« What? No Golden Globe For Alito's Wife? | Main | Victory is at hand »

January 23, 2006

It's not the gays or liberalism. It's economics.

Jeff Jacoby has noticed that there's been an exodus of people from Massachusetts. He's decided that it's because of liberal policies and gay marriage, since everyone knows that expanding civil rights makes life intolerable for people.

Problem is, he's wrong, wrong, wrong.

He's not wrong about people leaving Massachusetts. He's wrong about why. And it's not just Massachusetts that is seeing a mass exodus of people--especially young adults. Generation X has been the object of all sorts of finger-wagging on the part of pundits--we're apathetic, we buy too much crap, we are frivolous, we are irresponsible. But the fact is, we're bearing the brunt of misguided economic and political policies since the Regan era.

Housing takes up more of people's paychecks now than it did before. Rents and mortgages have skyrocketed, while wages have stagnated. And before anyone goes on and on about how we don't need the big ticket vacations and the huge homes and to live in the city, consider the actual reality: most of us live in modest homes, don't take big-ticket vacations (I was finally able to afford a vacation after being back in the US for six years), and don't buy Hummers and plasma TV's and piles of designer threads.

And I, for one, am sick and tired of the idea that that's all we do.

People are leaving Massachusetts--and New York City, and San Francisco, and Chicago, and every other metropolitan area--because they can no longer afford to live there. Because when you are young and starting a family, you have to go where you can afford a home. And many cities push out families with kids via stealth policies--only give permits for two-bedroom condos or retirement communities, the better to gain taxpayers and save on school expenses. The homes that are available to buy are now too often starter mansions, those godawful, souless monstrosities with all the soul and charecter of a hotel lobby.

People are leaving large metropolitan areas not because of liberalism (which is hard to find economically, frankly), or gay marriage, but because we cannot afford to stay. The problem is, the places that we can afford often don't have jobs that pay well. Wages have stagnated while costs have risen.

And it gets worse. Unlike the Baby Boomers, who had much lower tuition (even when the figures are adjusted for today's dollars) and Pell Grants, we have had to content with high tuition and the exhoration to simply take out student loans. Most adults have a large student loan bill they must pay back.

Now, we don't have to go to college, but if we don't go, we'll be in pretty bad shape. Where college used to be the ticket into professional careers, it is now what you need for entry-level jobs. Secretaries in the Boston area are expected to have a bachelor's degree. Our wages have not increased with productivity or inflation--we are actually working much more for much less. A man armed only with a high school diploma made the equivalent of $42,630 in 1972 (2002 dollars). He would make $29,647 today. A male college graduate in 1972 would make $42,087 (2002 dollars), as opposed to a median of $48,955 today. (A female college graduate would have make $36,850 in 1972 (2002 dollars), and would make $40,021 today). (Strapped, Tamara Draut, p. 80).  Many of us spoiled rotten slackers actually work more hours for less money, are more likely to be uninsured, and are more likely to be temps.  It's actually quite galling when you think of the gains corporations have made in productivity and profit--which has gone into the pockets of executives.  So much for the rising tide raising all boats.   

You can see more hair-raising statistics here. 

In light of this, all of the preaching about the latte factor, and bringing your lunch to work, forgoing new outfits, and not buying a car until you can pay for it outright rings hollow. Everyone I know does these things--we are hardly eating out every day or buying out Ann Taylor. And while it's prudent to save as much money as you can--and I do bring my coffee--that small bit of savings would be wiped out in the event of a major health disaster, a major car accident, or sudden unemployment. And that would only be available after saving our coffee and lunch money over several years. And frankly, I have yet to see a used car in good condition that costs less than eight to ten grand. I don't recall anyone having that kind of money on hand to pay for it outright, and living in less expensive areas usually means living in a place with no real public transportation to speak of. Living close to one's work in the city means paying much more for housing.

Between stagnant wages, rising housing costs (which have far outpaced wages), and student loan debts, it's little wonder that young adults and young families have to move to less-expensive areas. Maybe they live with their parents to save up, or they double up in the bedrooms with multiple roommates to save, and then move. But I'm here to tell you, it isn't gay marriage or liberalism.

Posted by at January 23, 2006 11:43 AM