OT: Millennial employment

[RU85inFla]

I believe most of the Millennials that have trouble are due to college debt and expectations of quality of life. When I grew up we had a family of 5 living in a 1,000 sq. ft. house with one bathroom and an old sofa in the basement with a small black and white that acted as our family room. That was middle class.

My kids grew up with their own bedroom, bathroom and a bonus room which was additional to the family room but had every gaming system, a big screen and surround sound. My eldest, who is 25 and doing great gets a little frustrated with the quality of the place he lives in. He thinks its a shithole but it's as nice as my first house.

 

[robcac26]

I don't know if it's like this everywhere, but at least in my high school they made it seem as though the only people who don't go to college are the ones who aren't smart enough to get in. At the end of the day it was our decision, but at the time it did seem as though choosing not to go to college was pretty much like dropping out of school, so almost nobody even considered it. I bet at least 80-90% of the people I graduated with never gave any thought to whether or not they would go to college, it was just viewed as the next logical step. Everyone asked each other where they were going to college, not if they were going to college. If I was raising a high school kid now though, unless he/she was really smart, I'd probably prefer they learn a trade instead. I don't know if this story was exaggerated by the time I heard it, but I remember hearing that one kid from my high school who wasn't really that great of a student and didn't go to college was making 70k a year working on computers just out of high school.

 

[vkj91]

I don't know if it's like this everywhere, but at least in my high school they made it seem as though the only people who don't go to college are the ones who aren't smart enough to get in. At the end of the day it was our decision, but at the time it did seem as though choosing not to go to college was pretty much like dropping out of school, so almost nobody even considered it. I bet at least 80-90% of the people I graduated with never gave any thought to whether or not they would go to college, it was just viewed as the next logical step. Everyone asked each other where they were going to college, not if they were going to college. If I was raising a high school kid now though, unless he/she was really smart, I'd probably prefer they learn a trade instead. I don't know if this story was exaggerated by the time I heard it, but I remember hearing that one kid from my high school who wasn't really that great of a student and didn't go to college was making 70k a year working on computers just out of high school.

This is a failure of both the schools and parents. This idea that everyone needs to go to college has to stop. Teachers and guidance counselors should be pushing the "lesser" students to trades or positions that don't require mounds of debt. My brother hated school yet my parents and his HS pushed him to at least go the CC route. He never went, got crap grades, and my parents wasted money they didn't need to. He ended up joining the military and then becoming a cop. He would have been better suited not wasting those few years making believe he was getting an education

 

[Upstream]

I'm not willing to do the work, but I wonder how it looks when you consider the increased expense of a college degree now vs 20 years ago.

I did that work in post 188 (and previous posts) in this thread, and CamdenLawProf and I are debating whether the increased wage gap offsets the increased tuition.

 

[Upstream]

I don't think of $61,000 as a huge family income in a state as expensive to live in as New Jersey. And remember there are by definition 50% of families below that level. Even at $61,000, I think Rutgers tuition would be quite a strain. I agree that college remains a sound investment, even if one has to borrow money at 8% interest. But that doesn't change the fact that the millennials are taking on a burden that today's middle-aged and elderly didn't have to, and so millennials are understandably upset by that.

I'm tempted to get into a discussion of the larger variety of financial aid options available to lower income families today versus 30 years ago, but that doesn't really make a difference. Even if you assume the financial aid options are equivalent, and all the increase in tuition is paid by student loans, today's students are still better off.

I'll grant you that $61K is not a huge family income and that NJ is an expensive state to live in. But that isn't something new. The median family income in NJ was lower 30 years ago, and half of NJ families earned below the median, and NJ was a very expensive state back then too. This is a burden that was felt back then as it is today.

That is why my comparative analysis of college tuition was a comparison of tuition versus the median family income. That way I am comparing the burden felt by families today to the equivalent burden felt a generation ago.

And I admit that tuition as a portion of median family income has gone up quite a bit. As I calculated, that means a college student is comparatively paying about $8K a year more.

But that is offset by the wage gap for college grads. College grads today earn comparatively $6K a year more. That means that today's millennial grads can enjoy a higher standard of living (as compared to the average standard of living in the state) than grads a generation ago, because they have comparatively higher incomes. But the trade-off is they have higher student loan debt. But they can make the choice to enjoy the same standard of living as a generation ago, and apply their extra income to paying off their extra debt. That means they have less than 5 years of the same standard of living as a generation ago, followed by a higher standard of living.


There are some differences:

* Many more young adults attend 4-year colleges today than 30 years ago. So while the individual burden of paying for college may not be greater, there are many more people feeling that burden. But in the long run (long run being the incredibly short horizon of less than 5 years to pay off the incremental debt), they are all better off since college grads earn more.

* Millennials who graduated during the recession had a tougher time due to the economic impact of the recession. But this is an economic cycle phenomenon, not a generational phenomenon. Graduates in 2009 had a harder time finding jobs than graduates in 2006, even though both are of the same generation. The same was true in the early-1980's recession where 1982 grads had a harder time finding jobs than 1978 grads.

 

[eceres]

I'm tempted to get into a discussion of the larger variety of financial aid options available to lower income families today versus 30 years ago, but that doesn't really make a difference. Even if you assume the financial aid options are equivalent, and all the increase in tuition is paid by student loans, today's students are still better off.

I'll grant you that $61K is not a huge family income and that NJ is an expensive state to live in. But that isn't something new. The median family income in NJ was lower 30 years ago, and half of NJ families earned below the median, and NJ was a very expensive state back then too. This is a burden that was felt back then as it is today.

That is why my comparative analysis of college tuition was a comparison of tuition versus the median family income. That way I am comparing the burden felt by families today to the equivalent burden felt a generation ago.

And I admit that tuition as a portion of median family income has gone up quite a bit. As I calculated, that means a college student is comparatively paying about $8K a year more.

But that is offset by the wage gap for college grads. College grads today earn comparatively $6K a year more. That means that today's millennial grads can enjoy a higher standard of living (as compared to the average standard of living in the state) than grads a generation ago, because they have comparatively higher incomes. But the trade-off is they have higher student loan debt. But they can make the choice to enjoy the same standard of living as a generation ago, and apply their extra income to paying off their extra debt. That means they have less than 5 years of the same standard of living as a generation ago, followed by a higher standard of living.


There are some differences:

* Many more young adults attend 4-year colleges today than 30 years ago. So while the individual burden of paying for college may not be greater, there are many more people feeling that burden. But in the long run (long run being the incredibly short horizon of less than 5 years to pay off the incremental debt), they are all better off since college grads earn more.

* Millennials who graduated during the recession had a tougher time due to the economic impact of the recession. But this is an economic cycle phenomenon, not a generational phenomenon. Graduates in 2009 had a harder time finding jobs than graduates in 2006, even though both are of the same generation. The same was true in the early-1980's recession where 1982 grads had a harder time finding jobs than 1978 grads.

Stop making coherent arguments...let th re young have angst and the old complain they are unappreciative slackers. This is core to our society.

 

[Scarlet1984]

We've had good success with Millennials in my company. We have our share of baby boomers as well. No discernible difference in work effort or sense of entitlement.

 

[miketd1]

The crazy cost of desirable homes (not too old, decent school district, decent commute) in this area has pretty much destroyed any chance this generation had of being better than the last.

You either pay through the nose for a house in a good school district and scrimp in every other aspect of your life or you buy an affordable home and pay through the nose for private school.

It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

On top of that, the prior generation is getting older. In many instances, I see folks squeezed between taking care of their kids while also taking care of their parents. With the advancement of medicine, people are living longer and as a consequence need to be taken care of for a longer time. Folks in mine and my wife's families have gone into their 90s. That wasn't the expectation with the prior gen...

EDIT: And I haven't even brought up college...

 

[yesrutgers01]

This is a failure of both the schools and parents. This idea that everyone needs to go to college has to stop. Teachers and guidance counselors should be pushing the "lesser" students to trades or positions that don't require mounds of debt. My brother hated school yet my parents and his HS pushed him to at least go the CC route. He never went, got crap grades, and my parents wasted money they didn't need to. He ended up joining the military and then becoming a cop. He would have been better suited not wasting those few years making believe he was getting an education

This is a good point. I can use my own example...Luckily, our eldest didnt have to rack up loans in college but let's say he did and for a business communications degree, he would have racked up- let's say 120k?
did well in school, came out with a relevant degree and yet, first year salary starts in Manhattan at $35-40k base plus commission. Smart enough to use the first job for experience, 4 years and 3 jobs later, earning 6 figures. In this case, the degree paid for itself already and he has a great career track.
2nd son, also athletic but hated school. School system pushed him out with a HS degree but never took the time to force him to work. We did but since they wouldnt allow him to fail, it was a losing battle. But...you have to go to college was our take. He still hated the idea but Ramapo college wanted him for the track team and convinced him and us that this was the right place for him. Even though there is no scholarship and we live 4 miles from campus, coach insisted he had to stay in housing. Meanwhile- coach insisted on arranging his classes so he wouldnt miss practice. This resulted in him not taking some basic courses he needed. We have to put our foot down and started meeting regular with the Dean to help. A year later and over 20k in student loan, we saw it wasnt going to work(very good but tough school). took him out and put him into CC. like 8k later he had his 2 year degree but didnt want to go anymore. Got himself a job and 3 years later, with a Union and overtime, he is 24 yo making about $80k per year. And stuck with his "forced into college dept of $20k) and no additional debt from CC

CC is the ONLY way to go for a kid if he/she is not sure if college is right for them but would like to give it a try. Just be diligent in finding a good CC. At least if they drop out, there is virtually no debt. No harm no foul, as they say.

It is an individual decision. But beware, no college degree does eliminate you from some jobs regardless of your experience.

 

[FanuSanu52]

I don't think the data leads to that conclusion.

As I noted earlier (where I quoted the Talia Jane thread), the cost of tuition and fees at 4-year public universities in NJ has increased from 7.8% of the median NJ household income in 1984 to 19.8% in 2013. That means an NJ public university student is paying comparatively $8000 more today. As I noted, that is a lot more money, but in a state with a median family income over $61K, it is not making or breaking anyone. Plus there are a whole host of financial aid options today that just did not exist 30 years ago.

But let's make the assumption that the increased tuition burden is borne exclusively by the millennial student without any assistance from his parents, and let's assume that student loans are the only form of financial aid used to offset that increased burden. So the millennial student is assuming approximately $8K additional debt for every year he is in college.

But as also noted by me and others in this thread, the wage gap between college-educated and non-college-educated has also widened. The millennial student can also expect to earn comparatively $6300 more per year today than a generation ago.

So the millennial, if he chooses to go to college, is paying comparatively $8000 per year more over 4 years, and then gets $6300 a year more in earnings. At a student loan interest rate of 8%, the millennial can use that extra earning to pay off 4 years of student loans in less than 5 years, and still have some of his extra income to spend on other things.

Lol, ya think? I think those making that $61K might tell the story a little differently.

 

[FanuSanu52]

I don't think of $61,000 as a huge family income in a state as expensive to live in as New Jersey. And remember there are by definition 50% of families below that level. Even at $61,000, I think Rutgers tuition would be quite a strain. I agree that college remains a sound investment, even if one has to borrow money at 8% interest. But that doesn't change the fact that the millennials are taking on a burden that today's middle-aged and elderly didn't have to, and so millennials are understandably upset by that.

I live in an area much cheaper than NJ, and I can't imagine meeting basic expenses on $61K, let alone thinking about college for multiple children.

In NJ? Good luck in saying that's a nice sum that'll absorb tuition increases.

 

[yesrutgers01]

Lol, ya think? I think those making that $61K might tell the story a little differently.

No disrespect to anyone but $61k in NJ doesnt get you a damn thing. The shame of it is that it "SHOULD" be a respectable salary for some good hard work and in 80% of the country you get to live very good on it. but up here, it is very difficult to get by on.

 

[FanuSanu52]

Of course there are and winners tend to win regardless of the route they choose. Would you rather be a plumber not doing well with zero debt or a kid with an English degree and 240k in debt? worlds always gonna need more toilets than poets.

Maybe, maybe not. Either way, an English degree is a poor example. The world ain't gonna stop shttng, but it ain't gonna stop reading, either. The Internet has created a huge demand for content - written word, photography, digital graphics, video, etc. etc. That's on top of all the more traditional avenues that you could pursue with an English degree.

 

[Rutgers1]

People should stop and realize that things today are different. People change jobs like they change their underwear. I've seen plenty of resumes from people who have stayed at a job for max 2 years and often less than that. Kids today who don't realize that and won't take a first job in the field they want that may be less than what they want to make are idiots. Get in, get experience, move on, and you will get paid more.

 

[Upstream]

Lol, ya think? I think those making that $61K might tell the story a little differently.

I'm sure they will tell the story differently. I'm sure they'd talk about how they can barely scrape by making the median income in NJ. Just like 30 years ago, those making the median income would have told the story about how they can barely scrape by making the median income in NJ.

But that is not what this thread is about. The discussion isn't whether it is tough for someone making the median income to get by, or whether they have to worry about money, or whether they view a college education as expensive. No one is disputing this. The discussion is whether it is significantly worse for Millennials today than it was for young adults a generation ago.

Some in this thread have claimed the increase of in college tuition in the last generation makes it much harder for Millennials to survive. My point is that college tuition is comparatively $8K more than it was a generation ago. And college graduates are now making about $6K more than they were a generation ago.

In my previous posts I brought up NJ's median income and the increase in financial aid programs to point out that the burden of the increase in college tuition is not fully falling on the Millennial students. But even assuming the worse case scenario, that the entire burden of the increased tuition costs falls on the student, and that the option to pay that cost is for the student to take out a student loan, it still doesn't make things worse for the Millennial student upon graduation. He can just take the additional income he is earning versus the previous generation, and apply that to his loan to pay off the increased tuition in less than 5 years.

So for less than 5 years, the Millennial graduate enjoys a standard of living comparable to what he would have if his finances were comparably the same as they were for a graduate a generation ago, and then after that less than 5-year period, the Millennial graduate enjoys a higher standard of living.

 

[miketd1]

^^^ You're making the assumption that said millennial is employed (in their field -- part-time/seasonal/bartending doesn't count. Why? Because you're further assuming said millennial is going to be job-hopping up a career ladder.). Not sure that's a safe one to make.

 

[RUsojo]

I don't know why people get so angry when a millennial comes out of school without debt because their parents paid for school. Kudos to the parent for getting a professional degree and giving their kid a head start. That kid isn't entitled. He grows up knowing it's stupid to go to college and get a 4 year degree in the arts.

I'd rather hire a kid like that then a kid who went to ramapo for 4 years to get a communications degree.

 

[FanuSanu52]

I'm sure they will tell the story differently. I'm sure they'd talk about how they can barely scrape by making the median income in NJ. Just like 30 years ago, those making the median income would have told the story about how they can barely scrape by making the median income in NJ.

But that is not what this thread is about. The discussion isn't whether it is tough for someone making the median income to get by, or whether they have to worry about money, or whether they view a college education as expensive. No one is disputing this. The discussion is whether it is significantly worse for Millennials today than it was for young adults a generation ago.

Some in this thread have claimed the increase of in college tuition in the last generation makes it much harder for Millennials to survive. My point is that college tuition is comparatively $8K more than it was a generation ago. And college graduates are now making about $6K more than they were a generation ago.

In my previous posts I brought up NJ's median income and the increase in financial aid programs to point out that the burden of the increase in college tuition is not fully falling on the Millennial students. But even assuming the worse case scenario, that the entire burden of the increased tuition costs falls on the student, and that the option to pay that cost is for the student to take out a student loan, it still doesn't make things worse for the Millennial student upon graduation. He can just take the additional income he is earning versus the previous generation, and apply that to his loan to pay off the increased tuition in less than 5 years.

So for less than 5 years, the Millennial graduate enjoys a standard of living comparable to what he would have if his finances were comparably the same as they were for a graduate a generation ago, and then after that less than 5-year period, the Millennial graduate enjoys a higher standard of living.

One of the problems, as I've pointed out multiple times, is that you're ignoring cost of living. So a statement like this, "I'll grant you that $61K is not a huge family income and that NJ is an expensive state to live in. But that isn't something new. The median family income in NJ was lower 30 years ago, and half of NJ families earned below the median, and NJ was a very expensive state back then too. This is a burden that was felt back then as it is today." - is incorrect. It wasn't expensive 30 years ago, comparatively speaking. IMO that's the biggest issue facing millennials.

Back in 1975, you could earn whatever the crappy new-grad median was and still afford the basics. You had the luxury of working your ass off and getting the big raise/promotion while living modestly. You also had the luxuries of pursuing a modest career, without constantly looking for a promotion, living in a single-earner home and still living a comfortable life, etc. Today, you don't have those luxuries, not in the areas we're talking anyway. So when you compound that with extra debt and entry level wages that haven't kept up with the times ... it's just a fact that grads today are facing a worse situation out of the gate.

I'm not sure what's so difficult to admit about that. This isn't a personal complaint for me. I'm not really a millennial, nor do I relate to any specific generation. It's just keeping a combo of eyes and mind open and recognizing what's going on.

 

[vkj91]

I don't know why people get so angry when a millennial comes out of school without debt because their parents paid for school. Kudos to the parent for getting a professional degree and giving their kid a head start. That kid isn't entitled. He grows up knowing it's stupid to go to college and get a 4 year degree in the arts.

I'd rather hire a kid like that then a kid who went to ramapo for 4 years to get a communications degree.

I agree with the first part but not the rest. I know plenty of successful families that allowed little johnny to major in a useless degree. Also, I don't always consider the ARTS a useless degree

 

[Upstream]

One of the problems, as I've pointed out multiple times, is that you're ignoring cost of living. So a statement like this, "I'll grant you that $61K is not a huge family income and that NJ is an expensive state to live in. But that isn't something new. The median family income in NJ was lower 30 years ago, and half of NJ families earned below the median, and NJ was a very expensive state back then too. This is a burden that was felt back then as it is today." - is incorrect. It wasn't expensive 30 years ago, comparatively speaking. IMO that's the biggest issue facing millennials.

Back in 1975, you could earn whatever the crappy new-grad median was and still afford the basics. You had the luxury of working your ass off and getting the big raise/promotion while living modestly. You also had the luxuries of pursuing a modest career, without constantly looking for a promotion, living in a single-earner home and still living a comfortable life, etc. Today, you don't have those luxuries, not in the areas we're talking anyway. So when you compound that with extra debt and entry level wages that haven't kept up with the times ... it's just a fact that grads today are facing a worse situation out of the gate.

I'm not sure what's so difficult to admit about that. This isn't a personal complaint for me. I'm not really a millennial, nor do I relate to any specific generation. It's just keeping a combo of eyes and mind open and recognizing what's going on.

Time for you to show some data.

I've been using median household income as the barometer. My assumption is that the median household income represents what the median family in NJ can afford. But it is certainly possible that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than the median household income. If this difference is significant, it represents a decline in the standard of living for the median NJ family.

If NJ is comparatively more expensive today than it was 30 years ago, then show me some data that quantifies how the cost of living in NJ in the past 30 years has increased faster than the median household income.

I suspect you are just making stuff up. But maybe you're right. If so, back up your claim that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than the median household income.

(In edit: I just checked, looking at the cost of living as defined by the Consumer Price Index for Northern NJ for the period from 1984 to 2014. The CPI in NJ in 2014 was approximately 1.9 times higher than in 1984. During the same period, the median household income was approximately 2.3 times higher. That means income in NJ is growing faster than the cost of living. Just the opposite of what you claimed. NJ is becoming comparatively less expensive than it was in 1984.)

 

[RUsojo]

I agree with the first part but not the rest. I know plenty of successful families that allowed little johnny to major in a useless degree. Also, I don't always consider the ARTS a useless degree

True useless is harsh. As a pure ROI view, a professional degree or sciences, business, etc would prove better in the long run.

 

[retired711]

Time for you to show some data.

I've been using median household income as the barometer. My assumption is that the median household income represents what the median family in NJ can afford. But it is certainly possible that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than the median household income. If this difference is significant, it represents a decline in the standard of living for the median NJ family.

If NJ is comparatively more expensive today than it was 30 years ago, then show me some data that quantifies how the cost of living in NJ in the past 30 years has increased faster than the median household income.

I suspect you are just making stuff up. But maybe you're right. If so, back up your claim that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than the median household income.

(In edit: I just checked, looking at the cost of living as defined by the Consumer Price Index for Northern NJ for the period from 1984 to 2014. The CPI in NJ in 2014 was approximately 1.9 times higher than in 1984. During the same period, the median household income was approximately 2.3 times higher. That means income in NJ is growing faster than the cost of living. Just the opposite of what you claimed. NJ is becoming comparatively less expensive than it was in 1984.)

Yes, but not that much less expensive. This was an expensive place to live 30 years, as you yourself have stressed. (I lived here then as now.) And the increase in tuition at Rutgers since 1984 has been quite dramatic. I recall the tuition here in 1984 as about $2000. Thus the increase in tuition has far outstripped the general increase in cost of living.

 

[vkj91]

True useless is harsh. As a pure ROI view, a professional degree or sciences, business, etc would prove better in the long run.

Probably but I've seen more than enough poli sci, english, and sociology majors go onto to have very successful careers in business fields. Likewise, I've known some pretty bright chemists who sat in a lab making squat. That being said, I'd much rather my son come to me and say he is going to major in business and math than English and General Sciences like dad. lol

 

[FanuSanu52]

Time for you to show some data.

I've been using median household income as the barometer. My assumption is that the median household income represents what the median family in NJ can afford. But it is certainly possible that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than the median household income. If this difference is significant, it represents a decline in the standard of living for the median NJ family.

If NJ is comparatively more expensive today than it was 30 years ago, then show me some data that quantifies how the cost of living in NJ in the past 30 years has increased faster than the median household income.

I suspect you are just making stuff up. But maybe you're right. If so, back up your claim that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than the median household income.

(In edit: I just checked, looking at the cost of living as defined by the Consumer Price Index for Northern NJ for the period from 1984 to 2014. The CPI in NJ in 2014 was approximately 1.9 times higher than in 1984. During the same period, the median household income was approximately 2.3 times higher. That means income in NJ is growing faster than the cost of living. Just the opposite of what you claimed. NJ is becoming comparatively less expensive than it was in 1984.)

No I'm not making stuff up. It's been a storyline everywhere, especially an expensive place like NJ.

Here's a study from our buddies at NJ.com: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/05/tougher_times_nj_workers_strug.html

The most relevant part: "The report says over the past dozen years, living costs have risen up to 28.9 percent while median wages fell 4.4 percent."

Just think about it: Could you afford to live in NJ doing your father's or grandfather's job, likely without the support of a second income? No way is the cost of living more affordable for an entry level employee today versus 20, 30 ... years ago.

 

[jtung230]

The wage gap data discussed earlier in this thread would seem to indicate that a college degree is more valuable today.

But, if a college degree is actually less valuable, as you claim, then it is pretty stupid that a higher percentage of young adults are looking to earn less valuable college degrees today.

it's less valuable because everyone has a college degree.

 

[NotInRHouse]

"Just go to community college" is flawed. How are you going to get there? Much of NJ- especially the lower middle class areas- are not well serviced by PT.

Then there is the fact that while at least one NJ college has to accept you, they do not have to be generous about how to apply your credits, and thus, you are not necessarily going to graduate in 4 years.

Not to mention, in most lines of work your salary will plateau without a masters or MBA...nevermind that lawyers and doctors are drowning in debt. The country needs doctors, but 4 years of med school on top of college and years of residency at 40-50k a year, you will not be in good financial straights until you're in your 40s, and for women, well beyond child bearing age.

Which is also why the "major in something useful" line is absurd. Most engineers I know, to use the favorite boomer example of shoving STEM down everyone's throats, have a graduate degree because they don't feel like seeing six figures in their 40s, and in NJ, you'd better see that before then or good luck being able to raise a family.

The "be a plumber" line is also nonsensical when you consider how many manual jobs are heavily unionized and the jobs go straight to the connected. You also need training for many manual jobs. And plenty of jobs that used to not require college, like the police, at least require community if not a BA. And you can be sure that there will be competition from college grads, and who will get chosen? That

The starting salary even for an engineer out of college is 50-60k. Most in housing finance will say you should not spend more than 3x income on a home. Good luck finding any place near a job in North or Central NJ for 120k that isn't a drug den. Nevermind rent.

Live with mom and dad? A NJT bus or rail pass from the burbs is easily over $300 plus parking if they are not walking distance.

That the average income in NJ for a family is 61k, and the average property is somewhere around 300k, is quite telling about when the boomers locked in. Think also about how many of those families just had Dad working because Mom didn't have to. I know one millenial mom who doesn't work because dad is an investment banker. Go ahead and tell me Boomer moms had to work unless they were married to bankers.

Somehow, some in the older generation have convinced themselves that for the first time ever when student loan exceeded credit card debt, it was just because the students were studying art history, demanding fancy lives or going on vacation...

 

[Upstream]

Yes, but not that much less expensive. This was an expensive place to live 30 years, as you yourself have stressed. (I lived here then as now.) And the increase in tuition at Rutgers since 1984 has been quite dramatic. I recall the tuition here in 1984 as about $2000. Thus the increase in tuition has far outstripped the general increase in cost of living.

Completely agree. The difference is marginal at best. But the data directly contradicts Fanu's claim that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than income. Even though income has risen just marginally faster, it flies in the face of the claim that NJ is comparatively more expensive today than a generation ago.

And I think I've commented enough on higher tuition costs. Yep, tuition is higher, and somewhat moreso than the increased wage gap that plays in a college grad's favor. But a college grad can pay off the tuition difference in less than 5 years by accepting a standard of living comparable to grads a generation ago.

 

[FanuSanu52]

Don't pat yourself on the back for an overly simplistic analysis that doesn't explain what's going on in front of the naked eye.

If you missed my numbers above, here are a few more links for ya tying into both increased costs of living and decreased wages among millennials:

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/stor...14/new-jersey-becoming-unaffordable/15483341/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-millennials-make-less-have-more-debt-1461641401

http://comptroller.nyc.gov/newsroom...aced-toughest-economy-since-great-depression/

You really want to keep on about how a state with a known recent history of driving people away with some of the highest taxes and highest costs of living in the nation is a *touch* cheaper than it was?

In case you think I'm making that up: http://www.northjersey.com/news/bus...illion-in-income-from-out-migration-1.1510592

 

[retired711]

Completely agree. The difference is marginal at best. But the data directly contradicts Fanu's claim that the cost of living in NJ has increased faster than income. Even though income has risen just marginally faster, it flies in the face of the claim that NJ is comparatively more expensive today than a generation ago.

And I think I've commented enough on higher tuition costs. Yep, tuition is higher, and somewhat moreso than the increased wage gap that plays in a college grad's favor. But a college grad can pay off the tuition difference in less than 5 years by accepting a standard of living comparable to grads a generation ago.

Of course, that analysis assumes that the proportion of jobs available to college grads is the same now as it was then so that a young man or woman can earn the comparable standard of living. I wonder if that's true. Certainly it is not in the law, and I wonder about other fields as well.

 

[Scarlet1984]

Probably but I've seen more than enough poli sci, english, and sociology majors go onto to have very successful careers in business fields. Likewise, I've known some pretty bright chemists who sat in a lab making squat. That being said, I'd much rather my son come to me and say he is going to major in business and math than English and General Sciences like dad. lol

My kids go to highly ranked liberal arts colleges and are majoring in History (with a lot of math and comp sci and distance running) and Poly Sci (with a lot of football). From a practical skills perspective, they both do waaaaay more critical thinking in their classes than I ever did.

They both will likely graduate with no debt and, I am pretty sure, good job prospects. I am not sure I would recommend the liberal arts path for everyone, but they seem to be on a good track.

 

[rutgersdave]

Don't pat yourself on the back for an overly simplistic analysis that doesn't explain what's going on in front of the naked eye.

If you missed my numbers above, here are a few more links for ya tying into both increased costs of living and decreased wages among millennials:

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/stor...14/new-jersey-becoming-unaffordable/15483341/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-millennials-make-less-have-more-debt-1461641401

http://comptroller.nyc.gov/newsroom...aced-toughest-economy-since-great-depression/

You really want to keep on about how a state with a known recent history of driving people away with some of the highest taxes and highest costs of living in the nation is a *touch* cheaper than it was?

In case you think I'm making that up: http://www.northjersey.com/news/bus...illion-in-income-from-out-migration-1.1510592

I don't think the Millennials in New Jersey have the problem as much as Millennials in other part of the country. At least the majority of the NJ ones can find a job due to the proximity to NYC. Other graduates in other states probably have a greater amount of student loans since most NJ parents are richer base on how many can send their kids out of state. When they get a job, their wages are much lower than NJ wages yet have a greater student loan balance. they don't have the opportunity to move around and increase their salary over a few years especially when they might only have 1-2 employers in town.

You are talking about NJ Millennials when you don't even live in the state.

 

[Upstream]

Of course, that analysis assumes that the proportion of jobs available to college grads is the same now as it was then so that a young man or woman can earn the comparable standard of living. I wonder if that's true. Certainly it is not in the law, and I wonder about other fields as well.

I don't know if there are more or less law jobs today than 30 years ago. I remember many of my lawyer friends complaining about a glut of lawyers. Of course we've both seen posts from some lawyers on this board which would cause one to think that if he can get a job, anyone can get a job.

But you're really grasping at straws now. All the data suggests that young adults with a colle degree today earn comparatively more than a generation ago. I'm sure that varies to some amount by field. So my advice is don't get a job in a bad field.

Bottom line is that this generation of college grads is better off (or at least not significantly worse off) than the previous generation.

 

[rutgersdave]

What's funny is that the posters are all old men complaining about how hard it is for Millennials but probably only 15-20% of them think it hard. They learn to move ahead like every generation.

Out of the 5 Millennials in my family, 4 are more successful than most on this board. The 1 loser was a liberal Arts major who was terrible in school. Her family place sports ahead of education when she was younger. Her mother thought she would just marry a rich guy like she did when she married my brother.

 

[FanuSanu52]

I don't think the Millennials in New Jersey have the problem as much as Millennials in other part of the country. At least the majority of the NJ ones can find a job due to the proximity to NYC. Other graduates in other states probably have a greater amount of student loans since most NJ parents are richer base on how many can send their kids out of state. When they get a job, their wages are much lower than NJ wages yet have a greater student loan balance. they don't have the opportunity to move around and increase their salary over a few years especially when they might only have 1-2 employers in town.

You are talking about NJ Millennials when you don't even live in the state.

Possibly true, not sure how they compare. But NJ/NYC is among the more expensive places to live, and entry level jobs are not keeping up.

Not sure what that last sentence has to do with anything. I didn't choose to make the conversation about NJ, just responding. And I spent most of my life, including college and post-college, in NJ and was a borderline millennial. Do I have enough street cred for you now?

You're not a millennial at all, yet you're in the conversation, mostly to complain about how tough it is for you, a much older guy ... for the umpteenth time. It's pretty much the only drum you bang on a CFB board.

 

[FanuSanu52]

Bottom line is that this generation of college grads is not better off than the previous generation, and I don't much know what I'm talking about.

Agreed.

 

[Upstream]

@FanuSanu52 , you keep throwing articles at me that compare 2011 to 1999 to show that young adults right after the height of the recession have a harder time than young adults before the recession. No kidding. The same was true in the 1980s recession.

As I noted in my comment at the end of post 205, economic cycles are not the same as generational trends.

 

[FanuSanu52]

@FanuSanu52 , you keep throwing articles at me that compare 2011 to 1999 to show that young adults right after the height of the recession have a harder time than young adults before the recession. No kidding. The same was true in the 1980s recession.

As I noted in my comment at the end of post 205, economic cycles are not the same as generational trends.

It shows what we're discussing: that millennials are making less money than their predecessors (like GenXers) in the face of a faster-rising cost of living.

I'm not really interested in a whole separate argument, but there are plenty of economists out there that will tell you the CPI is being manipulated. And common sense tells you there are good reasons for the government to do so. When things on the ground aren't matching up, you can't just use an ultra-simplistic a > b equation and pretend that it verifies what you're saying.

Again, if income v cost of living is better today than it was in the 1980s, then why can't you afford to support a family on a single income from a modest career anymore? The types of careers many of our parents and grandparents were doing are simply not viable anymore.

 

[Upstream]

It shows what we're discussing: that millennials are making less money than their predecessors (like GenXers) in the face of a faster-rising cost of living.

I'm not really interested in a whole separate argument, but there are plenty of economists out there that will tell you the CPI is being manipulated. And common sense tells you there are good reasons for the government to do so. When things on the ground aren't matching up, you can't just use an ultra-simplistic a > b equation and pretend that it verifies what you're saying.

Again, if income v cost of living is better today than it was in the 1980s, then why can't you afford to support a family on a single income from a modest career anymore? The types of careers many of our parents and grandparents were doing are simply not viable anymore.

My comments are in direct response to j22889's post:

Can you really blame a college educated millennial for being lazy and uninterested in a job making $10/hour when they have 30k in student loan debt and rent is $1000/month?

I responded:

Oh good lord. You act as if this is something new. My first job out of college was a low paying job and I struggled to pay my rent and expenses. (I didn't have student loan debt because I went to school on a scholarship, but most of my friends had significant student loan debt.)

Back then there were also people who were lazy and uninterested in their jobs, but that was because they were lazy and uninterested in working (or in the wrong jobs). And those people blamed others for their laziness or bad jobs. Just like today. And some of those people eventually figured it out and went on to be successful, and some never figured it out and never became successful. Just like what will happen to today's young adults.

And then he said it was disingenuous to compare post-college costs today to 30 years ago.

I'm definitely not claiming that all experiences of millenials are unique to their generation, but its disingenuous of you to compare relative wages/living expenses/costs of education post-college today to what they were 30 years ago

My comments since then have been specifically focused on today versus 30 years ago, to show that there is not a generational paradigm shift between late-Boomers/early-GenX and Millennials.

If you want to discuss whether things are worse during recessions than during economic expansion, I agree with you. But that doesn't make it a generational shift. And the recent recession isn't the only recession we've been through in the last 30-50 years. Maybe it was more severe and lasted longer, but the nature of the impact mirrors past recessions (compared to the Great Depression, which had a very different type of impact).

If you want to discuss whether things are different today than 100 years ago, I am sure they are. I would guess the data would show generational paradigm shifts from before the Great Depression to post-WWII and somewhat more through the 1960's.

But in the last 30 years there have been changes, but not paradigm shifts. Yes, more kids go to college. Yes, college costs are higher. Yes, the wage gap for college-educated adults has increased. Yes, there are more women in the work place (about 6% more). But those are marginal changes, and some offset each other (like higher colleges costs is offset by higher wages for college grads).

 

[John Otterstedt]

I have a mixed view of millennials. I am a teacher, and although I don't have a ton of millennials around me, there is enough to draw some basic conclusions:

On the negative side....
1) Overall, there doesn't seem to be the same "I have to prove myself!" mentality that I saw in the past. It has gotten harder to get a teaching job, yet I don't see the 20-something kids doing extra things to make themselves stand out - at least not to the same degree. They seem to think that graduating college entitles them to a job. Some take the next step and get a position as a classroom assistant, thinking that they will undoubtedly get the next teaching job to come along. They don't realize, though, that the school is full of assistants and full teaching positions are few and far between. You have to do more.

2) The younger ones didn't live in a world of unstructured play. Their lives were structured for them - and it is only getting worse with the current crop of kids in school.

3) Too many think they are going to make a living playing video games. Many "jobs" are beneath them.

On the plus side....
1) Even though I said that they aren't doing the extra things to get jobs, I have to use this space to admit that the coolest thing going on in the world of education is mainly attended by millennials. It is called EdCamp, and it is a series of weekend teacher-led professional development events. The topics are cutting edge, and the attendees are very enthusiastic. Basically, they are saying "The old people's idea of professional development is antiquated - let's create our own." I love that.......I just don't see any of these kids in my everyday existence as a teacher. They seem to be outliers.

2) Even though your average millennial lived a more sheltered day-to-day life, they have traveled more than anyone in my generation. It is like their parents kept them in a bubble until age 18 and then turned them loose and said, "Explore the world!" So, while I can talk more extensively about exploring the far corners of my town, I never spent a semester oversees.

3) Referring to my previous #3 above.......Many of them actually DO make a living playing video games. My father thought I was crazy when I aligned this website with Rivals.com, yet 20 years later, Rivals is still around and some publishers are making a lot of money. I think it is natural for the older generation to laugh at the things the current generation is pulling a paycheck from. In my case, I admit that I told my son he was crazy when he was telling me about "Youtube Stars" and professional Minecraft players. I was wrong.

 

[retired711]

I don't know if there are more or less law jobs today than 30 years ago. I remember many of my lawyer friends complaining about a glut of lawyers. Of course we've both seen posts from some lawyers on this board which would cause one to think that if he can get a job, anyone can get a job.

But you're really grasping at straws now. All the data suggests that young adults with a colle degree today earn comparatively more than a generation ago. I'm sure that varies to some amount by field. So my advice is don't get a job in a bad field.

Bottom line is that this generation of college grads is better off (or at least not significantly worse off) than the previous generation.

I accept your points. FWIW, there are certainly fewer jobs for lawyers than there used to be. And yes, I get your point about some lawyer posters on the board.