Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

census.socialexplorer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 86 posts

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#71

Post by Kluny »

IndianAstronaut wrote: post #67
cryoshon wrote: post #41

Relative to the year 2000 is the part that scares me the most. It seems that largely things have changed for the worse over the last decade. For Massachusetts: Lower employment by an entire %4. Lower wages by 4k/year (%10 less!!!), adjusted for inflation. More people living with parents, fewer people living alone (read: piled into group houses with their former college roommates/friends). More people in poverty. More…

The next obvious thing that will start to happen is higher crime. Lots of unemployed, lots of time on hands, and no future.

I've actually seen more than one article commenting about how strange it is that there hasn't been a rise in crime yet.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#72

Post by TheCoelacanth »

hnriot wrote: post #54
bpodgursky wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone has to be below average. Dunno why it's sadder to have unemployed Californians than unemployed Virginians.

because Silicon Valley is in California, it's supposed to be the world's hub of tech leaders. If we have a candidate pool that is so poorly educated it doesn't bode well for sustaining that technology lead.

Palo Alto has one of the highest levels of education in the country. The rest of the bay area ranks highly as well. However that entire region only makes up less than 20% of California's population. The rest of the state brings down the average.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#73

Post by logfromblammo »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #56
logfromblammo wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful with your use of the word "we". What is happening is that between 1974 and 1994, the generation that was then in power decided to stop paying off their own debts, and started deferring payment to future generations. The effect is similar to being forced to cosign a mortgage before you are even born, then when you turn 18, your parents kick you out of their house and stop making the payments. You then have to…

So, for everything you said above, how do you define the pronoun "we"? People in the USA who entered the workforce in the 90s/00s?

"We" without an explicit antecedent includes anyone that is foolish enough to join in.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#74

Post by learnstats2 »

disputin wrote: post #59
learnstats2 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments don't have to be competitive if they mutually limit migration - and this is one problem. People need the option to leave a system that doesn't work for them, or that system won't see a need for change. The same competitive forces that are so important to capitalism should apply to nation-states as well.

They do have the option to leave, and looking around London that's exactly what they're doing, which is not good for the countries they're leaving. I'd say it's more important that they have the means to change that system.

Why do you think it's bad for the countries they are leaving that people can go and find work elsewhere and gain experience and skills (and most likely, return with these)?

There doesn't seem to be much of a downside to me.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#75

Post by ryanSrich »

Time for some personal experience.

Both my fiancé and I are employed. Most would consider our combined income to be very good. Considering the economic climate we are both doing well.

The problem here, and why I think trends like "never married" and "living at home" are up, is that even though we make a very good wage we still aren't middle class due to student debt. So instead of buying a house we pay over $3k each month on our student debt. Instead of purchasing new cars and a house (thus pumping money back into the economy) we have to pay rent.

The point of this post is that even if you are one of the lucky ones to get a well paying job right out of college you'll most likely have to put off purchases that used to be the norm for middle class.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#76

Post by jdmichal »

azurezyq wrote: post #38
debacle wrote: post #2

The Median Earnings for Full Time Workers page was quite sad for America. Language Other than English Spoken at Home was quite surprising for me. I had no idea it was that high. I don't understand how the employment numbers can be that bad. 35% unemployment - that is mostly impacted by people rearing children and college age folk, I hope.

I'm living in California. California has a considerable amount of Spanish speaking hispanics for historic reasons. For greater SF/LA areas, actually non-native English speakers communities are growing very fast due to hi-techs and relatives immigrants. Just to mention a few: Monterey Park, 20% whites, 66.9% asians (50% Chinese). Milpitas, 20% whites, 62.2% asians. Cupertino, 30% whites, 63.3% asians (20% Chinese, 20%…

As another point of reference, one could live in certain parts of Miami their entire life without speaking a word of English, and have minimal (if any) friction. Forget about "spoken at home", we're talking "spoken everywhere" here.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#77

Post by kaoD »

yuncun wrote: post #68
Florin_Andrei wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> competition is growing and therefore salaries are shrinking I'm a fan of asking naive questions, so here's one: If salaries are shrinking everywhere, then where is all the money?

Towards second world countries like China that have been quietly busting their asses after WWII.

I agree, and would also add that economics is not a zero-sum game.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#78

Post by kaoD »

disputin wrote: post #57
tormeh wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem in Spain is that the government and its regulations are so bad, that the only way Spain can become competitive is if the government gets its act together. Until then (i.e. always) lower wages and longer hours will have to do.

(i.e. always) Based on above comments I hope you're voting for Podemos. * if the government gets its act together* That won't happen spontaneously.

> I hope you're voting for Podemos.

It doesn't appeal to everyone.

Although Podemos isn't trying to market itself as a left-wing party, it indeed is (and everyone knows it). Its leaders had strong political connections with left-wing movements (some of them were political advisors for Chávez) and promote socialist ideas (some of them good, some bad, in my opinion).

Unfortunately a right-wing Podemos is unlikely to succeed due to the traditional conservatism of the right-wing, and the "indignado" market share is already taken by Podemos.

Some far-right parties grew a bit nothing real but for the moment.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#79

Post by kaoD »

disputin wrote: post #52
kaoD wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say bureaucracy or the State is the problem in Spain, but the political caste (in both our traditional left and right-wing parties), rampant corruption and a general lack of faith in democracy (or, more specifically, in the currently available democratic instruments). As far as I can tell we're not facing this problem alone, but we're pretty young as a democratic society and most of our politicians inherit…

That's not the competition I talking about, but it is good to hear that it's there. The UK is also sick of its traditional parties, but is voting to the right, away from Europe. Party loyalty is usually ideology loyalty, and in a changing world the suitability of an ideology to the global context will change, so the traditional parties are likely a write off as their idea of keeping abreast is fringe tinkering. My po…

> [...] giving an example of company registration taking a matter of hours. What excuse is there for the Spanish government to slack off on such trivial lubricants, the result of which then weighs on the worker?

Crony capitalism, though I would call that an explanation, not an excuse. How else would you explain the tax on renewable energy?

I guess it's also incompetence. The traditional model of parties is fundamentally broken, and professional politicians (i.e. influence peddlers) are a plague in our Establishment.

Re: Explore how people in the U.S. aged 18 to 34 have changed over four decades

#80

Post by r00fus »

humanrebar wrote: post #24

Aside from the economic indicators, which are already being discussed here, the numbers for "never married" (up), "veteran" (way down), and "foreign born" (up) really jump out as trends. "Living with a parent" (up) is also a trend, but perhaps one more directly tied to the employment economy. For better or worse, all these trends have had and will have important societal impacts. Why don't we see more discussions on…

A lot of these are indicators of a perverse economy. Living with Parents, Living in Poverty, Never Married are all up, while Employed Population is way down.

Meanwhile the security/prison industrial complex and financial sector are essentially unregulated (total regulatory capture).

Post reply on HN