25% of young Americans aged 18 to 24 eat every meal alone—'a virtual doubling of what it was two decades ago,' expert says
25% of young Americans aged 18 to 24 eat every meal alone—'a virtual doubling of what it was two decades ago,' expert says
The Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Mothers and Fathers Are Going Broke
The authors present quantitative data to demonstrate how American middle-class families have been left in a precarious financial position by increases in fixed living expenses, increased medical expenses, escalating real estate prices, lower employment security, and the relaxation of credit regulation.
The result has been a reshaping of the American labor force, such that many families now rely on having two incomes in order to meet their expenses. This situation represents a greater level of financial risk than that faced by single-income households: the inability of either adult to work, even temporarily, may result in loss of employment, and concomitant loss of medical coverage and the ability to pay bills. This may lead to bankruptcy or being forced to move somewhere less expensive, with associated decreases in educational quality and economic opportunity
Among the expenses driving the two-income trap are child care, housing in areas with good schools, and college tuition. Warren and Tyagi conclude that having children is the "single best predictor" that a woman will go bankrupt
Warren and Tyagi call stay-at-home mothers of past generations "the most important part of the safety net", as the non-working mother could step in to earn extra income or care for sick family members when needed. However, Warren and Tyagi dismiss the idea of return to stay-at-home parents, and instead propose policies to offset the loss of this form of insurance.
Warren and Tyagi attempt to overturn the "overconsumption myth" that Americans' financial instabilities are the result of frivolous spending – they note, for instance, that families are spending less on clothing, food (including meals out), and large appliances, when adjusted for inflation, than a generation prior.
Historical context.
Inflation started becoming a problem in the late 1960s. LBJ wanted to have a massive Vietnam War without raising taxes, so he printed money. Nixon ran as a 'peace candidate' and then tripled down on Johnson's policies. For a while, running the steel mills 24/7 to make bombs was popular with the Unions and Wall Street, but when the Arab Oil boycott hit everything went off the rails.
Jimmy Carter hire Paul Volker to run the Fed; Volker's plan worked but Carter lost in 1980 and Reagan got the credit. Worse, Reagan let the banks print money to fund the 'go-go' 1980s.
In 1968, middle class was one income supporting a family of four. In 1992, when Bush Sr. was done, 'middle class' was two incomes. During the same time, $1 million went from being a vast fortune to what a rich guy paid for a party.
We should entertain the idea that this is the effect, not the cause, of the problem. That we have cause and effect in reverse.
I’m guessing they don’t want everyone knowing their only source of food is hot pockets.
♫ Alone Pockets ♫
wait, what do the other 75% do?
Oh the other 3/4 can't afford to eat regularly.
Eat with their two friends.
I eat lunch mostly alone. Dinners maybe about half or 2/3rds with someone. But I'm well older than 18-24 :(
Part of why I make it a point to cook for my people as often as I can
I tried cooking my people but the neighbors complained.
I mean... through the 18-24 area, I pretty much ate every meal alone.
Still do at 38.
Did you go to college?
I'm close-ish to your age and college is the reason I basically never ate alone. When I was in the dorms, my roommate or friends and I almost always went to the dining halls together. If I had to catch lunch on my own due to a weird schedule or whatevs, I'd chat up somebody new and (hopefully) make a friend. Then when I was in an apartment, my roommates and I ate together to save money. But I went to a school with a big campus, far away from where I grew up.