Print Friendly
May 10, 2012

The War on the Young: Young Adult Joblessness at 13.6%

April is the cruelest month for the Obama administration’s hoped for economic recovery; yet again this year signs of economic recovery faded in the spring after a winter of growth. But for one group, there has been little hope and no change: the jobs picture for young adults just keeps looking bleak.

Data from Tuesday’s Gallup report suggests that despite supposed improvements to the country’s economic health, youth unemployment was essentially flat in 2011. It currently stands at 13.6 percent, up from 12.1 percent in November of last year, standing exactly as high as it was one year ago. 32 percent of adults age 18 to 29 were underemployed in April, and the number has been steadily rising since last July.

It is an interesting political paradox: the generation that supports the Democrats most at the polls tends to benefit less from liberal Democratic policies than older, more skeptical voters. The pattern is to put a flashy, attention-getting proposal that appeals to young adults out front while making policy choices that in effect transfer money from the young to the old on a large scale. Thus Obamacare allows young adults to stay on their parents’ policies a few years longer — but corrals young adults into compulsory insurance programs at costs that subsidize the premiums of older workers. The administration offers to cut the rate of student loan interest while supporting an academic status quo that inflates student costs and forces more students to take out larger loans.

In 2008, young adults and students turned out in droves to elect Barack Obama president. Recent reports suggest that while Obama still leads among the young, enthusiasm has faded considerably. It isn’t hard to guess why.

Posted in Blue Social Model, Economics & Business, Election 2012, Obama, Politics, Quick Takes
Send Us Feedback Send Post Ideas
Load Comments
  • http://vbounded.blogspot.com vbounded

    There is job demand for kids in agriculture, mining, metallurgy, wealth planning for retiring boomers, and other things. If kids don’t want to do what people are willing to pay for, they are going to be unemployed, and have no one to blame but themselves.

  • Kris

    “the generation that supports the Democrats most at the polls tends to benefit less from liberal Democratic policies than older, more skeptical voters. The pattern is to put a flashy, attention-getting proposal that appeals to young adults out front while making policy choices that in effect transfer money from the young to the old on a large scale.”

    I imagine young adults would resent your illogical finger-pointing at them to the point of rage. Even Obama voters have enough foresight to admit that most of their economic plight is due to Bush II.

  • Jim.

    Agriculture, mining, metallurgy, retirement planning… those don’t sound like the hip urban jobs that Obama supporters expected.

    Could it be that demand for workers is actually pushing people out of fashionable cities, into rural areas and the Sun Belt?

    Follow them money, kids.

  • EvilBuzzard

    vbounded – Once people realize that a welfare state really can fail to meet it’s obligations, then younger people will be willing to perform work that is “beneath their station and dignity.”

  • alanstorm

    “Even Obama voters have enough foresight to admit that most of their economic plight is due to Bush II.”

    Anyone who voted for Obama thereby demonstrated absolutely zero foresight.

    Evidence for your assertion? Even if all the blame for the 2007-2008 could be laid at GWB’s feet, Obama’s (and Congress’s) policies are the ones responsible for making this “recovery” weak, anemic and slow .

  • Jack

    Kris highlights the fact that young liberal minded voters blame all of their problems on Bush, even though, on economic and monetary policy, Clinton, Bush and Obama are mostly cut from the same cloth and all of them share some blame.

    Obama is a master at persuading young voters that he is on their side. Young voters, in turn, support Obama not because of his economic or monetary policy, but because of his progressive cultural policy and, most of all, because he makes them feel good.

  • richard40

    Jack, good analysis. I think your comment nails it better than any others.

    The dilemma is while objective numbers based analysis would indicate that dem policies are horrible for young people, young people do not have enough experience and skepticism to recognize that analysis. They are still idealistic, and still make feelings based decisions, and while on an objective basis big gov policies are clearly failing, on a feelings basis they still look promissing and compassionate. Its basically the old saying of any young person that is not liberal has no heart, while any old person that is not conservative has no brain.

    You also make a good point that the young are more socialy liberal. That is why a libertarian based idealogy is often more attractive to the young than conventional conservatism, as proven by the wave of young people supporting the fairly old, and occasionally wacky, Ron Paul. Their objective part can realize that they will one day get stuck paying for todays big gov, while not getting their share because it will be broke, while their idealistic part can back Pauls socially liberal policies.

  • thibaud

    2008 was a freak election re. the youth vote. Young people in the US have never voted in significant numbers and never will.

    Add to this their declining share of the electorate as the nation ages, and it becomes clear that this is certainly the demographic with the lowest return on campaign investment for either party.

    Hispanics and two-parent families with school-aged children are the demographics who will decide this election. Economic security, including secure access to decent health insurance, is the issue of issues for these two groups.