> living standards, employment prospects, ...Is it possible that dividing GDP by population isn't a good indicator of whether "life got objectively worse" for people living in conditions of increasing inequality?
Perhaps the prospect of juggling three gig jobs that can disappear in an instant, while still not being able to pay for rent and healthcare, isn't an ideal "employment prospect".
Or perhaps the data cited in the article isn't granular enough to point at root causes. Yes, young people are depressed and anxious. But when we understand that persistent sadness and hopelessness is far more prevalent among teen girls than teen boys, now we can look at what's different for girls than boys.
One hint is that among teens, the vast majority of minutes spent on Instagram are by girls, not boys. Boys are online a lot too, but gaming is a different social and behavioral animal.
And most studies looking for correlations between social media usage and mental health are flawed, because they are typically dose-response studies. If individuals who consume 15 meals a week of fast food have greater rates of diabetes than individuals who never eat fast food, then that's a good correlation (though not necessarily causation)!
But that method fails for social media, because social media is a collective activity. Girls who spend five hours a day on Instagram are mediating relationships through the app and neglecting in-person social activity, and we know that's unhealthy.
But girls who stay off social media are out of the loop, socially isolated, probably ostracized for being weird, because their friends are still on it for five hours a day.
High rates of social media usage damage both frequent users and infrequent users, so it's hard to see that in dose-response correlations.