January 10, 2006
He's missing something
Daniel Gross has a piece on Slate chewing out twentysomethings for complaining about the job market, etc. He does have something of a point: just because we're on the bottom of the heap now doesn't mean we're going to stay that way. You aren't 25 forever.
But what he's missing is that by the time we're able to afford to have kids, most of us will be too old, assumming men marry women approximately their own age. He is right that not being able to afford preschool if you don't have kids does, on the face of it, sound a bit nonsensical, but it's a damned good reason not to have kids in the first place.
Which is exactly what's happening. Birth rates in post-industrial nations are rapidly falling, to the point where Japan has a negative growth rate, and if it weren't for massive North African and Middle Eastern immigration, Europe would too. Some European nations already do (Albania could lose up to 50% of its population in the next few decades). Tax structures are stacked against us, the massive boomer generation is gobbling up resources, refusing to go quietly into that dark night, and fighting like the dickens to extend their rob-the-poor-to-feed-the-rich "social safety net" programs.
You know that whole "you take care of us when we're kids and we'll take care of you when you get old" implied social contract thing? The deal is off.
Chicken-egg. Ryan, what I think you've been missing in this whole "the world isn't giving 'us' a viable deal" thing is the perspective that all generations have been through it. You really don't want me to go into detail about my first job at $1.40/hour (that was the minimum wage then) or the first place I rented that cost $40 a month (a SHACK with two rooms... I had to work hard to move up to renting an apartment from acquaintances at $75 a month that was actually livable). My wife and I can count on two fingers the times we were helped by our extended families in any (slightly) substantial way ... we had to work for everything ourselves. (But then so did my parents...)
The point isn't that you have to make what you think you need to do what you think you should be doing... I think the point is that you do what you should be doing, and that drives you to do what it takes to make it work (making more, or doing with less). If I'd really waited til I could afford my kids, I'd never have had them. It doesn't work that way.
I think some in this generation just hasn't found this generation's "solution"... for prior generations, the key was education (no guarantee now, more the key for my generation and prior), geographic migration (think westward migration amongst others, now only applies "globally"... are you tri-lingual?), going into debt prior to that debt being wiped out by inflation (my parents' generation and a little earlier), etc. I think this generation's solution is "cooperation"... I've been interested in how the "Friends" mentality has evolved... 3BR/3BA townhomes in my current (soon to be former) complex are quickly becoming "housing collectives" with three couples splitting the rent. If that doesn't sound "doable" , realize that it is just a stepping stone. Every generation has to find that first step to get it to the next.
I worried some when I got to Covenant about some of what you've complained about... the only ones Covenant was actually paying what they needed (or maybe a little more) at the time were the empty nesters... from what I've seen those guys funneled a lot of that back into the school. The school started worrying about "the problem" and started trying to help the lower echelons... after I'd moved into the middle echelons. It's a never-ending struggle.
Stop whining... no one will give you the solution. You'll have to make your own solution.
Posted by: Randy D. Smith at January 11, 2006 01:33 PMI don't know that Ryan is complaining so much as identifying social wind that blows little good. A Western decline in birth rates, if unchecked, has the potential to become a weapon of cultural suicide. I refuse to worry too much about it, though, until young people abandon their talent for making choices while drunk and stupid. Here lies our hope for a future.
Posted by: mesh at January 11, 2006 01:49 PMThe current, so-called "elderly-political complex is indeed a difficult problem. The elderly, on the one hand, tell the younger generations not to live for the "here and now" and not to "discount the future so much." They suggest that we stay in school longer, that we save our money (as opposed to spend it), and that we spend our time building our skills.
Then, on the other hand, this same group of people create an unimaginable, gargantuan debt of IOUs through Social Security and Medicare. They refuse even the smallest of reforms to the benefits they receive, despite the fact that they have been the sole benefeciaries of their children's largesse. They constantly push to expand these programs and the burdens they will leave on their children and grandchildren. Furthermore, through their prescription drug benefits, they undermine the incentives of the drug companies to develop new drugs, thus leaving their children and grandchildren with less effective medicine.
So how do we deal with a group of people that tell us not to live for the present, yet through their actions do exactly that? It's no wonder that so many younger people have trouble respecting their elders.
I think that the Bible is quite clear that the care of the elderly is the responsibility of each elderly person's family and the Church. It might be too late for today's elderly to learn this lesson, but hopefully our younger generation will.
Posted by: Ben at January 12, 2006 12:17 PMFor Aaron -- "Ryan complaining" can be looked at two ways. First, realize that I hesitated to respond, then responded with the context of at least one earlier posting along the same lines. If anything I was responding more to the earlier posting. Second, I think it's part of Ryan's nature, inherently, to complain. He's a cynic and a critic... it's his gifting, if you like! And he's good at it. Hmmm, I think I'll resist the impulse to expound on the pendulum swings at Covenant between the cynics and the cheerleaders... you guys definitely were in a "cynic phase" of those swings (guess where I think the pendulum has been since y'all left?)!
For Ben, I'm not sure how to respond. Presumably I'm in between you guys and "the elderly" (though I suspect you might clump me in that category, I don't know). Nevertheless, this read much like a political manifesto... high on the expected sound bites for one side, but low on actual connection to a reality outside of anecdotal evidence.
Stay in school longer -- not my motto. A FEW people I encouraged to stay in school longer, but it tended to be based on gifts. (Of course here I'm dealing with three people obviously gifted with abilities that MIGHT benefit in such a way.) Most people I thought needed to mix life experiences with academia. Some I even thought shouldn't be in college. Okay, today I think MANY shouldn't be in college that are. But that's just my opinion. I'll agree that "society" (and the elderly probably go along with it) is pushing "stay in school longer".
Save your money -- I've heard a lot of "people aren't saving as much" statements of fact, but I don't recall seeing a lot of "go save more" type of stuff. If anything, the elderly (my opinion) wanted more spending, NOT saving... it's necessary to prop up the pyramid they constructed. That was Clinton's legacy (again, my opinion)... he was able to build people's confidence to tackle climbing that consumerism pyramid... and the economy kept ticking.
Spend time building skills -- here I'll agree. How could I not. But again, it's that mix of "real world" skill building with (when appropriate) credentialing via academia.
But please, don't paint "the elderly" with the same brush as "the leadership of the AARP" any more than you should paint educators with the same brush as "the leadership of the NEA". Rank and file do NOT see eye to eye with the leadership, in many cases. In this way, Ben, you continue to lobby for a position placing "Rush-types" when that position becomes vacant! :-)
Finally, how do you live with such people? Same way you've been doing it... thumb your noses at them and live for the present like they do. Okay, I take that back (sorta)... MY generation thumbed their noses and did what they wanted. Your generation seems to be more adept at just "tuning out" what they don't want to hear (the walkman+ result) and just doing (Nike effect) what they want.
The more interesting question is "How will you be (do) different(ly)?". My father and my mother-in-law have continually spurned our efforts to "take care of them"... I'm already looking at whether I will behave differently from them. I think so, as THEIR perceptions of the needs of the elderly (staying where they are in the environment they're comfortable with) differ from my perceptions of need (anywhere with the Internet is just about the same as any other... I don't even think I'll need access to a good "library" by then, as Internet access will have finally completely replaced that need).
Oh well, obviously y'all hit some hot buttons that have been on my mind a bit. Sorry to expostulate at length so. But, as Scott Meyers (Effective C++ author... heard a lecture by him last night) said, "It's therapeutic sharing these experiences with others!".
--
RDS
going back to a different point made in the original post, I believe that, for most folks, if they wait until they can "afford" to have kids, they'll never have kids. does this not elevate material goods over procreation?
Posted by: bobw at January 13, 2006 03:57 PM