Economic crisis: Is there a new 'Lost Generation'?
Gertrude Stein in Paris in 1924. A conversation with a mechanic helped her to recognize the loss of a generation in World War I.
Wikimedia Commons
Last time, it was the devastation of World War I that prompted Gertrude Stein and Ernest Hemingway to tell the world’s young adults: “You are all a lost generation.” Now, is the economic crisis creating another Lost Generation?
The latest statistics from the U.S. Census, which we’ve discussed all week, confirm that America’s young adults have been hit really hard by the prolonged economic recession. Some are calling them our new lost generation, citing numbers that show the generation’s low (and falling) employment rate, more young adults living at home with their parents, delayed marriage and high poverty rates among households headed by young adults.
“These people will be scarred, and they will be called the ‘lost generation’ — in that their careers would not be the same way if we had avoided this economic disaster,” Harvard economist Richard Freeman told Associated Press. Freeman’s remark is echoing through news media and the blogosphere. The Atlantic repeated his conclusion.
Freeman makes a valid point. Young adulthood is a large portion of a person’s impressionable years. This is the developmental period in which values are learned that last a lifetime.
People who came of age in the Great Depression, for example, tended to be frugal and thrifty throughout their lives. We know from analyses of data from around the world that people who come of age in a time of economic turmoil, unsafe circumstances and political unrest have fundamentally different values from those whose impressionable years occurred in a context of affluence, safety, and stability. (If you’re interested in these issues, check out my own book, "America’s Crisis of Values: Reality and Perception.")
I don’t know if “lost generation” is the right label. It was popularized by Ernest Hemingway, who got it from Gertrude Stein, who got it from a garage owner she knew in Paris, who used the phrase to describe those who came of age during World War I. The label is applied to the Millennials to refer to delayed adulthood and responsibility, hopelessness, listlessness and other responses to a dim economic future.
Do you see Millennials in this way?
Are they a “lost generation”?
Or, is there a more positive interpretation?
Originally published at www.OurValues.org, an online experiment in civil dialogue on American values.
Dr. Wayne E. Baker is a sociologist on the faculty of the University of Michigan Ross School of Business. Baker blogs daily at Our Values and can be reached at ourvaluesproject@gmail.com or on Facebook.
Comments
KJMClark
Tue, Sep 27, 2011 : 10:31 a.m.
It's not just the millenials. Median wages have gone pretty much nowhere since the 70s. They've gone down since 2000. The only people who have made progress are the top 25% or so, with most of the income gains going to the top 1%. Let's not forget that the worst of the unemployment in the Great Depression was in the under-20 category. If 14 and 15 year-olds were still allowed to hold regular jobs, as they were in the 30s, and we counted unemployment like they did, we'd probably be near the 25% unemployment we experienced then.
Sarah Rigg
Mon, Sep 26, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.
It's definitely hard for young people just coming into the job market right now. I still think it's a pretty bleak situation, but the small silver lining, is, I think, extended families bonding and building community together to weather tough economic times. I know more than one family where brothers, sisters, cousins, etc. have chosen to either continue living together, or to come back together, because they know there's power and safety in banding together, sharing expenses, etc. You could call this "delayed adulthood and responsibility" OR you could call it going back to older values. It's only been the last 100 years since we expected kids, magically, at age 18, to leave the house and be instantly independent.
Polyjuce123
Sat, Sep 24, 2011 : 6:05 p.m.
The idea of a "lost" generation is not new, and the processes behind it have been in motion ever since the baby boomers came of age and implemented the most selfish policies of our time. Boomers like Reagan and Bush who gave us NAFTA and harnessed the wheel of globalization to turn the US into a service oriented economy, all the while the majority of the boomers kept untouched due to their "seniority". On the other end, the 16-24 year old out of HS can expect to make a poverty wage (unlike their older counterpart who bought a house with their pay at age 18) and they can expect their labor to be tailored to the company they work for, which means full sacrifice and no benefits. This is something foreign to baby boomers, growing up in a time when mom stayed home, and dad made enough to pay for 2 cars, the house and timely vacations. The comfortable image of suburban life was born, and their generation would be the last to enjoy it. In an economy where the age groups 16-24 have nearly 25% unemployment, age discrimination is the only answer. When employers want "X" years of experience and a college education to boot, the "X" in the equation equals your age. Employers favor older displaced employees simply due to the hope that they will be more "reliable" often ignoring the fact that their younger counterparts are more educated and better suited for the position. As freshly minted young graduates are forced to remain unemployed, they will only be less employable in the future, and yes this is what is creating the "lost" generation. It is this greed to maintain their (boomers) wealth and status that shuns the youth of today, as they play to hold on to their high wages as long as this economy will allow. But when the boomers leave the office, their younger counterparts will walk into the same position, but paid only 3/4 of their older peers wage, and forget asking about benefits. Welcome to the new mechanical sol
Chip Reed
Tue, Sep 27, 2011 : 11:35 a.m.
I can't argue with that, but in 1981, baby boomers weren't making any of the decisions. Perhaps your beef is with grown-ups in general, and you may have a point...
Polyjuce123
Mon, Sep 26, 2011 : 6:12 p.m.
@Chip The dots are easy to connect, all it takes is some simple and quick research anyone can do. We can look at this issue in terms of government policies that have shaped the US, or we can look at it in more of a sociological aspect as Baker notes and question the values of current and past generations. One of the turning points of labor and the dissolving of the middle class was the 1981 strike and defeat (by the Reagan administration) of the professional air traffic controllers association. This set the tone for other employers to stand up against unions and the erosion of benefits and high pay. The 80's represented a major shift to employers streamlining their operations, (aka "trimming" workforce) which would be further aided by the internet boom of the early 90's and the advent of globalization. These events of erosion, and stagnant pay (note I am not including the actions of the Bush and Clinton admin due to lack of space here) have left younger generations with a shell of what once was a robust economy. In order to remain solvent in a global economy, employers have made benefits and perks a thing of the past save upper mgmnt and execs. Young professionals are particularly hard hit due to lower starting salaries which restrict their buying power in the economy, and taking home ownership out of the picture along reducing the amount of money they circulate into the economy. There are many other points to make here that I don't have the space to, but one thing is true, but when you impoverish younger generations with mountains of debt and minimum wage positions, its not hard to speculate the future of this country.
Chip Reed
Mon, Sep 26, 2011 : 2:01 p.m.
do you just make this stuff up as you go?
Polyjuce123
Sun, Sep 25, 2011 : 4:55 p.m.
Do some research, the WW2 generation largely did not agree with his policies unlike the boomers. Reagan represented the boomer train of thought and shaped the fall of the unions and the middle class. Reagan may have not been technically born in the boomer time frame, but his values mirrored the selfishness of the boomers. What trouble are you talking about? The 14 trillion dollar hole you left younger generations to fill?
Chip Reed
Sun, Sep 25, 2011 : 4:24 p.m.
If you young whippersnappers think Reagan (unless you mean Michael Reagan...) was a baby boomer, then we are in even more trouble than we thought.