Higher education has reached more and more Americans over time, and now among those 25-29, one third have at least a four year undergraduate degree.
More Americans have started and graduated college in recent years, spurred on by the Great Recession, and the recognition that unemployment levels among college graduates is 3.3 percent for those ages 25-34, compared to 11.8 percent for high school graduates.
Still, too many students fail to finish a four year, or even a two year degree, and in many states, the graduation rate is much lower than in others, with the trend being that the “Blue” states have higher graduation rates than the “Red” states, another indication of two Americas in our midst, one in the 21st century, and the other moving back socially to the 19th century in many ways, sadly!
And low income American families still see only about one out of ten of their children going on to college and graduating in a six year period, while high income families see seven out of ten children gaining a college degree.
And women are graduating at higher rates than men, another disturbing issue regarding the emotional maturity of young men, many seeing just having any job as enough, making more women more highly educated than men, and in many cases, choosing not to marry someone of lesser educational attainment.
And Asian Americans continue to have higher percentages of college degrees, followed by whites, blacks and Hispanics, respectively.
The road to the future in a technology based and digital economy is higher education, so those not attaining that goal are at a long range disadvantage in the American economy of the future.
Hello Professor,
A thoughtful post and I would like to complement this recent news with the potential job market this generation has to face.
FIrst off I have been in communication with my Moderate Republicans the last couple of weeks. I wanted to pass on of the latest news coming from Arizona. The cooperation on recent legislation between the Moderate Republicans and Democratic, working together, and the moderates in the state intentionally bypassed the Extreme Reactionary Republicans cutting them out all together.
Those Reactionary Republicans released a news briefing that they were going to go after the Moderates Republicans for working with the Democrats to pass Arizona legislation. My friends and I had a good laugh because it is the Reactionary Republicans who are being targeted by the real Republican Party. They are the ones behind the curve.
Bruce Bartlett who was the former Reagan Economic Policy Advisor has stated, “Frankly, one of our political parties is insane, and we all know which one it is. They have descended from the realm of reasonableness that was the mark of conservatism. They dream of anarchy, of ending government.â€
I like to refer to the book, “Wealth of Nations†written by Adam Smith and is considered one of the Harvard Classics for reading. In summation it is the country that takes raw materials shipped in from other nations and provides the “Value Added†manufacturing is what leads to the higher standards of living for the citizens of this country. (This “Value Added†aspect for the first decade plus of the 21st century was transferred to China at the expense of American workers Middle Class Standards of living.)
I also highly recommend reading the comments by Mark Blyth, the Scottish Economist who really dissects the myth of austerity in a real historical context in language we can all understand, and he’s quite entertaining at the same time. This is rather brilliant!
In summation:
“Governments today in both Europe and the United States have succeeded in casting government spending as reckless wastefulness that has made the economy worse. In contrast, they have advanced a policy of draconian budget cuts….”austerity”…to solve the financial crisis. We are told that we have all lived beyond our means and now need to tighten our belts. This view conveniently forgets where all that debt came from. Not from an orgy of government spending, but as the direct result of bailing out, recapitalizing, and adding liquidity to the broken banking system. Through these actions private debt was rechristened as government debt while those responsible for generating it walked away scot free, placing the blame on the state, and the burden on the taxpayer.
That burden now takes the form of a global turn to austerity, the policy of reducing domestic wages and prices to restore competitiveness and balance the budget. The problem, according to political economist Mark Blyth, is that austerity is a very dangerous idea. First of all, it doesn’t work. As the past four years and countless historical examples from the last 100 years show, while it makes sense for any one state to try and cut its way to growth, it simply cannot work when all states try it simultaneously: all we do is shrink the economy. In the worst case, austerity policies worsened the Great Depression and created the conditions for seizures of power by the forces responsible for the Second World War: the Nazis and the Japanese military establishment. As Blyth amply demonstrates, the arguments for austerity are tenuous and the evidence thin.
Rather than expanding growth and opportunity, the repeated revival of this dead economic idea has almost always led to low growth along with increases in wealth and income inequality. Austerity demolishes the conventional wisdom, marshaling an army of facts to demand that we recognize austerity for what it is, and what it costs us.â€
Thanks for your perceptive comments, Engineer Of Knowledge, but as we know, the right wing conservatives and Republicans do not care what harm they visit on ordinary Americans. When, oh when, will the RED State voters come to realize that their Republican Governors and legislatures are harming the interests of the struggling middle class and the poor? When, oh when, will they realize that social conservatism, connected to so called “religious” groups is hypocritical, and just out to harm the rights of women, minorities, immigrants, and the poor? When will the outrage against the Republican Party of today finally decimate the cancer it has become, and return it to normal mainstream Republicanism of Lincoln, TR, and Ike? And also of Rockefeller, Ford, and Dole and even McCain?
Professor, I’m working on it as hard as I can so my family’s legacy Party can make the change back to a normal mindset… 😀
Ah the moderate “me too” RePUBICans as always agreeing with the Democrats to advance the leftist liberal agenda. It’s so heartwarming.
Totally agree, Professor, in that they need to return to normal mainstream Republicanism. 🙂
Sorry Juan…you are going to have to give more tangentable examples than a not supported statement. We all should be working for the betterment of our citizens….less rehortic…more substance…anything else is just a rant…:-)
Well two more ammonium nitrate fertilizer plants exploded in Louisiana this week. Just more evidence of, “We don’t need those pesky environmental OSHA regulations, because there are too many “Business Unfriendly” regulations causing problems.” The results are that “Working Middle Class” people die….just the cost of doing business….Right? When is the South going to wake up and realize they are just being exploited?
To pass on some information for those who may not know, ammonium nitrate is what Tim McVeigh used when he blew up the Federal “FBI” Building in Oklahoma.
Yes, buy the way Juan…”Ah the moderate “me too†RePUBICans as always agreeing with the Democrats to advance the leftist”…well as you should know, this is a “Generalized Statement” which negated your argument right off. Key word here is “always” which is not accurate in any stretch of the imagination. Just saying…:-). If you are practicing law, you should workin this.
The South, as a section of the nation, has always been the most poorly educated, most ignorant, part of the nation.
It used to be exploited by the Democratic racists, who kept on harping on the Civil War.
Once the Democratic Party liberated itself from this heritage, ironically under a Southern Democrat named Lyndon B. Johnson, the GOP took over and continued promoting prejudice and narrow mindedness, and found it worked, and they continue to undermine the full economic and social transformation of the section, perpetuating the old ideas and thoughts in veiled ways, but it has kept the section behind the rest of the nation. Very sad indeed!
Engineer: Just one question. Are you a conservative? If so, how? If not and you’re a liberal , then why don’t you join the Democrats? Because every single policy you advocate is a liberal policy. You agree almost 100% with Ron. So I really do not understand how someone who talks like a liberal and thinks like a liberal is somehow a Republican and not a Democrat?
Ron: Your comment about the South just shows how prejudiced and bigoted an elitist leftist liberals like you can be sometimes. (As a matter of fact Engineer comes through as exactly that!!). The irony is that you do not even remotely realize it. And even after I call you out on it, you will still be in denial. Amazing.
Professor, if so many of us see this, then why do those in the Southern Regions do not? Has this demographics population become so aclamated to so much less over the years. Can they not see there is so much deserving of them than just Surfdom?
This is not the station in life I’m gonna settle for and I’ll be damned if I will allow my children to be subjected to. I raised them and educated to be more than what others would have them be.
Ron , I don’t understand , if the Democrats liberated itself from the southern racist heritage under a Southern Democrat named Lyndon B. Johnson and that was taken over by the GOP, how is that the big breakthrough for the GOP in the House did not come until 1994, almost 20 YEARS LATER? Did the south cease to be racist and became racist again in 1994? Please explain why the Democrats could count on better than 3/5ths of the Southern congressional districts prior to 1994? Were the Democrats still promoting racist policies in the South? If all this voter swap took place because of Johnson and Nixon’s southern strategy then please explain why states like Alabama and North Carolina voted in their first Republican legislative majorities since Reconstruction in the YEAR 2010!!!!! What happen? They became racist all of a sudden again in 2010? At least answer these questions Professor.
Surfdom? Is that a new word?
Exactly right about your comments about the South, Professor. 🙂
Juan, it took to 1994 for the GOP to win control of both Houses, and in the case of the House of Representatives, the first time since 1954.
Seniority and habit kept the Democrats in control in much of the South beyond 1964, and the expansion of the vote to African Americans also helped keep the South Democratic.
Of course, there were still southern conservative Democrats, who were unwilling to give up their party identification out of tradition, but often voted with Republicans and worked with Nixon and Reagan, and opposed Carter.
It took a generation for change completely, but the GOP today in the South is the inheritor of the old Southern Democrats, such as Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, who led the transition to the GOP.
And I am not prejudiced or bigoted, just see things as they are, not what you wish they were. The South remains backward and poor, with a few exceptions, areas of technology and higher education influence–such as Austin in Texas, the Research Triangle in North Carolina, Northern Virginia, Southern Florida, Atlanta—but much of the rest still in the 19th century, poverty stricken and exploited by Republicans, who do not give a damn about their constituents, just as the old Southern Democrats did the same for a century.
Same with me Professor. I’m also not prejudiced or bigoted, just seeing things as they are, not what Guano and Davy No Nothing wish they were.
Excellent article about racism: http://www.winningprogressive.org/the-erosion-of-empathy
Juan,
I tried to answer your question using my cell phone but it didn’t through and ended up loosing it. I will try again when I get back to my dying computer.
Hello Juan,
First off…Surfdom being a word…. LOL…apparently Samsung Galaxy III seems to think so. Definition:
The lack of ability of some people to free themselves from the internet.
What I had typed in my comment was Serfdom: the status of peasants under feudalism.
When I hit send, the Smart Phone changed it to Surfdom. Go figure.
Second, your question is a good one. I simply consider myself as Working Middle Class and about center of the political spectrum.
As everyone is the sum of their own experiences, and what I grew up with is what has formed my opinions and viewpoints. I am a Republican and not what I view as being a Democrat. You, however, view the two terms from the vantage point of what you have been exposed to. What you know as Conservative Republicans are for me the “Johnny Come Lately†and not what I remember my parents and grandparents belong to. Remember when Barry Goldwater made his famous statement of, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is not vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue,†many walked out in the middle as it was so extreme….and of course he lost badly in the National Election. He was viewed as a joke and not one to be taken seriously. The Republican knew he was not going to have a chance of winning so he was put up as a sacrificial candidate to choose one of true value later on……Nixon.
So you ask why do I not change to the Democratic Party but stay and voice my opinion on taking the Republican Party back to what it once stood for….It is because it pisses off all the right people.
Well that aside, I can give you a short example of what I see as a recent conservative atrocity and abuse. I worked for a company for 15 years and left for a better position. Back in the early days the owner use to have “Profit Sharing†as he was good at rewarding those who help to make him successful. (As I said before, “you don’t need legislation to treat your employees well.â€)
This Profit Sharing would go into the employs’ personal retirement savings. Well to fast forward to 2004 when the Republicans took control of House, Senate, and White House. The laws were changed so that when an “Investment Banker†firm bought out a company, what had once been “Profit Sharing Personal Retirement Funds†simply became profits of the purchased company. Long story short, I had several co-workers loose about 1/3rd of their retirement savings. As far as I am concerned, this was making a theft legal of what had once been illegal.
I saw this happening and pulled my money out when I left and before the Investment Bankers took control of the company they had just purchased. Now for some food for thought, when these co-workers growing old and run out of money that the Investment Bankers took 1/3rd of, who do you think is going to have to support them late in their lives….yes YOU are.
I also have seen good men and women working to support their families but being exposed to White Lung, Black Lung, Asbestos, and cancer causing chemicals but told it was all safe and nothing was going to hurt them. When the workers got sick, they were simply fired and this is still going on today.
Much like the tobacco hiding the facts that their products caused cancer but would sue anyone to make that claim as there was no evidence….of course they had the knowledge and evidence to the contrary.
So to conclude, it is not a liberal or conservative / Democratic or Republican as you look at it from your experience exposure viewpoint (not that I am saying this is wrong) but more to the fact I am Working Middle Class born, raised, and exposed from my grandparents Watermen, Coalminer; my father’s teachers’ life, mother nurse…etc. The Republican’s use to support and back hard working people and allowed them to afford the fruits of their labor….not change laws to legally steel their retirement funds.
This is just a short snap shot of what makes me Republican. I am just luck that I have the education and experience in my field which is in demand now with the electrical infrastructure system. Those co-workers because of their age now were laid off and cannot find a position due to age discrimination. So to repeat, who do you think is now supporting them…..yes YOU are.
Now your statement, The irony is that you do not even remotely realize it. And even after I call you out on it, you will still be in denial. Amazing. (See I have been speaking very nicely with you and you rewarded this by going into Ass Mode. You are better than that don’t you think?.)
Reason:
The South was the first to push through “Right To Work†legislation reducing Working Middle Classes’ voice.
Thanks, Engineer Of Knowledge, for your carefully explained retort to Juan on why you are a Republican.
I am a Democrat, and proudly so, but except for Goldwater, I never had a problem with Republicans, until Reagan came in, and made conservatism (Goldwater with charm and charisma) acceptable, and that was the beginning of the end of the American Dream for many middle class people. That is why I never had a problem with Rockefeller, Ford, Baker, Dole, and other mainstream conservatives, although still preferring Democrats, but I did not see dangers like we face now with the right wingers who profess religiosity, as they promote a lack of ethics and high levels of immorality. And the Rand Paul brand is even more terrifying, as are the Tea Party wing nuts!
Yes Professor I too see current events as you do. My Son-In-Law’s youngest brother will be working on the Republican candidate for the Governor’s race in Virginia. Juan has no idea who he is speaking with and my stature within my 150 year family legacy Party.
Juan only knows what he has been subjected too over the last decade plus of extreme rehortic. “If one does not assimilate to the reactionary extreme right….then you are not a true Republican.”
Yes even the Republican Party can have many shades of gray….just as the Democrats can.
I like you do not, for the most part, have any problem with a Democratic person. I have great respect and consider you a good friend… 🙂
Same way with myself, Engineer. I also consider myself working middle class and middle of the political spectrum. Socially, I tend to lean left. Fiscally, I’m more moderate. I was raised Democratic by my parents but, like the Professor, I have no problem with mainstream conservatives, like the ones he mentioned.
Engineer: There you go again rambling about the “your stature” and the 150yrs family legacy within the Party. May I ask, didn’t we abolish titles of nobility after the Revolution? Talk about being an elitist snobbish northeastern country club Republican “moderate” aka liberal. Now I am not saying you are from the northeast, but by what you write you fit the mold.There is nothing I find more annoying that younger generations boasting about what the forefathers have done in the past. Clinging to past “greatness” whatever that may have been. If anything, it wasn’t you but your forefathers. And if you did anything in the last 40yrs but support the “losing” establishment of the RePUBICan party, then you really haven’t had that much of a positive impact. Unless you consider getting leftist Democrats elected as something positive. I mean there could be shade of gray, that’s all fine and dandy, but when you support practically 100% of the other parties agenda, then why the hell have two parties?
With respect to the 2004 Congress, and the legislation you are talking about, may I remind you that the conservative movement got back in 2010, just as they did in 94. But in 2004 it was the moderates who control everything, very much like they still do know, though there is some resistance. Remember Speaker Hastert who was the “compromise candidate” ? He pledged to work for bipartisanship, saying: “Solutions to problems cannot be found in a pool of bitterness. They can be found in an environment in which we trust one another’s word; where we generate heat and passion, but where we recognize that each member is equally important to our overall mission of improving the life of the American people.” So there you have your bipartisanship, didn’t seem to improve it much!
So you are against bipartisanship and cooperation between the two parties, Juan? Instead, you want constant confrontation and stalemate? Has that worked, and does it work for democracy to have the two parties at each other’s throats? The greatness of the nation is when there is bipartisanship, as in the Cold War Era after World War II! And with Ike accepting the New Deal in the 1950s, rather than trying to destroy the great advances of FDR!
Constant conflict and belligerence reminds us of the Civil War, which was a terribly divisive period with lasting scars! That is not what I want in our future, but leave it to the far Right of the GOP as now constituted, and talk radio and Fox News Channel, and the hate filled Christian Right, which defies the teachings of Jesus Christ, and cares not how much they promote division and conflict, and that will be our future, which will undermine us!
But that far Right is dying out, and the GOP will, hopefully, see the light, and excise the cancer, and let them go to a far right fringe group that will flail aimlessly until it finally dies out, and we return to moderate, centrist government, where no matter which party wins, the country is not put into extremist change, but stays in the mainstream!
I do not agree with bipartisanship that simply means advancing the statist leftist liberal agenda. PERIOD. Why is it that compromise always mean forwarding the Democrats party agenda? Like this Immigration bill! It’s insane.
Exactly right about bipartisanship, Professor! 🙂
If there is no immigration reform, the GOP is DEAD in the water, and might as well concede the 2016 Presidential election, which they will not win anyway, due to the electoral college, but also in the popular vote! Lindsey Graham is right on this, for once!
Let me get this straight, Republicans are supposed to alienate their base, for only 8.4 percent of the electorate, which is the Hispanic vote, and at the same time increase the Democrat base by almost 11 million new voters at least? Let me ask you this, why don’t Democrats propose banning birth control pills as a way of winning pro-life voters? It would be insane and stupid for the Democrats , but at least they would try to win more than 8.4% of the electorate.
Even if Romney had gotten 70% of the Hispanic vote he would have lost anyway, as I have shown in previous post with the New York Times interactive electoral map and as shown here also:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-winning-hispanic-vote-would-not-be-enough-for-gop/article/2528730.
Furthermore here is an interesting article by A J Delgado as to why amnesty won’t win Republicans the Hispanic vote:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/sorry-gop-immigration-reform-won%E2%80%99t-win-you-the-latino-vote/
She makes the following points.
-Latinos will resent the added competition for jobs
-Those favorably affected don’t vote – and won’t for a long time (I actually do not agree with this one, I am pretty sure the next day after this bill passes, if it does, Chucky Schummer will hit the podium and say “its just not fair that millions who have been legalized have to wait so long to become citizens. But we had to do this because of the Republicans.” And the media and people like you Ron , will surely agree and begin pressuring to change the law or have the Courts interfere.)
-Latinos who are already citizens – and vote – don’t actually care much about immigration reform
-The GOP won’t even get the credit.
-Bush never received 44% of the Latino vote.
-The GOP will be blamed for the enforcement mechanisms.
-Immigration reform is unlikely to gain the GOP any actual converts.
-The GOP may lose some conservatives.
-Is there a single reliable poll or study actually proving the myth that the GOP’s “harsh rhetoric†on illegal immigrants… has driven away a significant portion of the Latino vote?
-The 1986 amnesty did nothing to gain the Latino vote.
-No, Latinos are not ‘natural conservatives. A 2012 Pew poll found that 75% of Hispanics “prefer a big government which provides more services†rather than a small government providing fewer services. (Meanwhile, only 41% of the general American public held this view.)And how did it break down generationally among Latinos? A whopping 81% of Latino immigrants held the pro-big-government stance,with the percentage only dropping to 72% amongst second-generation Latinos.
So if the Republicans pass amnesty, they will effectively cease to exist in the future and big government Democrats with the complicity of big government “moderate” establishment Republicans will practically govern forever. And it wouldn’t even matter if they take the country to bankruptcy and inflation, Democrats will still win because they will have a solid captive voting block that either believes in big government or is dependent on it one way or another, who will readily accept that the rich are too blame for all their woes.
Juan, even if immigration reform does not pass, the demographics favor the Democrats for the long term, as the white vote becomes smaller percentage wise. So the GOP is done, no matter what, as long as it goes to the far right, where a small minority are found. The Bible toters and social conservatives are like Don Quixote!
If that is true, then why do you worry about it? As a Democrat what more do you want? There you have Democrat Senator Menendez saying “I would tell my Republican colleagues, both in the House and the Senate, that the road to the White House comes through a road with a pathway to legalization, Without it, there will never be a road to the White House for the Republican Party.” http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV?id={037F01B9-D4D8-4B0B-95DC-2C2F1A03A120}&title=Senator-Menendez-Warns-GOP-There-Will-Never-Be-a-Road-to-the-WH-Without-Immigration-Reform .
I have never, in my life, heard the Democrats talk about how bad they feel when Republicans lose elections. Since when are Democrats interested in what’s best for Republicans, for conservatives? I don’t understand why Democrat Senator Menendez wants Republicans to win the White House. Can you explain to me why Senator Menendez wants the Republican Party to have a pathway to the White House? Seriously. And what about Candy Crowley? She says, “So, you think without passage, you can’t elect a Republican president?”!!! Do either of these two people really care about that?
Do you think Candy Crowley or anyone in the main stream media wants a Republican president elected? Come on, seriously! I’m not aware of Democrats expressing regret or sorrow or sadness over the fact that Republicans aren’t winning elections. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Then there’s this demographic shift they are blabbering about. What shift? All of a sudden Hispanics voted Democrat after voting Republican all these years? What demographic shift? The Hispanic turnout was less in 2012 than it was in 2008! The Hispanic percentage of the vote in 2012 was barely over 8%. Do you know where the increase in Obama turnout was? Obama’s vote totals were down from 2008 to 2012, but there was one demographic that was way up, and you know what it was? Elderly black women. Elderly black women pushed the percentage of the black vote Obama got even higher than it was in 2008. Ten percent more blacks voted in 2012 compared to 2008, even beating white voters. Eligible black voters turned out at rate of 66.2 percent, compared to 64.1 percent of eligible white voters. Only 48 percent of all eligible Hispanic voters went to the polls.Only two groups voted in larger numbers in 2012 compared to 2008: blacks aged 45-64, and blacks over the age of 65 — mostly elderly black women. In raw numbers, nearly twice as many blacks voted as Hispanics, and nine times as many whites voted as Hispanics. (98 million whites, 18 million blacks and 11 million Hispanics.) So, naturally, the Republican Party’s entire battle plan going forward is to win slightly more votes from 8.4 percent of the electorate! It’s just insane, and stupid!
Again, I just never knew that Menendez or any other Democrat wanted the Republicans to win the White House that badly. Have you ever seen them endorse a Republican? Am I missing something here? And finally McCain, by the way, in 2008, was very pro-amnesty. Did he win?
Info about Obama’s demographics: http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2013/05/president-obamas-teflon-coating.html
As the article says, a more diverse America ain’t buying what the Regressives are pushing. 🙂
Outstanding! Louisiana Senator Elbert Guillory (R-Opelousas) explains why he recently switched from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party. He discusses the history of the Republican Party, founded as an Abolitionist Movement in 1854. Guillory talks about how the welfare state is only a mechanism for politicians to control the black community.
Excellent article critiquing left-wing cynics: http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2013/06/a-few-thoughts-on-cynicism.html
🙂
A number of studies show that voters are not nearly as conservative as they think they are.
http://www.psmag.com/politics/youre-probably-not-as-conservative-as-you-think-60280/
Yes, Princess Leia, I have seen this, and cited it on my Facebook account! I comment on a lot of issues and articles there, to supplement what I write on here, and my entries on here are also on Facebook and Twitter!