The Go-Nowhere Generation

I find that a lot of the comments here are missing the point. Sure, Baby Boomers have no moral high ground when it comes to generational criticism. Who cares? I think the OP makes some really interesting points and, for my part, I don't think he's trying to moralize or call people lazy. "Go-nowhere" sounds pejorative, but the fact is that people have less of a use for transportation now, and I think there's an interesting insight there.

As a country, we deeply suck at moving humans around. Europe has actually fast trains and they're actually reasonably priced, unlike Amtrak. If you want great service in Europe, you take Virgin; if you want cheap flights, you take RyanAir. We lose by getting RyanAir service for Virgin/BA prices. We're great at shipping bits, U.S. freight rail is world-class, and we can get almost any fruit in any season, but when it comes to passenger transportation, we essentially stagnated in 1949. Air travel is still expensive and far more unpleasant than it ever was, passenger rail is at the same speed it had in the 1920s, and most of us still rely on the car for commuting. If you want to live in a place where you can actually walk or bike to a city, you'll pay absurdly high prices to live there. This mediocrity in transportation is a deep national morale problem that is exacerbated by the current economic climate (i.e. many people having no fucking money). A result of this is that the world is becoming larger. Much larger.

Moreover, what's left of the job market fills through social connections. "Front door" approaches are officially dead. It's possible to make "weak ties" and acquaintanceships online, and that kind of "networking" is often enough (strength of weak ties) but if you fall into a bad spell (or, say, are female and take a few years off from work to raise children) and need someone to take a chance on you, you're going to want strong ties. With wealth disparities widening and talent geography becoming more unfavorable, people are less inclined to believe they'll easily make strong ties after college; it rarely happens. So people are averse to moving without a strong reason to do so.

Then there is the difference in job markets between continuous (efficient, low-latency) and discrete (illiquid, high-latency) ones. For high-talent jobs and candidates, there are 3 places where the markets are continuous: New York, Silicon Valley, and Boston. That's not to say there aren't great jobs (and great people to hire) in places like Portland or Minneapolis. There are, but there isn't the massive number that makes a market continuous. A lot of talent is coalescing in these 3 areas because living in one of them means that changing jobs doesn't mean that one is likely to be changing cities. What that means is that people who are willing to move for economic reasons, by and large, have ended up in one of those three places (and will stay there).

I wonder why don't you write it.

Based on your comment I assume that you have the means of supporting your "More to life than work" lifestyle? That you're not on the government dole or living in your parent's basement? If my assumptions are correct, then I commend you and I'm envious of your ability to strike a balance.

I don't believe for one second though that the reason Gen Y suffers from a high jobless rate is because they share the same values you do. I believe they're lazy, spoiled and entitled. I have several cousins who are between 16 and 18 and have no jobs, nor have they ever. And it's not because there's no jobs to be had, it's because they don't want to work as a grocery story stock person or a cashier. Those jobs are below their upper middle class upbringing.

And because of Facebook, they don't need jobs. They can hang out with their friends all day online for free. Their parents provide them with food, shelter and clothing - so what more could they ask for? I don't believe this is sustainable though. Our society works because people produce things. We've seen what happens when we trend towards a service based economy rather than a manufacturing based economy. What happens when we transition to a sit on our ass and surf the internet economy?

I don't know that it's necessary to leave these days depending on your industry. Anyone just about anywhere can launch a global business on the Internet, I have a 2nd job that I work 100% telecommute, so I can work on vacation if I wanted. With most countries outside of Asia working in more service oriented industries, the only real migration would be those who wish to follow manufacturing.

"Because in addition to that $200 for the bus ticket, they'd also need money on hand for first month's rent, security deposit, probably some new furniture and houseware, etc. plus enough saved up to be able to commit to the lease without knowing how much income they'll have... if/once they do manage to line up a job."

These concerns are not unique to the current generation. Pulling up stumps and moving in search of work and prosperity has ALWAYS been risky (hell, I've done it three times so far, once while massively in debt). It's just that now there's a very strong trend towards risk aversion, which makes it that much harder for the entrepreneurial spirit to flourish.

In fact, it's even worse than that; With the internet, it's easier than ever before to find a job before you even decide whether to move or not. And yet more and more people remain complacent in a 13% jobless rate area when 3.3% is available for the taking.

Of course, the good news is that for those who ARE adventurous, there's never been a better time to move and take advantage of the opportunities created by the fear of the majority.