining the source of one’s own happiness or lack thereof. The OP and I differ most strongly on whether or not high expectations (and consequently dissatisfaction) were/are reasonable. The OP argues that young people act entitled when they demand that the economy improve at historically normal rates while I argue that young people have a legitimate grievance, that they had good reason to expect what they expected and their subsequent unhappiness is the product of a real and serious injustice.
That last sentence was sobering and noteworthy…
Thanks for sharing!
I loved the Yuppies article, in part because of its ridiculously insulting graphics, but I also enjoyed this different perspective on the issue! I still agree with both, Gen Y has a problem, which was both brought on by their parents, and themselves!
I’m glad you enjoyed my piece, though I’m not so sure it’s possible to wholly agree with both pieces–I make some claims here that contradict what is said in the Yuppies article.
I find that the younger generation y or younger are very selfish. You didn’t pay for what seniors get now. They worked hard for it. They worked to insured that their contributions would be there for others following them. But Congress and the politicians took care of that. They made sure there would be nothing left for the up and coming generations by bilking the funds and redirecting them for their own purpose. There still are many older seniors between the ages of 65-90 still working and contributing so that there will be benefits for those to come and themselves. And I can bet seniors are more health conscious then the younger generation.
As far as education is concerned, what has that got to do with seniors. Many States instituted lotteries and gambling so that there would money for education, but I see no one has asked where is the money really going towards. That is billions of dollars folks. Wake up. Make sure you know what you are talking about before you start flapping your gums..
Money our society spends on healthcare could theoretically be spent on other goods or services. The United States spends much more per capita on health care than most other wealthy countries, and much of that money could be re-appropriated to education. If older generations had payed for these programs, we would not have a long-term budgetary problem and there would be plenty of money leftover for education spending. Instead, entitlement spending on older generations comprises the majority of US federal spending, and long-run budget projections show that these programs will continue to consume larger portions of the state’s finances, strangling spending on the young, who have endured consistent year over year increases in college costs and subsequent student debt.
Really an interesting and fun to read blog with well-presented facts…
Very enjoyable read! Well done.
Well written and on the spot!
As a former Youth Director, I have regularly observed and read about narcissism and entitlement among today’s youth. In fact, I just wrote a rather opinionated post myself about entitlement (http://wp.me/22KTz). But I find your summary of the article you cite to be quite different from most of the information I’ve taken in — you state that “Young people are unhappy because the growth their parents promised them never materialized.” I believe there’s a lot of truth to that, but I have to wonder if such a justification for unhappiness is a sort of ‘off-shoot’ of purebred narcissism or entitlement. By holding their parents responsible (either consciously or subconsciously) for the broken promises and unfulfilled dreams is itself an admission of laziness and self-centeredness. Why should it be parent’s responsibility to accurately predict a child’s future? Sure, they can provide opportunity, encouragement, resources, etc., but ultimately it is up to the child to determine what their life becomes.
Do you not think that older generations have moral duties to their children that include ensuring that the educational and economic opportunities they enjoyed are reproduced for their children? How do you propose young people restore these lost opportunities? By definition, these opportunities have not been preserved, so no matter how hard-working or capable young people are, they are given reduced chances of advancement.
After reading this article it’s abundantly clear the problems stem from 4 areas
-parents
-economy
-technology
-social media
As a young person I’ve always been told I can do what I want and never had the expectation of doing better than my parents, as for the economy I’d say there lies the problem, our time is seen as less valuable therefore we get the minimum wage, what’s more frustrating is all the new gadgets that are constantly being thrown in our face and the need to buy them grows as my peers make them more attractive, if a few of my friends have one thing and share there experience with this new gadget and talk about it in front of me I do feel left out,but the economy an low minimum wage make it increasingly hard to get the things we want, with social media slowly replacing face to face contact it’s a must to have all the stuff just to feel you fit in, the stuff has become a talking point for people an games give them a new source of socialising that’s far easier an cheaper than traveling to them by bus or train.
In my opinion young people in General have grown up in a totally new culture, And from past discussions with friends we find the older generation far more aggressive and money hungry, technology has created a culture of hermits that sit in scrolling the internet seeing what’s happening around the world and all we see is war,violence,money, and fear, if you lived as young as us in these times an see how aggressive our species is from our view then you would see why going outside is such a deterrent.
The desire to have whatever the cool thing is was with us long before social media. It is however quite true that as wages stagnated, people accumulated large amounts of debt in order to finance the growth in lifestyle even in the absence of wage growth, ultimately sparking the economic crisis in 2008.
Benjamin: Nicely developed argument, but terribly wrong assessment and conclusions. There is no correlation between the past allocations of individual investments in social programs and the lower rate of wealth gains by the Y generation yuppies. Indeed, it is the investment in social welfare that has protected the bottom half of the country from even further decline.
Linking the two things together is a just a fabrication (fantasy??). The wealth disparity in the country is the product of a methodical effort by the very wealthy to put in place systems that will implement their personal agendas, namely to become even more wealthy. This is done by political action (lobbying), propaganda (attack ads on social welfare policies), and sometimes direct financial support to implement destructive legislation (gerrymandering, voter ID, regressive tax reform, and union busting right to work laws).
The conclusions drawn from your analysis smack of a philosophy that is probably the biggest threat to our society today, Libertarianism. This teaching, based on Utilitarianism, if not countered will drive the country to a third world status, where there are two classes, the rulers with all the money owning everything and the peasants doing all the work and owning nothing.
It is ironic that even one of the champions of Libertarianism on the principle that people are better off when acting only in their self interest, (Adam Smith) also said: “when all property is owned by one group society is destroyed”. I paraphrased this because I do not remember it verbatim, but the words were to the same effect.
I don’t think you’ve understood my argument correctly or where I’m coming from ideologically.
Social welfare cannot be considered as one broad, sweeping category. There are many social welfare programs that do not contribute to the economic development of young people, some of which I criticized in this piece, like Medicare. I’m not arguing for a general increase in welfare spending, but for a redistribution of the beneficiaries of existing welfare spending. Instead of spending so much of our economic output on medical care for the elderly, we would be better off investing those funds in providing young with educational and economic opportunities. We can do this without damaging the welfare of the elderly severely by implement a higher-efficiency healthcare system like the one in Japan.
I am militantly opposed to libertarianism. Morally, I am a utilitarian. Provided one accepts a broadly Keynesian economic framework, it becomes clear that libertarian economic policy does not maximize utility and is consequently immoral by a utilitarian standard.
I’ve written about the relationship between utilitarianism and equality a couple of times:
https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2012/09/17/utilitarianism-and-equality/
https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2012/12/26/keynesian-utilitarianism/
I’ve also written against libertarianism quite a bit:
https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2012/11/16/intellectual-hipsters-libertarians/
https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2012/11/17/libertarian-party-platform/
https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2013/02/19/stephen-davies-libertarianism/
Benjamin: I count support of education, i.e loans, grants, student loan interest forgiveness programs, etc. as a social welfare investment. Strict utilitarianism (Libertarianism) would treat those as not having utility, i.e. those aspiring students should earn their tuition money themselves somehow, or at least not expect the government to provide assistance. Some of that ilk have even proposed eliminating the Dept of Education from the Federal Government as a waste of taxpayer funds. (along with proposals to eliminate the Federal Reserve. EPA, and who knows what else?) I commend you for seeing the irrationality and the dangerous activities the Libertarians exhibit. Thanks for clarifying your philosophy for me. I will read the additional blog references you mentioned and maybe comment further. (PS: I hope your studies at Chicago, if they include economics, will not persuade you to change your outlook, but you may have to defend your Keynesian principles against very strong opposition.)
The category of “social welfare” contains much, much more than just education and student spending programs. In reality, these programs comprise a minority of social welfare spending, so arguing that there ought to be a correlation between the two is spurious.
Libertarianism is not strict utilitarianism. Libertarianism does not maximize utility because it results in large amounts of unnecessary harm. John Stuart Mill (one of the fathers of classical utilitarianism) supported what’s called the harm principle, that the state may intervene in order to prevent citizens from being harmed. Mill advocated that the state provide young people with some minimal amount of educational and economic opportunity. In order to simultaneously be both utilitarian and libertarian one would need to have a deeply misguided view of economic theory and exclude diminishing returns.
Reblogged this on Thoughs of a Political Science Major.
Thanks for sharing!
[…] https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2013/09/18/why-are-young-people-unhappy/ […]
Thanks for sharing!
I do agree with the author of this blog to a point. Honestly it is the fault of the children of the old people on why our crisis in healthcare is the way it is. Back in the day people never ever thought about caging up their parents in a institution. Or allowing strangers to take care of them. So shame on EVERYONE! Shame on humanity for not taking care of each other the way we should! For focusing on our material gains! Yes I am under 30 yes I am pissed off! I hate the fact the generations above me killed off the Native American tribes and now I am left to live in this polluted hole!
In the past, people died younger of diseases that are now preventable and curable. People are now living longer, but improvements in the quality of life are not keeping up with improvements in its quantity. Instead, we now have people living often for a decade or longer in a poor quality state in which they cannot maintain their independence. Caring for elderly parents is consequently a much bigger job now than it was in generations past, and the use of institutions and strangers quite understandable.