The Youth Policy Action Center’s (YPAC) co-founding partner, Mobilize.org, recently launched the second annual Democracy 2.0 Survey. The survey was designed by Millennials to find out what the Millennial Generation thinks about the economy, technology, democracy and their government. It also looks at the way you think about yourself in this democracy at the transition to a new government.
This national survey, Democracy 2.0: An Annual Survey of the Millennial Generation, is being taken by thousands of young Millennials on the ground and online across the nation. If you were born between 1978-2008, your response is very important as Mobilize.org begins their 2009 campaign to upgrade the way our democracy works to Democracy 2.0. If you were born prior to 1978, please pass this along to a Millennial friend, co-worker, child, or relative.
Go here for the survey:
Friday, December 12, 2008
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Starting Off on the Right Foot
Starting Off on the Right Foot
High School Career Academies Boost Earnings and Independence
It might be surprising to many, but today, only about one-fourth of Americans over age 18 have a college degree. Among young adults age 18-34, only 16 percent have a BA. Another 7 percent have an Associate’s degree.
As a nation, we do a very good job of instilling the value of college. We do less well in preparing our high schoolers (at home and in school) for the rigors of college. Go to nearly any high school today and you’ll find many students who see college in their future. However, the majority of those will be derailed along the way. Even among those who make it to a four-year college, only about one-half of those finish.
So what happens to those who don’t make it? In short, many flounder in low-wage jobs. Others sink. In 2000, 14 percent—3.7 million—of all young adults aged 18 to 24 were neither enrolled in school, employed, or in the military, nor had a high school degree or GED.
Young persons who flounder on the path to adulthood risk becoming disconnected from those “institutions” that shape our lives: work, school, and family. At-risk young adults who lack the credentials to land a decent job struggle to find employment, often giving up in discouragement. Without a job, they find it hard to start a family. Pretty soon, they are adrift.
But a new study by MDRC finds promise in high school career academies for preventing this drift. Career Academies are high school programs that, in addition to regular academics, offer students an option to specialize in a field, whether that be culinary arts, accounting, nursing, or others. Many high schools across the country offer these academies, right within the high school walls.
MDRC recently evaluated several career academies in a rigorous study that used the gold-standard of research designs, random assignment. Like drug trial studies, this study created a control group of students in the same high schools and compared them with those enrolled in the career academies on such things as average earnings after high school, intensity of work, and wages, higher education, single parenthood, marriage, and whether they were able to live on their own. The high schools were in pretty tough neighborhoods in inner cities. MDRC researchers followed students for eight years.
The results are pretty amazing.
Earnings for those who completed the program in a career academy earned about $2,100 ore per year than their classmates—or about $17,000 over eight years. Much of these earnings gains were driven by their ability to land secure jobs: they worked more months and longer hours each week than others. They also earned a higher hourly wage. And these earnings gains were not coming at the expense of post-high-school education or training. Those in career academies were just as likely to go on to some form of postsecondary school.
Young men—often most at risk for becoming disconnected—did particularly well. They earned about $30,000 more over eight years than their peers from the same high school.
These higher earnings and job stability may be one reason that more of those from career academies were also doing better on the home front. There is nothing like a solid wage and a steady job to make you feel secure in your future.
Eight years after high school, significantly more from career academies were married and fewer were single. More were custodial parents and fewer were single parents. And more were living independently from their parents.
Most social programs rarely see impacts this large.
High School Career Academies Boost Earnings and Independence
It might be surprising to many, but today, only about one-fourth of Americans over age 18 have a college degree. Among young adults age 18-34, only 16 percent have a BA. Another 7 percent have an Associate’s degree.
As a nation, we do a very good job of instilling the value of college. We do less well in preparing our high schoolers (at home and in school) for the rigors of college. Go to nearly any high school today and you’ll find many students who see college in their future. However, the majority of those will be derailed along the way. Even among those who make it to a four-year college, only about one-half of those finish.
So what happens to those who don’t make it? In short, many flounder in low-wage jobs. Others sink. In 2000, 14 percent—3.7 million—of all young adults aged 18 to 24 were neither enrolled in school, employed, or in the military, nor had a high school degree or GED.
Young persons who flounder on the path to adulthood risk becoming disconnected from those “institutions” that shape our lives: work, school, and family. At-risk young adults who lack the credentials to land a decent job struggle to find employment, often giving up in discouragement. Without a job, they find it hard to start a family. Pretty soon, they are adrift.
But a new study by MDRC finds promise in high school career academies for preventing this drift. Career Academies are high school programs that, in addition to regular academics, offer students an option to specialize in a field, whether that be culinary arts, accounting, nursing, or others. Many high schools across the country offer these academies, right within the high school walls.
MDRC recently evaluated several career academies in a rigorous study that used the gold-standard of research designs, random assignment. Like drug trial studies, this study created a control group of students in the same high schools and compared them with those enrolled in the career academies on such things as average earnings after high school, intensity of work, and wages, higher education, single parenthood, marriage, and whether they were able to live on their own. The high schools were in pretty tough neighborhoods in inner cities. MDRC researchers followed students for eight years.
The results are pretty amazing.
Earnings for those who completed the program in a career academy earned about $2,100 ore per year than their classmates—or about $17,000 over eight years. Much of these earnings gains were driven by their ability to land secure jobs: they worked more months and longer hours each week than others. They also earned a higher hourly wage. And these earnings gains were not coming at the expense of post-high-school education or training. Those in career academies were just as likely to go on to some form of postsecondary school.
Young men—often most at risk for becoming disconnected—did particularly well. They earned about $30,000 more over eight years than their peers from the same high school.
These higher earnings and job stability may be one reason that more of those from career academies were also doing better on the home front. There is nothing like a solid wage and a steady job to make you feel secure in your future.
Eight years after high school, significantly more from career academies were married and fewer were single. More were custodial parents and fewer were single parents. And more were living independently from their parents.
Most social programs rarely see impacts this large.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
C-Span Interview on Youth Vote
Network member Connie Flanagan and PhD student Amy Syvertsen recently discussed young adults and politics on C-SPAN's Washington Journal. Listen here.
Connie and Amy discussed recent findings on the youth vote, community service, and other forms of civic participation. The bad news is that conventional acts, like giving money to politicians, writing to your Congressman, are down among young adults. The good news is that community services is climbing. Another bit of good news is the strong uptick in voter registration among youth. Since 2004, we've seen steady gains in youth participation-- even in the 2006 midterm elections. In Pennsylvania, youth make up 9% of total registered voters, or 8.3 million potential voters.
The rise in community service could also be a good harbinger because the strongest predictor of voting and being involved is simply being there. Being in a 4H group or being on a college campus or in a church group sparks interest and "hooks" young adults. If other people are doing it, you pay attention and want to join in. Participation then becomes a habit.
One worrisome finding is the sharp divides in participation by education. Young people who do not go to college are far less likely to vote, volunteer, or be involved actively in their community.
You can read more of Connie's work here and here.
---B. Ray
Connie and Amy discussed recent findings on the youth vote, community service, and other forms of civic participation. The bad news is that conventional acts, like giving money to politicians, writing to your Congressman, are down among young adults. The good news is that community services is climbing. Another bit of good news is the strong uptick in voter registration among youth. Since 2004, we've seen steady gains in youth participation-- even in the 2006 midterm elections. In Pennsylvania, youth make up 9% of total registered voters, or 8.3 million potential voters.
The rise in community service could also be a good harbinger because the strongest predictor of voting and being involved is simply being there. Being in a 4H group or being on a college campus or in a church group sparks interest and "hooks" young adults. If other people are doing it, you pay attention and want to join in. Participation then becomes a habit.
One worrisome finding is the sharp divides in participation by education. Young people who do not go to college are far less likely to vote, volunteer, or be involved actively in their community.
You can read more of Connie's work here and here.
---B. Ray
Young Adults and Volunteering
“Volunteering absolutely makes a difference. Whether you're volunteering as a tutor at
school, or like me, as a Boy Scout leader, or whether you're volunteering to read to somebody in a nursing home, it affects people's lives. And it makes your life more
fulfilling. It makes you have a good feeling, which probably makes you a happier person, which probably makes you better to be around.”
Tom was a 29-year-old computer analyst living in St Paul when the Network interviewed him a few years ago. Although he holds a full-time job, three times a week he teaches swimming to youth at the community center in the neighborhood where he grew up. He also sits on the planning board of the local Boy Scouts organization, which meets once a week. Tom started volunteering for both these programs when he was 18.
Americans are a nation of volunteers, but some have raised concerns that young adults today aren’t doing their part. The “me” generation is too cynical, too isolated behind their computers, or too selfish to pitch in, some say. Others see their volunteering as just a way to pad resumes for college applications.
Solid numbers are hard to come by, but it appears that the skeptics are being challenged. Young adults who started volunteering in high school, often to fulfill their “service learning” requirement, are continuing to pitch in during college. Volunteering by college students is growing at twice the rate of all other volunteering, according to a recent report by the Corporation for National and Community Service. The Obama campaign, and the Howard Dean campaign before it, have shown that youth do get involved in politics.
Yet, we still know relatively little about why young adults get involved, and more important, how—through which channels, which approaches speak to youth, and what keeps them interested. One thing is clear. Youth like Tom who start early in life are much more likely to become life-time volunteers. What is less clear is how institutions and organizations can hook that interest early and sustain it.
The Network recently opened the topic up for discussion at the biennial meetings of the Society for Research on Adolescence. Psychologists from Germany, Chile, Switzerland, and the United States spent the morning discussing how and why young adults volunteer, its effects on their well-being, and how the field can work to better understand their efforts and the benefits of civic participation both to society and to individuals.
“I think volunteering can be frustrating at times. People don't appreciate what you're doing,” said Tom. “But I think it's meaningful, especially if you're working with young people like I do. You make their lives, hopefully, one little bit better each week. And it makes your community better.”
In an existential sense, being a part of something bigger gives us meaning, it helps to shape our ideas of who we are and how we fit into the world. The need to matter remains central to the human condition. Perhaps modern society—paradoxically more connected technologically than ever before—is piquing our need as humans to matter and stand up and be counted. Down with anomie, up with people. After a few decades of rising materialism, disenchantment, distrust, and misanthropy among young adults, perhaps the reaction has begun.
school, or like me, as a Boy Scout leader, or whether you're volunteering to read to somebody in a nursing home, it affects people's lives. And it makes your life more
fulfilling. It makes you have a good feeling, which probably makes you a happier person, which probably makes you better to be around.”
Tom was a 29-year-old computer analyst living in St Paul when the Network interviewed him a few years ago. Although he holds a full-time job, three times a week he teaches swimming to youth at the community center in the neighborhood where he grew up. He also sits on the planning board of the local Boy Scouts organization, which meets once a week. Tom started volunteering for both these programs when he was 18.
Americans are a nation of volunteers, but some have raised concerns that young adults today aren’t doing their part. The “me” generation is too cynical, too isolated behind their computers, or too selfish to pitch in, some say. Others see their volunteering as just a way to pad resumes for college applications.
Solid numbers are hard to come by, but it appears that the skeptics are being challenged. Young adults who started volunteering in high school, often to fulfill their “service learning” requirement, are continuing to pitch in during college. Volunteering by college students is growing at twice the rate of all other volunteering, according to a recent report by the Corporation for National and Community Service. The Obama campaign, and the Howard Dean campaign before it, have shown that youth do get involved in politics.
Yet, we still know relatively little about why young adults get involved, and more important, how—through which channels, which approaches speak to youth, and what keeps them interested. One thing is clear. Youth like Tom who start early in life are much more likely to become life-time volunteers. What is less clear is how institutions and organizations can hook that interest early and sustain it.
The Network recently opened the topic up for discussion at the biennial meetings of the Society for Research on Adolescence. Psychologists from Germany, Chile, Switzerland, and the United States spent the morning discussing how and why young adults volunteer, its effects on their well-being, and how the field can work to better understand their efforts and the benefits of civic participation both to society and to individuals.
“I think volunteering can be frustrating at times. People don't appreciate what you're doing,” said Tom. “But I think it's meaningful, especially if you're working with young people like I do. You make their lives, hopefully, one little bit better each week. And it makes your community better.”
In an existential sense, being a part of something bigger gives us meaning, it helps to shape our ideas of who we are and how we fit into the world. The need to matter remains central to the human condition. Perhaps modern society—paradoxically more connected technologically than ever before—is piquing our need as humans to matter and stand up and be counted. Down with anomie, up with people. After a few decades of rising materialism, disenchantment, distrust, and misanthropy among young adults, perhaps the reaction has begun.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Youth Vote-- Will They?
I sat talking politics with a friend last night and he was certain that all the excitement among young adults about politics (mainly following Obama) would all fizzle in the end. “They talk a good game but they don’t get off their duffs and vote,” he said.
A couple of recent studies by CIRCLE, a research group studying civic participation, might signal a shift.
In the mid-term elections in 2006, turnout among 18-29-year-olds increased for the second major election in a row, growing to approximately 24 percent, up at least 2 points over 2002 levels,
“Young people led the way in this election. While voter turnout overall grew only slightly, youth turnout rose substantially,” said Peter Levine, director of CIRCLE. “Young voters have witnessed the largest increase in support of Democratic congressional candidates since 2000—nine percentage points. Their shift in voting behavior and their increased turnout clearly had an effect on the 2006 election results.” [go here for the full report]
In another study by CIRCLE, college students are apparently “hungry for political conversation that is authentic, involves diverse views and is free of manipulation and ‘spin,’” The report follows up on a 1993 study published that found students considered politics “irrelevant” to their lives and they saw little purpose in actively participating in politics.
So, what do you think. Will young adults vote?
A couple of recent studies by CIRCLE, a research group studying civic participation, might signal a shift.
In the mid-term elections in 2006, turnout among 18-29-year-olds increased for the second major election in a row, growing to approximately 24 percent, up at least 2 points over 2002 levels,
“Young people led the way in this election. While voter turnout overall grew only slightly, youth turnout rose substantially,” said Peter Levine, director of CIRCLE. “Young voters have witnessed the largest increase in support of Democratic congressional candidates since 2000—nine percentage points. Their shift in voting behavior and their increased turnout clearly had an effect on the 2006 election results.” [go here for the full report]
In another study by CIRCLE, college students are apparently “hungry for political conversation that is authentic, involves diverse views and is free of manipulation and ‘spin,’” The report follows up on a 1993 study published that found students considered politics “irrelevant” to their lives and they saw little purpose in actively participating in politics.
So, what do you think. Will young adults vote?
Monday, January 22, 2007
Is College Still Worth It?
Based on a study by Cecilia Elena Rouse and Lisa Barrow, Does College Still Pay, published in the Economists' Voice, vol 2, issue 4, 2005 <http://www.bepress.com/ev/vol2/iss4/art3/>
As the costs of college rise, and as more people face the monthly college loan payment, some might begin to wonder, is it worth it? Does college still pay?
For years, the answer to that question was a resounding yes. As the job market increasingly demanded higher-skilled workers and as the bottom dropped out on the wages of the lowest skilled workers, the returns to college were huge. The key reason for the increasing value of a college education was the cost of not having one. By 1989, wages for college grads were more than 70% higher than for high school graduates. That started to change in the 1990s as the wages of non-college grads began to increase, closing the gap somewhat. Couple that with the rising tuition costs and the fact that more youth must fund their tuition with loans instead of federal grants, many are wondering, can I afford to go to college, or is it the case that I can't afford not to go?
Rouse and Barrow recently calculated those costs. They find that the average full-time student who entered college in 2003 and finished in four years would pay $30,325 in tuition and fees. But on top of that are the wages forgone while attending school. If you could make $20,000 each year between age 18 and 22, the future wages from a college degree had better pay that and more if college is worth the time and money. Factoring in this "opportunity" cost of attending college, the cost of attending college rises to $107,277. Therefore, to be valuable, college has to boost lifetime earnings by at least $107,277.
In fact, it does, and more. College will boost a graduate's earnings by $402,959, leaving the net value of a college degree at about $295,682. In short, a student entering college today can expect to recoup her investment within 10 years of graduation. In other words, college still pays.
The big question, though, is will college continue to pay in the near future? For the foreseeable future, the likely answer is yes. Wages for high school graduates would have to increase by 95% with no increase in college-grad wages in order to make the value of college disappear. Even during the booming economy of the mid-1990s, real wage growth for high school graduates averaged only 4.6%. At the same time, we must recognize that while the real wages of college graduates have historically increased over time, globalization and technological progress could change all of that. With technological innovation, even our most skilled workers are starting to compete for jobs with workers overseas, and as supply and demand demands, wages for college grads would likely fall.
Thus, like all other investments, paying for college involves some risk. But, it's also likely to remain one of the best deals around.
Cecilia Elena Rouse is Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University and is a member of the MacArthur Research Network on Transitions to Adulthood. Lisa Barrow is a Senior Economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
As the costs of college rise, and as more people face the monthly college loan payment, some might begin to wonder, is it worth it? Does college still pay?
For years, the answer to that question was a resounding yes. As the job market increasingly demanded higher-skilled workers and as the bottom dropped out on the wages of the lowest skilled workers, the returns to college were huge. The key reason for the increasing value of a college education was the cost of not having one. By 1989, wages for college grads were more than 70% higher than for high school graduates. That started to change in the 1990s as the wages of non-college grads began to increase, closing the gap somewhat. Couple that with the rising tuition costs and the fact that more youth must fund their tuition with loans instead of federal grants, many are wondering, can I afford to go to college, or is it the case that I can't afford not to go?
Rouse and Barrow recently calculated those costs. They find that the average full-time student who entered college in 2003 and finished in four years would pay $30,325 in tuition and fees. But on top of that are the wages forgone while attending school. If you could make $20,000 each year between age 18 and 22, the future wages from a college degree had better pay that and more if college is worth the time and money. Factoring in this "opportunity" cost of attending college, the cost of attending college rises to $107,277. Therefore, to be valuable, college has to boost lifetime earnings by at least $107,277.
In fact, it does, and more. College will boost a graduate's earnings by $402,959, leaving the net value of a college degree at about $295,682. In short, a student entering college today can expect to recoup her investment within 10 years of graduation. In other words, college still pays.
The big question, though, is will college continue to pay in the near future? For the foreseeable future, the likely answer is yes. Wages for high school graduates would have to increase by 95% with no increase in college-grad wages in order to make the value of college disappear. Even during the booming economy of the mid-1990s, real wage growth for high school graduates averaged only 4.6%. At the same time, we must recognize that while the real wages of college graduates have historically increased over time, globalization and technological progress could change all of that. With technological innovation, even our most skilled workers are starting to compete for jobs with workers overseas, and as supply and demand demands, wages for college grads would likely fall.
Thus, like all other investments, paying for college involves some risk. But, it's also likely to remain one of the best deals around.
Cecilia Elena Rouse is Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University and is a member of the MacArthur Research Network on Transitions to Adulthood. Lisa Barrow is a Senior Economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
Upward Mobility and Class in America
Originally published in the St. Paul Pioneer Press, July 20, 2005, as an op-ed.
Teresa Toguchi Swartz, Douglas Hartmann
As Americans, we’d like to think that where or to whom you’re born is only a temporary status. With a little hard work, some gumption, and a bootstrap, we can be anyone we want to be. That certainly seems to be the case with a group of 20-somethings who grew up in St. Paul, whom our research group is interviewing in an effort to better understand how the transitions from adolescence to adulthood are unfolding today. These young adults believed for the most part that they were the authors of their lives and, if they were unhappy with the way things were going, that they could plan for and act to change things.
But is that really the case? Or does class matter in America? Consider this: Our findings show that in their early 20s, nearly two-thirds of young adults receive financial support from their parents, and 40% of those in their late 20s still receive assistance from parents in some form or another. However, and here is where class rears its head, young adults in the top one-fourth of family income categories receive three times more in material assistance than those in the bottom one-fourth. This occurs even though higher-income youth are only 10–15% more likely to attend college than low-income youth.
The importance of class was probably no more evident than in our interviews in St. Paul. While most, although not all, of the young Minnesotans we spoke with could count on their families for continued support as they established themselves, it was clear that those from more affluent families received significantly more financial help—for their education, rent, health and car insurance, and even down payments on homes—while their less well off peers spoke of struggling to pay for these or forgoing them altogether.
Consider Jake and Bo, two white 29 year olds who both attended St. Paul public schools. Following high school, Jake’s parents paid for his BA at William and Mary. After graduating, he attended a prestigious private law school on the East Coast, also financed by his parents. Bo, meanwhile, attended a local public university, which he felt was his only option because his mother could not afford to foot his education bills. Despite working substantial hours while attending college, he dropped out when he found himself having to go without food. Jake is now an attorney, while Bo has worked a series of manual and service jobs. Recently laid off, Bo has returned to community college, still hoping to someday earn his degree and land a well-paying job.
Yet despite these distinct trajectories, Bo remains optimistic that he can make a turnaround. Bo is not alone in this. Predictably, we found optimism over work and financial futures more prevalent for white, middle-class, and highly educated youth. But even those facing more challenges believed that hard work and determination would eventually pay off. As Bo said, “If I have to do something completely different tomorrow, as long as I’m willing and able to work at it, I think I’ll be fine.” The one concession for poor and working-class kids, it seemed, was to have reined in their aspirations; for example, hoping for a “clean” office job if they currently did manual labor or for increasing their commission from phone solicitations or bill collections.
On the whole, young people did not see their background and past experiences as determining their futures, and they viewed the world as offering them the chance to continually reshape their life through reflection, planning, goal-setting, and hard work. In short, the American Dream.
Indeed, the advantages of the private scaffolding that families provide their young adult children remain hidden, despite the very real inequities in material support that young adults from different classes receive from their parents. Relying on private families to deal with the many, larger structural changes (such as declining wages for males, higher housing costs, higher college tuition, more jobs that demand higher education) means that those with more resources will be better able to afford more—and a class divide will only widen. Without stronger safety nets, such as affordable health care, subsidized education (think GI Bill), school-to-work supports, and others, the optimism and can-do spirit of Bo and his peers may quickly disappear.
Teresa Toguchi Swartz, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of Minnesota. Swartz is the author of Parenting for the State (Routledge Press, 2005). Doug Hartmann is Associate Professor of Sociology, at the University of Minnesota, and is the author of Race, Culture, and the Revolt of the Black Athlete: 1968 Olympic Protests and their Aftermath (University of Chicago Press, 2003).
Teresa Toguchi Swartz, Douglas Hartmann
As Americans, we’d like to think that where or to whom you’re born is only a temporary status. With a little hard work, some gumption, and a bootstrap, we can be anyone we want to be. That certainly seems to be the case with a group of 20-somethings who grew up in St. Paul, whom our research group is interviewing in an effort to better understand how the transitions from adolescence to adulthood are unfolding today. These young adults believed for the most part that they were the authors of their lives and, if they were unhappy with the way things were going, that they could plan for and act to change things.
But is that really the case? Or does class matter in America? Consider this: Our findings show that in their early 20s, nearly two-thirds of young adults receive financial support from their parents, and 40% of those in their late 20s still receive assistance from parents in some form or another. However, and here is where class rears its head, young adults in the top one-fourth of family income categories receive three times more in material assistance than those in the bottom one-fourth. This occurs even though higher-income youth are only 10–15% more likely to attend college than low-income youth.
The importance of class was probably no more evident than in our interviews in St. Paul. While most, although not all, of the young Minnesotans we spoke with could count on their families for continued support as they established themselves, it was clear that those from more affluent families received significantly more financial help—for their education, rent, health and car insurance, and even down payments on homes—while their less well off peers spoke of struggling to pay for these or forgoing them altogether.
Consider Jake and Bo, two white 29 year olds who both attended St. Paul public schools. Following high school, Jake’s parents paid for his BA at William and Mary. After graduating, he attended a prestigious private law school on the East Coast, also financed by his parents. Bo, meanwhile, attended a local public university, which he felt was his only option because his mother could not afford to foot his education bills. Despite working substantial hours while attending college, he dropped out when he found himself having to go without food. Jake is now an attorney, while Bo has worked a series of manual and service jobs. Recently laid off, Bo has returned to community college, still hoping to someday earn his degree and land a well-paying job.
Yet despite these distinct trajectories, Bo remains optimistic that he can make a turnaround. Bo is not alone in this. Predictably, we found optimism over work and financial futures more prevalent for white, middle-class, and highly educated youth. But even those facing more challenges believed that hard work and determination would eventually pay off. As Bo said, “If I have to do something completely different tomorrow, as long as I’m willing and able to work at it, I think I’ll be fine.” The one concession for poor and working-class kids, it seemed, was to have reined in their aspirations; for example, hoping for a “clean” office job if they currently did manual labor or for increasing their commission from phone solicitations or bill collections.
On the whole, young people did not see their background and past experiences as determining their futures, and they viewed the world as offering them the chance to continually reshape their life through reflection, planning, goal-setting, and hard work. In short, the American Dream.
Indeed, the advantages of the private scaffolding that families provide their young adult children remain hidden, despite the very real inequities in material support that young adults from different classes receive from their parents. Relying on private families to deal with the many, larger structural changes (such as declining wages for males, higher housing costs, higher college tuition, more jobs that demand higher education) means that those with more resources will be better able to afford more—and a class divide will only widen. Without stronger safety nets, such as affordable health care, subsidized education (think GI Bill), school-to-work supports, and others, the optimism and can-do spirit of Bo and his peers may quickly disappear.
Teresa Toguchi Swartz, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of Minnesota. Swartz is the author of Parenting for the State (Routledge Press, 2005). Doug Hartmann is Associate Professor of Sociology, at the University of Minnesota, and is the author of Race, Culture, and the Revolt of the Black Athlete: 1968 Olympic Protests and their Aftermath (University of Chicago Press, 2003).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
