> [Lorenz] went on to suggest that the young people of the 1950s enjoyed objectively superior material prospects than young people do today This is why I think culture is more important than policy. Lorenz’s point is obviously non-sensical. She mentions the “safety net.” But Medicaid didn’t exist in the 1950s. There were no federal student loans. There were no food stamps. Almost nobody went to college. Etc. But it’s…
> There were no federal student loans. [..] Almost nobody went to college. How much did college cost? How necessary was a college degree for success?
No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
21–30 of 137 posts
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#22> [Lorenz] went on to suggest that the young people of the 1950s enjoyed objectively superior material prospects than young people do today This is why I think culture is more important than policy. Lorenz’s point is obviously non-sensical. She mentions the “safety net.” But Medicaid didn’t exist in the 1950s. There were no federal student loans. There were no food stamps. Almost nobody went to college. Etc. But it’s…
Ascribing the resulting unhappiness to departing from some sort of communal idyll where young people 'knew their place' is rather regressive I'd suggest.
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#23> [Lorenz] went on to suggest that the young people of the 1950s enjoyed objectively superior material prospects than young people do today This is why I think culture is more important than policy. Lorenz’s point is obviously non-sensical. She mentions the “safety net.” But Medicaid didn’t exist in the 1950s. There were no federal student loans. There were no food stamps. Almost nobody went to college. Etc. But it’s…
> There were no federal student loans.
True -- but by the same token, it was possible to "work your way through college". This is largely impossible now.
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#24Matthew Yglesias wrote about this today as well, and his take was interesting. Paywall though :/ https://www.slowboring.com/p/why-are-young-liberals-so-depre...
A study was conducted examining exactly this question. It turns out the bias is even worse: Not only are the 'wrong' questions unlikely to be asked, studies get rejected if they get the wrong results:
The authors also submitted different test studies to different peer-review boards. The methodology was identical, and the variable was that the purported findings either went for, or against, the liberal worldview (for example, one found evidence of discrimination against minority groups, and another found evidence of "reverse discrimination" against straight white males). Despite equal methodological strengths, the studies that went against the liberal worldview were criticized and rejected, and those that went with it were not. - https://theweek.com/articles/441474/how-academias-liberal-bi...
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#25Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#26Matthew Yglesias wrote about this today as well, and his take was interesting. Paywall though :/ https://www.slowboring.com/p/why-are-young-liberals-so-depre...
It's a very thought-provoking article and one that deserves more time than just might lunch break to ponder. In particular, this quote at the end of the article articulates an increasing discomfort I've been feeling around conversations about harm:
> I am increasingly convinced that there are tremendously negative long-term consequences, especially to young people, coming from this reliance on the language of harm and accusations that things one finds offensive are “deeply problematic” or event violent. Just about everything researchers understand about resilience and mental well-being suggests that people who feel like they are the chief architects of their own life — to mix metaphors, that they captain their own ship, not that they are simply being tossed around by an uncontrollable ocean — are vastly better off than people whose default position is victimization, hurt, and a sense that life simply happens to them and they have no control over their response. That isn’t to say that people who experience victimization or trauma should just muscle through it, or that any individual can bootstraps their way into wellbeing. It is to say, though, that in some circumstances, it is a choice to process feelings of discomfort or even offense through the language of deep emotional, spiritual, or even physical wound, and choosing to do so may make you worse off. Leaning into the language of “harm” creates and reinforces feelings of harm, and while using that language may give a person some short-term power in progressive spaces, it’s pretty bad for most people’s long-term ability to regulate their emotions, to manage inevitable adversity, and to navigate a complicated world.
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#27> [Lorenz] went on to suggest that the young people of the 1950s enjoyed objectively superior material prospects than young people do today This is why I think culture is more important than policy. Lorenz’s point is obviously non-sensical. She mentions the “safety net.” But Medicaid didn’t exist in the 1950s. There were no federal student loans. There were no food stamps. Almost nobody went to college. Etc. But it’s…
This is a hilarious one to include on your list because it shows you are missing the forest for the trees. Federal student loans didn't exist because they didn't need to exist as college was cheaper, living a middle class life didn't require college, and low paying jobs still paid a high enough percentage of living costs to allow people to pay their way through college by working. Today college is more of a requirement, most young people and families can't afford tuition so they need to take out loans, and low paying jobs do not pay enough to get out in front of that loan debt. The current situation is objectively worse.
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#28> [Lorenz] went on to suggest that the young people of the 1950s enjoyed objectively superior material prospects than young people do today This is why I think culture is more important than policy. Lorenz’s point is obviously non-sensical. She mentions the “safety net.” But Medicaid didn’t exist in the 1950s. There were no federal student loans. There were no food stamps. Almost nobody went to college. Etc. But it’s…
I can almost guarantee that young people don't have social security on the top of their minds. It's school school school internship work, that's it. Those bars are raised each year. Leisure time is social media and video games. All that got amplified in 2020. Not hard to see why they're depressed.
[Edit] I was standard college undergrad class of 2018, and right on the cutoff for gen Z. Our high school and college class was clearly more studious than class of 2016, and clearly less than class of 2020. I was also right there when childhood became virtual, starting with the iPhone and Facebook in middle school.
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#29Article spends entire time "debunking" a political pundit who posts "hot takes" on Twitter, doesn't interview a single teen. Maybe, just maybe, the answer is multi-faceted. Maybe we should take the things kids say at face value if we want to pretend that we are being intellectually honest. Sure, humans are notoriously bad at describing their own qualia and reasons for why they feel the things they do, but listening s…
As a neoliberal/capitalist, I would suggest that capitalism is an incomplete theory and that we are still flushing things out. The huge rise in material standard of living from the 1850s to 1970s in the US made a dramatic improvement in people’s real quality of life. But since the 70s the improvements are very marginal. I speculate that’s because most of the consumer improvements are in the domain of status consumpti…
The relationship between working people and let's say "capital" used to be more tenuous. This had ramifications for political stability in the late 1800s and early 1900s, but by the middle of the century we had a decent balance of power between laborers and companies, mediated by the government.
Union membership + secret societies were a huge building block of everyday life. If you haven't ever walked through a graveyard, I encourage you to do so. Look at the headstones of people who died before the 1980s. A huge number belong to a secret society or trade union group (for the sake of simplicity let's ignore the uncomfortable racial aspects many of these organizations may have had, they were still pillars of community even if they were racist pillars of community)
Contrasted with up until very recently where the norm was about bragging how hard you work (for someone else). Rugged individualism, not collectivism, is what some would consider to be the highest virtue today. Not to say this is a root cause, but just an example of change that can be analyzed in some weighted equation.
Re: No, Teen Suicide Isn’t Rising Because Life Got Objectively Worse
#30Article spends entire time "debunking" a political pundit who posts "hot takes" on Twitter, doesn't interview a single teen. Maybe, just maybe, the answer is multi-faceted. Maybe we should take the things kids say at face value if we want to pretend that we are being intellectually honest. Sure, humans are notoriously bad at describing their own qualia and reasons for why they feel the things they do, but listening s…
As a neoliberal/capitalist, I would suggest that capitalism is an incomplete theory and that we are still flushing things out. The huge rise in material standard of living from the 1850s to 1970s in the US made a dramatic improvement in people’s real quality of life. But since the 70s the improvements are very marginal. I speculate that’s because most of the consumer improvements are in the domain of status consumpti…