Educating College Graduates So They Can be Unemployed

Mar 22, 2011Mike Konczal

College graduates entering the recession face a lifetime of consequences -- and more education isn't going to solve the problem.

Aw hamburgers.

A new Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco paper, Recent College Graduates and the Labor Market by Bart Hobijn, Colin Gardiner, and Theodore Wiles, argues that unemployment is particularly bad for those just graduating from college. It explains how this puts pressure on structural or "recalculating" arguments of unemployment:

College graduates entering the recession face a lifetime of consequences -- and more education isn't going to solve the problem.

Aw hamburgers.

A new Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco paper, Recent College Graduates and the Labor Market by Bart Hobijn, Colin Gardiner, and Theodore Wiles, argues that unemployment is particularly bad for those just graduating from college. It explains how this puts pressure on structural or "recalculating" arguments of unemployment:

The current labor market outcomes of recent college graduates closely mirror those observed during the 2001 recession and the subsequent jobless recovery. This is important because recent college graduates are not subject to the kinds of structural factors that have been posited as the main sources of weakness in the overall labor market. Unemployment rates during the 2001 recession are widely recognized as cyclical in nature. Similarities in the experiences of recent college graduates in the labor market during the two recessions and recoveries are evidence that high unemployment rates in the current downturn and recovery are also mainly cyclical.

(h/t Mark Thoma, who has additional comments.) Check it out.

Children: Teach them well and let them lead the way. Or not.

I say hamburgers because Roosevelt Institute intern Charlie Eisenhood and I were working on a similar paper. Looks like it's getting absorbed into another project. I'm going to dump Eisenhood's summary of the long-term effects of graduating into a recession that we had in draft form to help supplement this argument, because it can't be said enough.

Eisenhood dug up the data for what I think is the most shocking graph. Here's the employment-population ratio for 20-24 year olds with a college degree, unadjusted monthly (they don't produce it adjusted) and then yearly average:

This is a cohort with mobility, fresh degrees, low health care costs, low wage rigidity, etc. etc. I don't shine the flashlight here to ignore the pain that those without college degrees experience in this economy. But if young people with college degrees can't survive in the post-recession era, nobody can. And this explodes the idea that education alone, instead of monetary and fiscal policy, is the way out of our current high unemployment rate.

I've been on a kick of watching the employment rates of 20-24 year olds with college degrees as a barometer for our economy's health for some time. Some people on the right get that this is going to kill a generation -- David Frum in particular has done great work. But in general everyone on the right is screaming about the Europeanization of the U.S. economy. Ironically, they have been screaming about the part where we could get universal health care and some decent trains and not the part where the young generation that is supposed to start building their careers, innovating and creating the future of the economy, is sitting idle. The part where a generation becomes permanently detached from the formal labor markets. An economy of insiders and outsiders.

Blog-Level Literature Summary

Handing the microphone off to Eisenhood:

Even considering both un- and underemployment rates may not be enough to describe the impact of the recession. As an Economic Policy Institute briefing paper points out, the unemployment rates might “underestimate the severity of the labor market problem for young college graduates because they do not indicate whether they are employed in a job that matches their skill level.” That can mean lower wages and a more arduous upward mobility path.

Research suggests that this effect is very real. Paul Beaudry and John DiNardo found “that every percentage increase in the [national] unemployment rate is associated with a 3-7 percent drop in entry-level contract wages.” Lisa Kahn found an estimate on the high end of that spectrum, discovering an “initial wage loss of 6 to 7% for a 1 percentage point increase in the unemployment rate measure.”

Phillip Oreopoulos, Till von Wachter, and Andrew Heisz found a smaller, but still strong effect in a study of Canadian graduates. They determined that “a typical recession -- a rise in unemployment rates by five percentage points in [their] context -- implies an initial loss in earnings of about 9 percent…”

Unfortunately, the recession’s effect is not limited just to the initial job search and wages. The negative impact persists far beyond that. Kahn found that the effect “falls in magnitude by approximately a quarter of a percentage point each year after college graduation. However, even 15 years after college graduation, the wage loss is 2.5% and is still statistically significant.”

Oreopoulos again found a smaller impact -- a wage effect that “halves within five years and finally fades to zero by 10 years” -- but attributed the discrepancy between his finding and Kahn’s “partly due to [Kahn’s] focus on graduates entering the strong recession of the early 1980s.” That provides little solace to students graduating in this recession, considering that it is deeper and markedly more prolonged than the 1981 downturn.

Job mobility is also affected. Kahn found a “negative correlation between the national unemployment rate and occupational attainment (measured by a prestige score) and a slight positive correlation between the national rate and tenure.” She concludes that “workers who graduate in bad economies are unable to fully shift into better jobs after the economy picks up.” Worse, Oreopoulos found permanent wage effects on workers with low expected earnings (based on occupational prestige).

Considering that Paul Devereux and Robert Hart determined that wages are notably more pro-cyclical among job movers (particularly those changing employers) than among job stayers, longer tenures in periods of growth are likely to depress wages.

It’s important to note that it’s not just lower-skill workers who experience these effects. Paul Oyer showed that “macroeconomic conditions have a large effect on the likelihood of [Economics Ph.D.s] obtaining desirable academic positions” -- those who searched for jobs in periods of high unemployment were more likely to take a position at a lower-ranked institution. Once again, it appears that the initial placement has a long-term effect on the workers career. As Oyer puts it, “it appears that getting a good initial job has a causal effect on having a good job later. His research suggests that those Ph.D.s in better first jobs are more productive in their research, leading them to better future jobs, perhaps through the mechanism of increased human capital.

Mike Konczal is a Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute.

Share This

How We Teach Our Graduates Not to Teach

Mar 17, 2011Bryce Covert

As we strip teachers of pay, benefits, and prestige, we'll lose more and more talent to investment banking.

As we strip teachers of pay, benefits, and prestige, we'll lose more and more talent to investment banking.

A new report came out recently on what the US can learn from the countries that most successfully educate their children. The most important recommendation? "Make a concerted effort to raise the status of the teaching profession." While the U.S. is only second to Luxembourg in OECD countries' spending on education, our money is misdirected, going to areas other than teacher salaries like bus transportation and sports facilities. And as the NYTimes notes, the results are clear:

On average, American teenagers came in 15th in reading and 19th in science. American students placed 27th in math. Only 2 percent of American students scored at the highest proficiency level, compared with 8 percent in Korea and 5 percent in Finland.

This recommendation comes at a time when the teaching profession is experiencing a brutal attack, as Republican governors (see: Scott Walker; also: Chris Christie) demonize them and their unions as vampires sucking state coffers dry and lazy ne'er-do-wells who have luxurious pensions and vacation time. But the degradation of the teaching profession isn't a new phenomenon.

Sign up to have the Daily Digest, a witty take on the morning’s most important headlines, delivered straight to your inbox.

When I was graduating college not too long ago, I had my heart set on teaching. I loved working with children and I wanted to give something back to my community and feel I was making a difference. What better way than to educate the next generation? But I entered the profession against all advice to the contrary (except from my mother and grandmother, both educators) and with zero help from my college's career services department. In fact, the only career that department seemed to want to service me into was investment banking. Every time I visited to go over my resume or practice interview skills, I had to answer again why I wasn't interested in being an ibanker. And I struggled to justify to myself entering a profession that promised to pay me so little, with the price tag of my student loans looming over me, when I could have gone into one that would have enabled me to pay back my loans in a heartbeat. In the end I persevered, but many of my friends and classmates did not. And who could blame them? With tens of thousands of dollars (or even hundreds of thousands) in student loan debt, the economically smart decision was to head into high-paying professions.

And in fact, they're not alone. A 2007 study by Jesse Rothstein and Cecilia Elena Rouse found that each $10,000 in loan debt reduces the likelihood that a student will take a job in the nonprofit, governmental, or education sectors by about 5-6 percentage points. This effect is heaviest in the education sector: that $10,000 in debt reduces the probability of taking a job in that sector by 3.3%. The authors came to this conclusion: "It appears that college debt affects post-graduation employment decisions: students with more debt are less likely to accept jobs in low-paying industries and accept higher-paying jobs more generally."

President Obama encouraged young people to go into teaching in his State of the Union, but simply imploring students isn't going to do the trick. It's not just about raising pay, either; it's about raising the public's perception of a teacher's job. While some point to summers off and short hours as signs that it's a cushy profession, the reality is quite different. Andreas Schleicher, who prepared the report, says, "The fact is that successful, dedicated teachers in the U.S. work long hours for little pay and, in many cases, insufficient support from their leadership." I can attest to this from personal experience. I was in the classroom well before 8am every day and stayed after 6pm on plenty of occasions -- not to mention the work I did on the weekends to make sure my lessons would run smoothly and engage my students. And I was far from the hardest worker among my colleagues. Not to mention that I worked at a private school that had excellent support, while many public schools have leadership that is stretched too thin and little budget for professional development.

The most important answer to fixing our educational system, which isn't serving our children, is to bring in more quality teachers. But if we continue to strip them of benefits and dignity, there's fact chance of it.

Bryce Covert is Assistant Editor at New Deal 2.0.

Share This

Roosevelt Institute Campus Network Spring Policy Conferences

Mar 7, 2011

alert-button-150Join the Roosevelt Institute Campus Network this spring as we host a series of national policy conferences across the country, highlighting the w

alert-button-150Join the Roosevelt Institute Campus Network this spring as we host a series of national policy conferences across the country, highlighting the work of our student network.

Each conference will be hosted by one of our student policy centers and will focus on interactive, thematic programming that convenes progressive organizations from across the country with our network of student leaders. Partners will engage with our students; leading discussions and workshops, providing feedback on student projects, and working with students to create local (and potentially, national) implementation plans.

The events will also promote our recently released Blueprint for Millennial America, the Think2040 model of engagement, and our newest volume of the 10 ideas series.

The conference calendar is as follows:

March 26-27th: "Defense, Development, & Diplomacy" Conference hosted by our Defense and Diplomacy Policy Center at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Students will be presenting a progressive vision for America's 21st century grand strategy; using defense, development, and diplomacy as equal pillars of US foreign policy. Students will be making presentations on reforming foreign assistance, energy security, cyber security, nuclear non-proliferation, and more. Guest speakers include Larry Korb, Gen. Paul Eaton, and Will Davis, director of the United Nations Center. Click here for more information.

April 1-3rd: "Growing the Future" Conference hosted by our Energy and Environment Policy Center at Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona. Campus leaders will be guiding conference participants in an exploration of ASU's urban agriculture initiatives, and students from across the country will be making presentations on sustainable urban development, gulf oil spill restoration, and agricultural policy reform. The event will also serve as a springboard for choosing national energy and environment projects for the upcoming 2011-2012 academic year. Click here for more information.

Sign up to have the Daily Digest, a witty take on the morning’s most important headlines, delivered straight to your inbox.

April 8-10th: "Serving the South" Conference hosted by our Health Care Policy Center at the Universities of Duke and North Carolina. Our students will be partnering with local community organizations to engage in a day of health service, provide trainings on effective grassroots policy making, and convene a community health town hall meeting. Click here for more information.

April 9th: "Rally for Rights" Conference hosted by our Equal Justice Policy Center at Northwestern University in Chicago. Our students will be presenting their policy projects based on human, civil, and consumer rights to a host of local and national organizations. Guest speakers include Gillian Sorenson, and representatives from the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicaid. Click here for more information.

April 15-16th: "Defining a New Economic Reality" Conference hosted by our Economic Development Policy Center at Columbia University in New York City. Our students will be using the content from their projects to promote a new economic vision for Millennial America that stresses community development and capital stewardship. Students will also conduct an interactive workshop on financial literacy. Guest speakers include Rob Johnson, Bo Cutter, and Philippe Aghion. Click here for more information.

April 16th: "A Blueprint for Comprehensive Education Reform" Conference hosted by our Education Policy Center at UCLA in Los Angeles. The event will be co-sponsored by Teach For America and will highlight the work of our students on comprehensive education reform. The conference will also serve as a platform to highlight our Think2040 campaign and the release of our Blueprint for Millennial America. Click here for more information.

We look forward to seeing you there!

Reese Neader is the Roosevelt Campus Network’s Policy Director.

Share This

Teachers vs. Wall Street: Who are the Greedy Ones Now?

Mar 4, 2011

Teachers certainly are greedy, aren't they? They make $50,000 a year with medical and dental benefits (outrageous!), have summers off, and live off of taxpayer money like vampires who love multi-colored construction paper. They could really learn a thing or two from Wall Street -- so it's a good thing Jon Stewart is here to explain it to them:

Teachers certainly are greedy, aren't they? They make $50,000 a year with medical and dental benefits (outrageous!), have summers off, and live off of taxpayer money like vampires who love multi-colored construction paper. They could really learn a thing or two from Wall Street -- so it's a good thing Jon Stewart is here to explain it to them:

Sign up to have the Daily Digest, a witty take on the morning’s most important headlines, delivered straight to your inbox.

Let's recap: getting $50k a year borders on avarice, but $250k is "close to poverty." Teachers take the summer off, but while bankers made shadowy deals that brought down the global economy they showed up year round. Teachers are paid with tax dollars, unlike those Wall Street firms who got bailed out. And if we cut Wall Street compensation, we'll break contracts and have a huge exodus of talent. We can't afford that, since they did such a good job of not wrecking the economy last time. The same can't possibly be true of teaching, right?

Hats off, Jon Stewart. You nailed it.

Share This

Student Debt Can be Deadly

Mar 2, 2011Bryce Covert

Student loans can't be discharged in bankruptcy. Credit card debt has even led to some untimely deaths. Why are we condemning our young people?

This week's credit check: The average undergraduate student graduates college with $4,100 in credit card debt and $19,300 in student loans. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students.

We may be trying to Win the Future, be we sure do like to get our young people mired in debt at an early age. And we're doing less to help them stay out of it.

Student loans can't be discharged in bankruptcy. Credit card debt has even led to some untimely deaths. Why are we condemning our young people?

This week's credit check: The average undergraduate student graduates college with $4,100 in credit card debt and $19,300 in student loans. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students.

We may be trying to Win the Future, be we sure do like to get our young people mired in debt at an early age. And we're doing less to help them stay out of it.

President Obama's recent budget proposal included ending an experiment that gave out Pell Grants for summer courses and eliminating a subsidy for paying interest on student loans for current grad students. That looks mild, of course, compared to what the GOP proposes to do -- cut the maximum grant payment by $845, end funding to other aid programs, kill AmeriCorps entirely, and slash billions from agencies that support academic research.

But as explained in "Up to Our Eyeballs", the cuts to grants isn't exactly new. Grants have been declining over the last thirty years as loans came to replace them in financing college educations. Two-thirds of financing used to come from grants, in fact, and now two-thirds comes from loans -- which is to say, taking on debt. The book notes, "The maximum [Pell Grant] award today covers about one-third the average expense of tuition and fees at a four-year private college, and only 22 percent of all grant recipients actually get the maximum." Meanwhile, tuition is climbing -- it rose 122% at public universities from 1986 to 2006. The average graduate leaves college with $19,300 in student loan debt, up from $9,250 about ten years ago.

Sign up for weekly ND20 highlights, mind-blowing stats, event alerts, and reading/film/music recs.

And now loan defaults are on the rise. A new federal analysis shows that about one-quarter of students who took out loans to attend for-profit college defaulted within three years of starting repayment. That rate is also up for public colleges -- at 11%, up 10% from the previous report -- and private nonprofit colleges -- at 8%, up from about 7%. This may come as little surprise with an unemployment rate of 9%. Indeed, while in some ways college graduates are better off than those without a degree, they've still seen the highest percentage increase in unemployment. It can be hard to keep up with loan payments when you can't find a job. And unlike most forms of debt, student loan debt is with you forever -- you can't discharge it in bankruptcy. In fact, "Up to Our Eyeballs" notes that about 9% of Americas aged 45-64 still have student loan debt.

That's all bad enough, but going to college also opens up another Pandora's box of debt: credit card offers. Students graduated college with an average of $4,100 in credit card debt in 2008 and half of all undergraduates had four or more cards. In the 2006 movie Maxed Out, mothers Trisha and Jeanne recount how both of their children went off to school and were hit with tons of card offers -- even though neither student had much income or any credit history. Neither parent had any idea what was going on, but eventually one of them had racked up 12 different cards and the other was behind on the very first card she got. In the end, both children killed themselves out of the desperation of not being able to pay off their debts. Suicide is disturbingly common among this age group: it is the second leading cause of death among those aged 15-24, and the rate has increased 200% for this group over the past 50 years. The reasons are complex and varied, but one cause can be financial strain.

The CARD Act was supposed to take care of the credit card problem. After the bill, no one under the age of 21 should be approved for a credit card offer unless a parent, guardian or spouse co-signs or the student can show proof of sufficient income to cover the credit obligation. It also restricts marketing cards to college students. But a study by Professor Jim Hawkins at the University of Houston Law Center found that 76% of students he surveyed under 21 said they had received a credit card offer since the beginning of 2010. So while students already saddled with the debt load of loans aren't also supposed to be enticed into credit card debt, they're still slipping through the cracks.

The country already came to the conclusion that we should restrict marketing tobacco products to minors because they can kill you. Debt can also be deadly. Why are we allowing them to take on so much so early on?

Bryce Covert is Assistant Editor at New Deal 2.0.

Share This

Memo to Obama: If You Want Us to Serve, Don't Cut AmeriCorps

Feb 15, 2011Raul Mendoza

lesson-150If we want more teachers and public service, we have to keep funding the programs that make it possible.

lesson-150If we want more teachers and public service, we have to keep funding the programs that make it possible.

In a recent bid to slash spending, Congress looks ready to nix seemingly dispensable programs like AmeriCorps. Under that larger umbrella, organizations like Teach For America are able to offer Corps members loan deferrals and loan forgiveness, making the opportunity to serve easier for recent college graduates. Without AmeriCorps funding, the extra financial burden on potential members will deter many from joining its programs. Although the President urges us to serve, the opportunity to do so will be undermined indefinitely.

I am Raul Mendoza, and I am a fourth grade math and computer science teacher in New Orleans, Louisiana. I am serving the first of my two-year commitment with Teach for America. I've been teaching since July 2010 and can tell you that it is an indispensable public service for the communities we serve. We give confidence to youth who live in chronic poverty -- youth who, in many cases, have seen first-hand crime that tears apart their communities. We give students the motivation and stability to be in school and stay in school. We give these students a choice about what they want to do with their lives -- not what they have to do because of the lack of opportunity they face.

Sign up for weekly ND20 highlights, mind-blowing stats, event alerts, and reading/film/music recs.

This past summer, I taught 5th grade students in Atlanta who failed both math and English on their last state-wide tests. Over the summer, our students scored an average of 25% better on their exit exams than they did on their entry exams. Those scholars built the foundations they needed to move on to the sixth grade. At my current assignment, a Teach For America teacher is running a program to train our eighth graders to apply to top high schools in New Orleans. I am heavily invested in this program. We've already had three students accepted into Benjamin Franklin High School -- the best in Louisiana and one of the top public high schools nationally. We will continue to prepare our students for success. This step in their development is where the game changes. Accessing high quality higher education helps America's next generation gain their confidence, knowledge, and the opportunities they need to succeed.

Only a few weeks ago in his State of the Union address, President Obama called forward the nation's young people to "make a difference in the life of a child" and become teachers. We are "nation builders," President Obama elaborated. Our aspiration is to develop a well-educated, engaged generation. To do that, we need to provide young people the opportunity to serve their communities. AmeriCorps makes that happen. Cutting an entire program just to pay lip service to budgetary restraint will severely undermine the foundation of civic engagement. Whether the choice is to join the Marine Corps or the AmeriCorps, the President and Congress must not deter America's youth from serving their country.

In the fifty years since John F. Kennedy's inaugural, it is hard to fathom that we have fallen from asking not what our country can do for us, but what we can do for our country to a Congress that actively seeks to limit our civic engagement.

Raul Mendoza is a fourth grade math and computer teacher working in New Orleans, Louisiana through the Teach For America program and was previously the Co-President of the Columbia University chapter of the Roosevelt Institute Campus Network. The views expressed are his own.

Share This

Creeping Socialism at The National Review

Feb 2, 2011Harvey J. Kaye

national-review-coverAn article advocates enrollment in public universities. What's the right coming to?

national-review-coverAn article advocates enrollment in public universities. What's the right coming to?

What is going on over on the right? For the past two years, conservative Republicans and Tea Partiers have attacked the Obama administration and liberals generally as nothing less than reds, communists, and socialists. They warned that the left was about to bury American freedom and prosperity in a wave of public takeovers and nationalizations of business, health care, and who knows what next. And yet in its January 24, 2011 issue, The National Review -- the flagship magazine of American conservatism -- has come out in favor of state, yes, state, control of higher education. What would the late William F. Buckley, Jr. say if he were around to read such stuff in the magazine he founded 56 years ago to combat "statism" both in its Soviet and New Deal modes?

To be sure, The National Review's editors have not abandoned the politics of reaction -- at least, not yet. The January 24 cover story, "Operation Rewind" -- illustrated with "<<" superimposed upon a photo of the Capitol Building -- welcomes the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives. It lauds congressional Republicans for getting down to business instead of wasting precious time wildly celebrating their return to power on the Hill. And sure to please their most loyal subscribers, a feature article by Deputy Managing Editor Kevin D. Williamson titled "Socialism Is Back -- And it's in Your Face," itself illustrated with an image of the Stars and Stripes with the fifty stars replaced by a Hammer & Sickle, vigorously decries socialism's hold on American education:

The public schools constitute one of the most popular instantiations of socialism in American life, though Social Security and government-funded transportation systems no doubt rank nearly as high... Public schools fail for the same reason that all socialist enterprises fail: lack of information. In marketplace transactions, prices communicate critical information about who is producing what, who is consuming what, and what it is that producers and consumers want and need.

Nevertheless, "pinko" arguments are definitely finding their way into the magazine.

Sign up for weekly ND20 highlights, mind-blowing stats, event alerts, and reading/film/music recs.

In a short piece titled "Ivy Chase" (and we should note that "Ivy" is printed in red), Kevin A. Hassett clearly undermines the Friedmanite-Hayekian-von Misean cause. Noting that this is "the time of year when high school seniors zip uncountable college applications across the country" and that "many yearn to be accepted in top private colleges and universities such as Harvard or Williams and fear that they might get stuck at a lowly ‘state school,'" Hassett poses the subversive question: "But are public universities in the U.S. really that bad?"

Citing a recent report by the website Payscale.com, Hassett observes that "public institutions trounce the private ones in terms of the percentage return on investment." In other words, if you want to get your money's worth and, indeed, make a lot of money, you should seriously consider going "public." Or, as he advises the aspiring and ambitious eighteen-year-old, "So, if you are anxious this application season, relax. In most cases, the impact of ending up at a small state school rather than a ‘first choice' will be small indeed."

Now I know you're tempted to read the ideological contradictions between the articles by Williamson and Hassett as indicating the onset of schizophrenia at the National Review. And I agree that the right can seem rather crazy these days. But I don't like to psychologize. From what I can tell, the magazine's new ambivalence is nothing less than what founder Buckley and others back in the 1950s referred to as "creeping socialism."

Harvey J. Kaye is the Ben & Joyce Rosenberg Professor of Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay and the author of Thomas Paine and the Promise of America.  A public-school boy from start to finish, he is currently writing The Four Freedoms and the Promise of America. Follow him on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarveyJKaye

Share This

The Millennial State of the Union

Jan 31, 2011Hilary Doe

flag-150Young people are taking matters into their own hands and working to effect change across a number of issues.

flag-150Young people are taking matters into their own hands and working to effect change across a number of issues.

This past Sunday would have been Franklin D. Roosevelt's 129th birthday. During this jobless recovery, we should remember that, beyond simply being the 32nd President of the United States, FDR was a fearless leader who redefined the role of government during our country's darkest hour. How? Roosevelt used an active government to create jobs, provide relief to disadvantaged citizens, build our country's infrastructure, win World War II, and, more broadly, address the needs of the American people. He advanced a values-laden, progressive vision for the everyday American.

Thousands of young people across the country are carrying on his legacy by putting forth their own progressive vision. The Roosevelt Institute Campus Network is releasing a New Deal for the Millennial America -- a blueprint for the progressive future that we, young people born between 1980 and 2000, are determined to inherit. Each generation designs its own path, and each American generation redefines the American dream. With the launch of the Campus Network's Blueprint for the Millennial America, the Millennial Generation is declaring their vision for America's future and imploring our leaders to take note, grab a shovel, and start building it with us.

So what will 2040 look if we have our way?
Over the past year, the Campus Network convened thousands of students from across the country in Think2040 conversations, asking them to define their vision, values, and priorities for our shared future. The results were compiled in our Blueprint for Millennial America. The report details how we plan to change the system from inside, employ ourselves, think long-term, and create a more equal, accessible, empowered, and community-minded 2040 America. Want specifics? In the Millennial America, our priorities are:

1. Educational Attainment

Our generation sees educational attainment as the key to opportunity and abundance. And we recognize that to remain competitive in the Next American Economy we will have to out-educate the rest of the world. Providing equal access to quality education is also a pathway to closing our country's growing wealth disparity. We need to improve K-12 education and increase college access and affordability to do that.

The best part? Millennials have already started moving toward this goal. Innovative young people, like Roosevelt Campus Network alum Kirsten Hill, have envisioned and implemented student-generated education programs like the SILA project. SILA (Students Improving Literacy Abound) is a university-partnered reading program in New Orleans that has paired over 100 Tulane students acting as mentors with second and third graders to decrease the achievement gap and increase literacy rates.

2. Green Living, Working, and Innovating

We recognize that to build a green economy, our generation will have to win the energy race with an effort that mirrors the Apollo program of the 1960s. The cost of fossil fuels is going to increase as countries like China and India compete for limited resources. We need to be innovation hawks and invest in green technology and infrastructure now to ensure that the windmills, solar panels, and fuel cells we use tomorrow are manufactured in the United States.

We need to cultivate healthier food systems. By supporting urban agriculture and other alternatives we can secure access to fresh and healthy food for all Americans. This will increase the security of our communities by ensuring that food comes from local sources.

Millennials aren't leaving their future to chance. We're creating a greener America today with a call for proposals to ensure our energy security and local movements to build community gardens, like the effort led at Arizona State University by Joshua Judd and other Roosevelt members.

Sign up for weekly ND20 highlights, mind-blowing stats, event alerts, and reading/film/music recs.

3. Wellness and Coverage

Our American Dream is more often a loft in the city with diverse people, food, culture, work, and a hybrid than a McMansion in the suburbs. It includes our wellness, and this New Deal for the Millennial America includes the guarantee that livable cities provide access to healthy food for all American people. The Millennial Generation -- the most under-insured of any alive right now -- also demands insurance coverage for all and innovative efforts to ensure access to preventative care.

We'll get there by 2040, starting with groundbreaking efforts to provide care to some of our most vulnerable. A Roosevelt member from Colorado College, David Silver, for example, is helping to pave the way to health care access for rural American using excess T.V. bandwidth to provide preventative care via "telehealth."

4. Entrepreneurship and a Social Safety Trampoline

Why are Millennials moving back to the forgotten places in America: post-industrial centers like Detroit, New Orleans, and Cleveland? So they can create a sweeping impact and experiment with new forms of entrepreneurship and social innovation. They are organizing employee-owned businesses, starting co-ops, and, in the case of Roosevelt alums Joe Shure and Rohan Mathew, creating successful nonprofits like the Intersect Fund to empower would-be entrepreneurs through microloans and start-up support.

But in order to pursue our innovative ideas, we need security; a flexible social safety net. And we need financial institutions that are responsive to their communities. Wages have stagnated. Benefits have decreased. As government protection of our social insurance has been cut over the last 30 years, the income inequality in our country has also significantly increased. Millennials demand equal access and equal opportunity. Our safety net should inject funding into the system when it's needed, provide retraining opportunities, ensure health care and unemployment insurance, and, instead of catching people near the bottom -- like a net -- function like a trampoline and bounce everyone back into high-functioning roles in society.

To reduce the socioeconomic gap in this country, everyone should pay taxes on their income, even if they make a lot of it -- their fair share. By just repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of Americans, we could move substantially closer to lowering the barrier to entrepreneurship by investing in a strong safety net and providing this essential economic security to all Americans.

5. America as a World Super-Partner

Millennials want the United States to continue to act as a global leader. But they envision the U.S. as a "super-partner" in world affairs. They favor a proactive U.S. foreign policy that stresses the use of "smart power" to achieve global security through active diplomacy, efficient development, and sharing defense responsibilities with its allies. Young people are already working to prove the effectiveness of this approach. Roosevelt member Jacob Helberg, for example, is working directly with Haitian NGOs to implement his idea to build a micro-community in Haiti reflective of the best practices learned by other nations.

If you're skeptical that our generation can accomplish all of this, we're working to prove you wrong. Because we're committed to fiscal responsibility in addition to the list of priorities above, we recognize that our priorities have the burden of cost, and, at a time when the nation is locked in heated debate over the budget, we're answering the call. While organizations from across the spectrum are rushing to put forth their plans, the Campus Network is designing our own ‘Budget for Millennial America' as we speak.

Want to help?
The greatest lesson to be learned from examining this list of Millennial values, priorities, and initiatives is that young people nationwide are prepared to design the innovative solutions and campaign for the change required to achieve our vision.

Do you have your own ideas for change? Contact one of our student policy strategists so that you can get involved in our national policy initiatives. Get published in our 10ideas series. You can even get paid to work with us over the summer in Washington, DC or Chicago through our Roosevelt Summer Academy program. We're designing and achieving the future that we want to inherit.

Thanks for paving the way, FDR. Happy Birthday, and we hope we're making you proud.

Hilary Doe is the National Director of the Roosevelt Institute Campus Network. Reese Neader is the Roosevelt Campus Network's Policy Director.

Share This

SOTU: I Think We're Turning Japanese

Jan 26, 2011Mike Konczal

If you listened to Obama's speech, you would think that the recession is over, the financial crisis is taken care of and we can educate out of the rest. You'd be wrong.

If you listened to Obama's speech, you would think that the recession is over, the financial crisis is taken care of and we can educate out of the rest. You'd be wrong.

There are three things you wouldn't have learned from the State of the Union last night. The first is embodied in the chart below. You wouldn't realize that employment is down about 5% from where it was 3 years ago, with millions of people are out of work, dropped out of the labor force, and underemployed. The second is that we have not yet hit the peak rate of foreclosures in this country. Last year 1 million properties were seized; this year an estimated 1.2 million will be seized. The last was that there was a  financial crisis in 2008, steps were taken to remedy it -- including what will be one of the signature legislative acts of the Obama administration -- and the current state of Wall Street is record profits.

Like Jamelle Bouie, I'm surprised by how fast we are moving past the current unemployment crisis. The Obama team has gone from the current to the Future, and must be expecting, or at least hoping, for a turnaround in job creation.

Sign up for weekly ND20 highlights, mind-blowing stats, event alerts, and reading/film/music recs.

The speech was well delivered. Although vague, it pointed to a kind of liberal supply-side theory that I think is important to highlight. Indeed, in a non-crisis time it would have been a great vision of the role of government in the economy. But right now we need the government to do different things.

Social Security cuts were not the centerpiece, which reflects excellent activism and writing across many different groups, including Strengthen Social Security, Dean Baker and CEPR, and many others. Though far from over, this is a good first step.

For those who think that better education is the way to get out of this mess, it's worth looking at data (from forthcoming Roosevelt Institute work) on the unemployment rate for 20-24 year olds with a BA (seasonally unadjusted, 4-month moving average):

To put that in words, young people graduating college with large debt loads are entering a brutal job market. Our colleges are no worse than they were in 2007, yet young people are struggling to find work even with strong college investments. Telling the American workforce that they aren't educated enough for the jobs of the future isn't going to actually reconcile with this data.

It's interesting to see how quickly forces are turning this into the new normal, pulling our attention away from the economic crisis. It feels like we are turning Japanese.

Mike Konczal is a Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute.

Share This

Wall Street Isn't Paid Enough

Jan 14, 2011Bryce Covert

Sky-high bonuses send a clear message about where our values lie.

Sky-high bonuses send a clear message about where our values lie.

A Bloomberg article from yesterday compared some numbers that should serve as a stark wake-up call: traders and investment bankers (read: people on Wall Street) make more in this country than neurosurgeons, cancer researchers, engineers, and four-star generals. That's right, folks -- if you go into the noble profession of trying to eradicate one of the most pernicious diseases, you can't expect to get paid nearly as much as someone trading derivatives of oil prices. I also suspect that General Patraeus feels his sacrifice to our country and his four-star status should earn him more than someone on the floor of the stock exchange. But of course you can't look to the banking industry for some humility in recognition of their sky-high checks. "The bottom line is all the people in investment banking understand that they work harder and are under more stress," Jeanne Branthover, a managing director at Wall Street recruitment firm Boyden Global Executive Search, told Bloomberg. "Many don't think they're paid enough." What a terrible life that must be! If only they could afford to buy yachts and go relax in the Caribbean.

But the outrage doesn't end there. Compare the estimated $2 million in pay that an M&A banker with 10 years of experience can expect to the $80,970 per year the average teacher in the top 10% will get. (Median teachers will be paid between $47,100 and $51,180 per year.) What's the value a dedicated teacher adds to our society? Educated children, who can expect higher incomes, greater productivity, and a better chance at coming up with the new ideas that take our country forward. Not to mention the harder-to-calculate benefits of children who learn to share, make friends, abide by social norms, and understand their role as citizens. What's the value that we get from a derivatives trader? It's still unclear.

Not to mention that those truly suffering right now (as opposed to the stressed out bankers who demand more zeroes on their bonus checks), i.e. the unemployed, when lucky enough to find a job are now landing ones that have dismal pay. Sixty percent of new jobs last year were in temp work, leisure and hospitality, and retail. Leisure pays an average hourly wage of $13.14 and retail will get you $11.84, while temp packagers only get $8.62.

Sign up for weekly ND20 highlights, mind-blowing stats, event alerts, and reading/film/music recs.

All of this sends a signal to young people as we live through this great recession. As I've mentioned before, we face some serious financial insecurities, greater than what many of our parents had to face when they were growing up. This means many of us will be calculating when we choose what to study in college and where to aim our career goals. Should I become a cancer researcher or a banker? The pricetag comes into play. Add to this the debt students are asked to take on at every step of their education, and the prospect of being awarded $2 million for two years in an MBA program versus $571,000 for 2-3 years in medical school and 6-8 years in residency that neurosurgeons must go through seems pretty enticing. Primary care doctors, which we desperately need more of, can expect to earn $186,044 per year for about the same amount of school and residency it takes to get into surgery. No wonder, then, that the smart calculate that they're better off going into specialties when looking at their student loan bills. The even smarter skip medicine and head straight to lower Manhattan.

Compensation is a way of valuing an employee. As the bankers rightly point out, harder work should usually lead to higher pay. So should the value put back into society. Bankers work hard, and we need them to facilitate lending and make the gears of the economy run smoothly. But does that value outrank the work a neurosurgeon does to save someone's life, like Dr. Rhee's miraculous work that led to Rep. Giffords opening her eyes two days ago? Should a banker make 20 times what a cancer researcher does? Our compensation scales are out of whack.

Bryce Covert is Assistant Editor at New Deal 2.0.

Share This

Pages