Why Are Record Numbers Of Young Adults Jobless And Living At Home With Mom And Dad?

The Economic Collapse ^ | 02/14/2012 | Michael Snyder

[SeekAndFind]

In the United States today, unemployment among those age 18 to age 34 is at epidemic levels and the number of young adults that are now living at home with Mom and Dad is at an all-time high. So why are so many of our young adults jobless? Why are record numbers of them unable or unwilling to move out on their own? Well, there are quite a few factors at work. Number one, our education system has completely and totally failed them. As I have written about previously, our education system is a joke and most high school graduates these days are simply not prepared to function at even a very basic level in our society. In addition, college education in the United States has become a giant money making scam that leaves scores of college graduates absolutely drowning in debt. Many young adults end up moving back in with Mom and Dad because they are drowning in so much debt that there are no other options. Thirdly, the number of good jobs continues to decline and this is hitting younger Americans the hardest. Millions of young people enter the workforce excited about the future only to find that there are hordes of applicants for the very limited number of decent jobs that are actually available. So all of this is creating an environment where more young adults are financially dependent on their parents that ever before in modern American history.

Since the start of the recession, the percentage of young adults in America that are employed has dropped like a rock. In 2007, the employment rate for Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 was 62.4 percent. Today, it is down to 54.3 percent.

Yes, there are certainly many out there that are lazy, but the truth is that most of them would like to work if they could. It is just that it is much harder to find a job these days.

And it isn't just young people that think that the job market has gotten tougher. According to one recent survey, 82 percent of all Americans believe that it is harder for young adults to find jobs today than it was for their parents to find jobs.

But if they cannot get jobs, then young adults cannot financially support themselves. So more of them than ever are heading back home to live with Mom and Dad.

In the year 2000, 8.3 percent of all American women between the ages of 25 and 34 were living at home with their parents. Today, that figure is up to 9.7 percent.

In the year 2000, 12.9 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 34 were living at home with their parents. Today, that figure is up to an astounding 18.6 percent.

Take a moment and let those statistics sink in.

Nearly one out of every five American men from age 25 to age 34 are living at home with Mommy and Daddy.

When you look at Americans age 18 to age 24, it is even worse. Among Americans age 18 to age 24, 50 percent of all women and 59 percent of all men still live with their parents.

Those are very frightening numbers.

Part of this has to do with a fundamental cultural shift. An increasing number of parents these days expect that they will have to take care of their own children beyond the age of 22. The following is from a recent article by Pew Research....

When asked in a 1993 survey what age children should be financially independent from their parents, 80% of parents said children have to be self-reliant by age 22. In the current survey, only 67% of parents say children have to be financially independent by age 22—a drop of 13 percentage points.

But what accounts for the tremendous gender disparity that we see in the figures above?

Well, one major factor is that young women are now far more likely to pursue a college education than young men are. According to an article in the New York Times, women now account for approximately 57 percent of all enrollments at U.S. colleges and universities.

The less education you have, the more likely you are to be unemployed in America today. So that is certainly a significant factor.

But many that have gone on to college are also moving back home. When you are a young adult with no job and no prospects and you are swamped with tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt, it can be incredibly difficult to be financially independent.

After adjusting for inflation, U.S. college students are now borrowing about twice as much money as they did a decade ago. Many students that go on to graduate school end up with more than $100,000 in total student loan debt.

Sadly, those degrees often do not pay off. In fact, in America today one-third of all college graduates end up taking jobs that don't even require college degrees.

So what does all of this mean?

It means that there are millions upon millions of angry, disillusioned and frustrated young adults out there today. A recent USA Today article told the story of 32-year-old Dennis Hansen....

After a year without work, Hansen, 32, was hired to monitor Lake Michigan and Lake Superior water for the state and federal governments over two summers. He also had short stints as a census worker and as an extra post office hand during one holiday crush.

It hasn't been enough: Hansen says he has a $13,000 credit card debt and that's just for basics — his $600 monthly mortgage, heat and food.

"It's definitely a roller coaster," Hansen says, with the ups coming when he's done well in a job interview and the downs when there's a rejection: "That's when I'm frustrated, angry and wondering why I went to college for 10 years."

If the economy was humming along on all cylinders, it would be easy to blame our young adults for being too lazy.

But these days most young adults have to scramble like crazy just to get a really low paying job. Large numbers of very talented young adults are waiting tables, flipping burgers or stocking shelves at Wal-Mart.

And this reality is reflected in the overall economic statistics. Since the year 2000, incomes for U.S. households led by someone between the ages of 25 and 34 have fallen by about 12 percent after you adjust for inflation.

The "wealth gap" between younger Americans and older Americans is also growing and recently hit a new all-time high. U.S. households led by someone 65 years of age or older are now 47 times wealthier than U.S. households led by someone 35 years of age or younger.

But this is not good for our society. When there is civil unrest, it is not those 65 and older that take to the streets.

We desperately need our economy to get healthy again so that our young adults can get good jobs, get married, set up households, raise families and be productive members of society.

Instead, the percentage of young adults that have jobs is near an all-time low, the percentage of young adults living with their parents is at an all-time high, the proportion of adults in the United States that are married is at an all-time low and we have hordes of angry, frustrated young adults with plenty of time on their hands.

You don't have to be a genius to see trouble on the horizon.

What is going to happen when the next major financial crisis comes and the economy gets significantly worse than it is now?

In the end, we are going to reap what we have sown. We have fundamentally failed our young adults, and those failures are going to produce some very bitter fruit.

[ReformationFan]

‘Regarding responsibility - you are correct. If you have no sense of self-worth, pride and integrity - you have no compuncture to take responibility for yourself. This is, indeed, a huge failing of their parents. Biblically, this is what I think is meant by the phrase “The sins of the fathers shall be visited upon his chldren”.’

This era is defined by having no self-worth, integrity and no compuncture to take responsibility for yourself. Just take a look at who our culture idolizes(the usual Hollyweird folks) and who this age group elected to the White House. Didn’t Obama and Nancy Pelosi pass legislation that children could stay on their parents’ insurance till they were 26?

[central_va]

As an employer, I can tell you that there are risks to hiring overqualified people.

BS. A more educated person needs probably LESS time for training. Offer them the job at the salary specified. If they take it then you have a better employee that is more productive.

Your small minded thinking hides the fact if you were to get a bright educated person they can probably do your loser job better than you. It's a threat, the law of the jungle, I get it.

Actually, I think the practice as you describe should be illegal.

[Retired Greyhound]

Benefits? This is a new phenomenon.

Young people should look for any job that pays money and buy basic insurance on the private market.

A low-deductable plan to cover accidents can cost as little as $60 per month for a young person.

True, this is not our parents America. 1950’s America was the exception, not the rule. But the entitlement attitude of the young is not helping.

[9YearLurker]

Congratulations—it sounds like you and your daughter have done a nice job.

[LibertarianLiz]

Was your daughter in Japan for the earthquake/tsunami?

No, she was preparing to go in about a month. What did happen, though, was that the majority of people that had signed up to teach, decided not to go. The company my daughter works for called her and asked if she was still interested. She said yes, but most said no.

As a result, she is traveling from school to school a lot. The travel time she does is really hard on her. She had wanted to really work on her Japanese and had found a teacher. But, her schedule changes every two weeks so it is very difficult for her to keep up with classes. Also, I had thought that there would be other people, probably around her age, for her to hang out with and go do things together. However, there aren't enough young people, so one person is traveling between schools and they may be the only teacher in that area. Occasionally, when she travels to go sight-seeing or something like that, she will see a Westerner and they always call to one another. One of the favorite topics seems to be the funny signs in "Engrish". The words are english, but, they are put in a fashion that is sometimes very difficult to understand. There seem to be quite a few Aussies over there.

[Gaffer]

We don’t have no jobs problem....it’s 8.somethign and decreasing by the minute! We’re all fine here, at least until November. Move along.

[Gaffer]

Sorry to hear your children are without gainful jobs. However, some part of me wishes that I had a house big enough to hold all my children and grandkids. I’d especially love to counteract the grand girls’ education indoctrination on a daily basis.

[Retired Greyhound]

Actually, I think the practice as you describe should be illegal.

Do you mean the practice of hiring the person that I think we be of most value to me? You would like to make that illegal?

I think you are in the wrong place. DU is down the hall, buddy.

[discostu]

Even without the draft parent pushed responsibility on kids. They didn’t let their 18 year-olds sit around the house, they had get a job or go to college, maybe both, and if they were going to stay with M&P they had to contribute in someway. The current generation isn’t being pushed out by parent or pulled out by draft. So they stay home.

[discostu]

These kids were bums before the economy turned south. They don’t want jobs, they aren’t looking for jobs, so the job market doesn’t really impact them. The most it does is give them an excuse during the occasional parental tongue-lashing. And it’s not like they’d be qualified for anything but a menial job, they haven’t gone to any kind of schooling, they’ve developed no skills outside of Playstation. Part of having no responsibility means having no reason to become qualified for a job.

[discostu]

I think it’s parents losing sight of the goal of child-rearing. Somewhere along the lines they forgot the idea is to create a functioning adult. Started treating it more like raising a pet, your goal with a pet is largely to avoid property destruction, so long as they aren’t peeing on the couch you like your pets as is, you don’t expect them to develop independence. That seems to be what’s happened to the kids, they don’t pee on the couch.

[ctdonath2]

Paying them what they’re worth is illegal.
Paying their sustenance is compulsory.
Having enjoyed sufficient wealth to acquire spacious accommodations, and to continue feeding the offspring, you consent to the arrangement.

[ansel12]

As an employer, I can tell you that there are risks to hiring overqualified people. It’s costly to spend the time training someone who doesn’t plan on being there long-term. When hiring, you look for good people that have education and experience congruent with the position.

The military knows the same thing, that is why they need some category IVs, they know that placing category 1s into those less demanding, repetitious, boring positions does not work out.

[ansel12]

Well in previous generations there was also this thing called "The Draft", that kind of forced 18 year-olds to be responsible.

The draft was definitely a big focus of males in their late teens, it forced them to confront adulthood issues, patriotism, and their internal feelings about military service and the role of service to their fellow man and how it fit into their own personal philosophical outlook, the right and wrong of killing, and much more.

[ctdonath2]

Your missing the point: the overqualified tend to leave ASAP.

Training people does take time & money, even if shortened by talent & education. Say training time is cut by 50% by hiring the overqualified, and productivity is greater than usual; 6 months later he finds a more suitable occupation & salary, leaves on a moment’s notice (the conventional 2 weeks would cost him hundreds of $$$), you’ve got nobody doing the job now, and hiring the next warm body takes an optimistic 100% of the usual training time - now you’ve spent half-again longer training someone (50+100%), suffered extra downtime, and otherwise went thru a whole lot more hassle than if you’d hired the just-qualified in the first place.

[discostu]

If the person is overqualified for the job then they’re probably also overqualified for the salary. So they might take the job because they need it, but they won’t stop looking for other employment. So yeah they might be totally awesome for the time you have them, but that time is going to be short, and then you’re right back in the boat you were in. Smart hirers are looking for employees that will be around a while, years. If you hire the overqualified you’ll get months, meanwhile that less qualified but still good guy that would have spent the next decade with you got hired by your competitor where he’ll be working against you for the next decade.

When I was young I thought like you, didn’t believe in the concept of overqualified. Then I moved up to the point in life where you get to hire people. That’s when I learned the truth. Overqualified candidates are real, and they really shouldn’t be hired.

[dsrtsage]

I had a friends kid from Idaho show up in here in Reno on January 1. He is 21, and showed up with little more than the clothes on his back. He wanted to start an apprenticeship as an electrician. By January 4th, he had lined up his first job working at a mine in central Nevada. Since then, he has already taken his aptitude test for apprenticeship, already taken MSHA and OSHA training. Is setting up welding training. And has gotten very high praise from his boss. He gets things done, doesn’t complain, and always keeps busy. He is one of just a few people that will be retained by the mine, as they are laying off most of the electrical contractors out there for being subpar. He is already doing some things that he is technically not allowed to do yet (though under supervision).

So it took a 21 year old exactly 4 days to begin a career in the highest unemployment state in the country.

[Hodar]

These kids were bums before the economy turned south. They don’t want jobs, they aren’t looking for jobs, so the job market doesn’t really impact them.

That's a pretty broad brush you go there, pardner. May be the case in a large number of cases, but there are also plenty of cases where people just can't catch a break.

[JimRed]

Depends on the kids. If they’ve been irresponsible since childhood, sell the house and buy a one bedroom condo when the last one leaves for college or his own apartment.

“Sorry, no room!”

[discostu]

Like all things in a nation of 311 million there will be exceptions to the rule. But by and large the failure to launch generation failed to launch 10 years ago, the economy has had no impact on their general lack of ambition. Yeah some folks can’t catch a break, but the ones like my nephew-in-law have their hands in their pockets they don’t WANT to catch a break.