How
exactly did we become losers? By many measures, we aren’t succeeding in the
ways our predecessors did. If you’re a college graduate, you likely have a lot
of debt and a degree that’s not helping you get a job. You’re under-utilized in the economy, and
there’s a good chance you have already lived, or still are living, at home.
Instead of starting families, we’re in limbo, working the sort of crummy,
low-paying jobs that we worked in high school and to pay for college, but that
we didn’t expect to have to work once we had a degree. We’re in economic
straits; unhappy, and often cynical.
The
obvious answer is the Great Recession, since December of 2007. To trace the
causes of this economic collapse would take a volume. Certain laws, such as
Glass-Steagall separating banks from securities, were repealed along with
other regulations put in place after the Great Depression of the 30s. When
these were removed, in a process from Regan to Clinton to Bush, the same risky
patterns that had led to the Great Depression began again. The critical components
of the fallout were that pensions disappeared and houses were being foreclosed
on – both of which struck the middle class. This, in turn, was compounded by
the fact that middle class families are historically highly likely to send
their children to college. Since the 1980s, tuition has far outpaced the middle
class wage (which has diminished relative to purchasing power over the same
period). So our generation took out loans to pay for it, which previously wasn’t too bad an
option, if you could get a well-paying job after college and pay them off in
maybe ten years.
Since 2007 things have gotten better. Still the
United States has roughly 9% unemployment and 15% of its population is living
under the poverty line. The Occupy movement was to be expected, since a
consistent factor in determining a country’s overall happiness is its income
discrepancy. The less of a discrepancy, the happier the population. When a
large portion of the people being hurt by the recession are youth, of course
they’re going to be fed up with the status quo. Approximately 17% of the
unemployed are under the age of 30. That’s roughly 3,400,000 people, or the
population of Wyoming, Montana, Vermont and New Hampshire combined. These
numbers do not include the under-employed who’ve settled for part-time work, or
have simply given up hope looking; for youth currently listed as 32% - one in three. The actual un- and underemployed
numbers are estimated to be higher than the reported.
Who
is going to fix this mess? Historically, based on the Great Depression, it’s
best to employ Keynesian economics in the form of government intervention.
Reputable economists, such as the Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman, are very
consistent in saying the initial government bailout was the right idea, but
simply not big enough. When free market forces go awry and the bust gets too
big to comfortably handle (like 3.4 million unemployed youth) the government
steps in and regulates to ensure safety for its citizens. This has been true
for boom-bust cycles going back to the 1600s. So we need to turn to government,
right?
In
John W. Dean’s Broken Government he
addresses the discouraging trend of voter apathy and reminds us “Over the years
–actually, over the decades– the figures have not changed significantly, so the
data from 2004 are as good as any and probably not far from what they have been
since the embarrassing records were first kept in the 1930s.” This apathy and
ignorance of voters is disheartening, certainly. About 60% of Americans in the
Bush years thought there was a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, to take a
recent depressing example. As of 2010 one in five said Obama was a secret
Muslim. Dean cites where Americans stood in the 2004 election for voter
turnout:
“How
many Americans do vote? The answer is surprisingly few. Among the 172 nations
of the world for which records are maintained, the 2004 nationwide voter
turnout of 48.3 percent of eligible voters…ranks the United States 139 among
the world’s democracies, slightly ahead of Botswana (46.5 percent) and Zambia
(40.5 percent). Most developed democracies have far greater turnout, like Germany
(80.6 percent), Sweden (83.6 percent), France (84 percent) and Italy (92.5
percent).”
The
2008 election had the largest turnout since the 1960s, with between 62-3% of
eligible voters going to the polls for the Presidential election. That’s still
less than the most recent elections in the United Kingdom, Kazakhstan or even
Togo. The point being – we are in part losers of our own making. Luckily, we can be the solution to our own problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment