RSS Feed MenuKevin Drum at Mother Jones notes my last post and then wonders, “What I’m more curious about is what this looked like in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Was optimism about our kids’ futures substantially higher then?”
The results I showed were mostly from a fantastic database of polling questions called “Polling the Nations”, which I recommend to everyone (though it’s not free, it’s not that expensive relative to other resources). That’s why they only start in the mid-80s, and there’s a gap between the mid-00s and the two or three polls I cite from this year and last (my look at this question was a few years ago).
Anyway, Kevin’s query reminded me that there’s another compilation of polling questions that is also amazing—the book, What’s Wrong, by public opinion giants Everett Carll Ladd and Karlyn Bowman. And it’s a free pdf.
So, let me add some results to those I posted before. I’m focusing, to the extent possible, on questions that ask parents about their own children. When people are asked about “kids today” instead of their own kids, they are much more likely to be Debbie Downers—a phenomenon that journalist David Whitman dubbed the “I’m OK, They’re Not” syndrome, which is much more general than questions about children’s future living standards. Also, let’s be careful to distinguish between levels and trends.
First, let’s look at the confidence parents have that life for their children will be better.
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1973)—26% were very confident, 36% only fairly confident, and 30% not at all confident
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1974)—25% very confident vs. 41% only fairly vs. 28% not at all
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1975)—23% vs. 39% vs. 32%
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1976)—31% vs. 39% vs. 25%
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1979)—25% vs. 41% vs. 29%
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1982)—20% vs. 44% vs. 32%
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1983)—24% vs. 38% vs. 33%
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1988)—20% vs. 45% vs. 28%
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1992)—17% vs. 46% vs. 31%
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1995)—17% vs. 44% vs. 34%
· Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard (2000)—46% said they were confident that life for their children will be better than it has been for them, vs. 48% saying no.
That last one shouldn’t be directly compared with the others—not only did it only offer a yes-or-no response, it was also asked of all adults. More on that in a sec. What we see from the Roper surveys is a fairly steady decline in solid confidence, but not much of a trend in pessimism. The main dynamic is that parents have moved from being “very” confident to “only fairly” confident. It looks like there may have been a small decline in optimism from the late 1980s through the mid-1990s. But it’s interesting that from 1973 to 1995, between 61% and 70% were at least fairly confident that their kids would be better off.
The Washington Post polling result provides a nice opportunity to look at the “I’m OK, They’re Not” pattern, since all adults were asked the question, even though fewer than half had children under 18 in their household. In a poll my employer* commissioned from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and Public Opinion Strategies, we asked parents about their expectations for their children’s living standards. We asked people who had no children under 18 at home about “kids today”. Pooling everyone together, 47% of adults said kids would have higher living standards. But the parents were much more optimistic about their own children, with 62 percent saying their kids’ living standards would improve. So the Washington Post result might have been right in the range of the Roper results had the question been asked only of parents.
Other polls have asked whether parents think their children will be better off when they are the same age:
· ABC News/Washington Post (1981)—47% said better off vs. 43% not better off (non-parents told to imagine they had children)
· ABC News/Washington Post (1982)—43% vs. 41%
· ABC News/Washington Post (1983)—44% vs. 45%
· ABC News/Washington Post (1985)—62% vs. 29%
· ABC News/Washington Post (1986)—74% vs. 19%
· ABC News/Washington Post (1991)—66% vs. 25%
· Newsweek (1994)—47% vs. 39% worse off (question uses “better off” rather than “better off financially”, asked only of adults with children under 18 in the household)
· ABC News/Washington Post (1995)—54% vs. 39%
· ABC News/Washington Post (1996)—52% vs. 39%
· Pew Research Center (1996)—51% said their children will be better off than them when they grow up (question uses “better off” rather than “better off financially”, asked only of adults with children under 18 in the household)
· Pew Research Center (1997)—51%
· Pew Research Center (1999)—67%
So optimism declined between the mid-1980s and early-1990s, recovered starting in the mid-1990s, and generally remained above early 1980s levels (when the economy was in recession). Except for, 1983 majorities or pluralities hold the optimistic position.
Another series of polls asked parents whether their children will have a better life than they have had. They also indicate a decline in optimism from the late 1980s to the early 1990s and a subsequent rebound:
· BusinessWeek (1989)—59% said their children will have a better life than they had (and 25% said about as good)
· BusinessWeek (1992)—34% said their children will have a better life than they had (and 33% said about as good)
· BusinessWeek (1995)—46% said their children will have a better life than they have had (and 27% said about as good)
· BusinessWeek (1996)—50% expected their children would have a better life than they have had (and 26% said about as good)
· Harris Poll (2002)—41% expected children will have a better life than they have had (and 29% said about as good)
Strong majorities thought the children would have as good a life as them or better, and while more people thought their kids would have a better life than thought they would have a worse life, optimism failed to win a majority of parents in a number of years. The trends appear to reveal a decline in optimism from the mid- or late-1990s to the early 2000s. Considering all of these trends thus far, a fairly clear cyclical pattern is emerging, as Kevin observed in his post.
The early 2000s dip also shows up in Harris Poll questions asking whether parents feel good about their children’s future:
· Harris Poll (1997)—48% felt good about their children’s future
· Harris Poll (1998)—65%
· Harris Poll (1999)—60%
· Harris Poll (2000)—63%
· Harris Poll (2001)—56%
· Harris Poll (2002)—59%
· Harris Poll (2003)—59%
· Harris Poll (2004)—63%
The dip is revealed to be related to the 2001 recession, as optimism rebounded thereafter, again following the business cycle. Again, solid majorities generally take the optimistic position.
The longest time series available asks parents whether their children’s standard of living will be higher than theirs. Unfortunately, it appears that most of these polls ask the question of adults without children too:
· Cambridge Reports/Research International (1989)—52% said their children’s standard of living will be higher vs. 12% lower
· Cambridge Reports/Research International (1992)—47% vs. 15%
· Cambridge Reports/Research International (1993)—49% vs. 17% lower
· Cambridge Reports/Research International (1994)—43% vs. 22% lower
· General Social Survey (1994)—45% said their children’s standard of living will be better vs. 20% worse
· Cambridge Reports/Research International (1995)—46% vs. 17% lower
· General Social Survey (1996)—47%
· General Social Survey (1998)—55%
· General Social Survey (2000)—59%
· General Social Survey (2002)—61%
· General Social Survey (2004)—53%
· General Social Survey (2006)—57%
· General Social Survey (2008)—53%
· Economic Mobility Project (2009)—47% said their children’s standard of living will be better (62% among those with kids under 18)
· Pew Research Center (2010)—45% said their children’s standard of living will be better vs. 26% worse
Once again the cyclical pattern emerges, though it is not quite as clear in the mid-2000s. Optimism is far more prevalent than pessimism in every year, reaching majorities from the late 1990s until the current recession. Even today, optimism is no lower than in the mid-1990s, and the EMP poll implies that when looking just at parents with children under 18 living at home, solid majorities continue to believe their kids will have a higher living standard.
Taken together, there is very little evidence that a supposed stagnation in living standards is reflected in Americans’ concerns about how their children will do. The survey patterns show that parental optimism follows a cyclical pattern, generally is more prevalent than pessimism, and did not decline over time. In fact, we can compare beliefs in 1946 to 1997 for one question—whether “opportunities to succeed” (1946) or the “chance of succeeding” (1997) will be higher or lower than a same-sex parent’s has been:
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1946)—64% of men said their sons’ opportunities to succeed will be better than theirs (vs. 13% worse); 61% of women said their daughters’ opportunities to succeed will be better than theirs (vs. 20% worse)
· Princeton Religion Research Center (1997)—62% of men said their sons will have a better chance of succeeding than they did (vs. 21% worse); 85% of women said their daughters will have a better chance (vs. 7% worse)
As one would expect, mothers in 1946 believed their daughters would have more opportunity, but surprisingly that view was even more prominent in 1997. And among men, there was very little change. Notably, unemployment was slightly lower in 1946 than in 1997, so this isn’t a matter of apples to oranges.
Or even more strikingly, consider two polls asking the following question: Do you think your children’s opportunities to succeed will be better than, or not as good as, those you have? (If no children:) Assume that you did have children.
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1939)—61% better vs. 20% not as good vs. 10% same (question asked about opportunities of sons compared with fathers)
· Roper Starch Worldwide (1990)—61% better vs. 21% not as good vs. 12% same
While the 1939 question only refers to males, given the relatively low labor force participation of women at the time, it is perhaps still comparable to the 1990 question. However, the unemployment rate was 17.2% in 1939 compared with 5.6% in 1990. Still, the two are remarkably close.
OK, can we put this question to bed? Americans believe their children will do as well or better than they have done, and this belief hasn’t weakened over time. Now let’s get back to arguing about objective living standards rather than subjective fears about them.
* * *
* For the love of God, nothing you’ll ever read on my blog has anything to do with my job—there are people at Pew whose ulcers flare at employees’ side hustles like mine.
Originally published at The Empiricist Strikes Back.
elizajane // Aug 8, 2010 at 2:30 pm
These statistics surprise me. I wonder what the results of such a survey would be if you broke it down according to income level, according to profession, according to location.
I myself feel absolutely certain that my children will not have the opportunities that I had and will never have the standard of living we enjoy now. I feel that both within my own family and in the nation as a whole, the generation above mine (people now retired) are squandering the inheritance of the generation below mine (people now in school or college). This is true in all sorts of areas, from finance to the environment. I know I cannot give my children the opportunities I had, like private higher education. I don’t know how my daughter with a chronic health problem would ever have gotten insurance if it weren’t for the precarious health-care bill that just passed. There are so many ways in which I see their paths as being harder than mine that it often makes me quite angry. And I think of myself as a chronically optimistic person in general, so that my view of the children’s future is simply realism.
Who are all these people, then, who see a future of opportunity for the next generation, and what are they looking at?
jakester // Aug 9, 2010 at 1:21 am
I could care less about all this pop prognostications and opinions. I actually hope the future kids get a worse shot at things since most of them and their parents are such shallow, messed up ignoramuses.
roesch // Aug 9, 2010 at 11:25 am
My “kids” are adults and I can say that for various reasons of career choice and luck their material lives will not match mine, but that does not mean they do not enjoy life and find creative and productive ways to exist. That said the I know that the present generation of students I teach in a COE are facing diminishing job opportunities, some already laid off after only a year on the job. I think in terms of investment in education, and return on the dollar the middle class is coming up short.
Telly Davidson // Aug 9, 2010 at 5:27 pm
Roesch offers: “I think in terms of investment in education, and return on the dollar the middle class is coming up short.”
While Mr. Winship has done us a service by provoking this necessary discussion, I have a problem with Sybil-the-Soothsayer prognostications about “will my kids, grandkids, be better off”, etc. I was at the Television Critics Assn the other week, talking to a female colleague of mine, where I opined that I have always thought I’d have been far better off in a previous generation. “Not me,” she said. “When you look at what the options were for women, and the anti-Semitism that was around a generation or two ago…”
That’s the crux. A black or Latino child born today will have far more opportunities (cough, the Obamas, cough cough) than their grandparents, and women will never hear what That Girl and Mary Richards routinely did in their day: “Sorry, sweetie — I’m gonna hire a man for that.” But as far as the middle-class, across-the-board, suburban standard of living of mid-century where policemen and teachers and factory workers had lifetime jobs and VA loans and block-long station wagons and un-luxury-taxed Town Cars, where college was $3,000 a year and medical/law school was $10,000… it is at one with the rotary-dial phone, the Betamax, and the LP record.
Instead of encouraging people to wallow in resentment by making guesses and predictions to pollsters — when almost no one denies that their kids are in fact going to face far higher educational and competitive standards and less-secure jobs — we need to actually start changing the terms of the debate in this country from 1945-1980 or so dialog to something that offers real advice on HOW to Survive the 21st Century (and maybe even thrive in it).
PracticalGirl // Aug 9, 2010 at 9:29 pm
Telly- I so agree.
While I had the natural knee-jerk reaction that these stats and this article were intended to evoke (I’m one who think the collapse of the economy actually affords our kids some great opportunities, especially in home buying), I kept thinking: “Better” or “worse”- those are the only two choices?
How about “different”? Why not ask if, after witnessing a country on the brink of a Depression, the younger generations will be more savvy than their “bigger is better” parents? Shouldn’t we, as Telly asks, talk about how to lead the younger generation to not just survival but thriving success in a manner tha befits the 21st century?
My 19 year old son has gotten an abject lesson in how NOT to live (courtesy of my generation) in his current summer internship. He’s working for a large, public retail automotive organization. It’s a marketing gig that had him working for a month with the strategic and Internet marketing department but will have him for 2 months on a sales floor. DAMN good place to learn about financial responsibility, irresponsibility and the consequences of living beyond your means. After helping to jam three couples into cars that they are paying far too much for (because of bad credit and high interest rates) he’s begun to understand the lessons that too many “grown ups” never learned. Live within your means, be happy with what you have, pay as you go etc. An eyes-wide-open moment, and I KNOW that he’ll be better off than most adults I know, simply because he’s seized it and realized there is another way.