The Current Job Market Is Shockingly Bad For 20-Something Men

[name not needed]

The Great Recession was disastrous across all worker demographics, but it was especially bad for men in their 20s.
While a greater percentage of men than women are still employed full-time, women have fared much better in the recent past, according to a new study from the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce (CEW). As traditional blue-collar jobs have declined, replaced by positions that demand more skills and education, 20-something men have struggled to stay employed, while women have pursued more advanced degrees that help them in today's market.

"For men, this is kind of a wake up call," says Anthony Carnevale, director of the Georgetown CEW. "The prospects are declining and what prospects there are aren't going to last. It's taking a while for the blue-collar economy to melt down, but it's melting."

In the last decade, the share of men ages 26 to 30 employed full-time fell from 80% in 2000 to 65% in 2012, the study finds. Over the same period, the proportion of women employed full-time in that age bracket also declined, but only from 56% to 50% — a drop of six percentage points as opposed to men's 15:



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-current-job-market-is-shockingly-bad-for-20-something-men-2013-9#ixzz2gQXWWZrp

[lumberjack_jeff]

1. I got your "male privilege" right here.

This is the employment to population ratio among men 16 and over

This is the employment to population ratio among women 16 and over

[Gravitycollapse]

2. You will notice that the ratio is still higher for men. Which kind of destroys your point.

[name not needed]

3. Is this part of your "intellectual castration" plan?

Because I see no reason for you to be posting here.

[Gravitycollapse]

5. It's part of my plan to counter stupidity.

[Major Nikon]

9. Then you have no business here

This isn't GD and if that's the kind of discourse you want, I suggest you go back there.

[Gravitycollapse]

11. Right. This is the place for posting pictures of women and complaining about getting paid more.

[Major Nikon]

13. I'm not going to argue the point

You can either be civil or you can leave or be shown the door.

[Gravitycollapse]

15. Just don't think that holding it open for me will get you laid.

[Major Nikon]

17. You're not my type

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=302048&sub=trans

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. "complaining about getting paid more"

Let's explore this, as well as your qualifications for "countering stupidity".

How much more are men paid for (qualitatively and quantitatively) the same work? Bonus points if your answer won't fit on a bumper sticker.

[HappyMe]

19. Your reply 15 is pretty stupid.

[hrmjustin]

7. The point is valid. And posters have the right to give their opinion.

[lumberjack_jeff]

21. The fact that men are more likely to work outside the home is not a metric of privilege.

And posters participate in protected groups only to the extent that they are not doing so with the intent to disrupt and/or habitually post on topics inconsistent with the SOP.

[hrmjustin]

22. I understand the point of the protected group but the poster made a valid point.

The response from the OP seemed overboard.

[lumberjack_jeff]

23. The merits of the point are addressed in posts #4 and #8.

The point I made in post #2 and #4 is that being less employable (and at lower wages) than your grandfather isn't privilege.

As I noted elsewhere, it isn't up to anyone to prove the negative. This generation of young men have a doubled likelihood of unemployment at 28% lower wages than their grandparents who started work in the 1970's. Please explain to us why this constitutes privilege.

[hrmjustin]

24. I am not really here to argue whether you were right or wrong.

My thought was that the point was valid and could be argued as you did in your replies.

My only thoughts were that post number 3 I believe seemed a bit off. I did not mean to disrupt anything here.

[lumberjack_jeff]

25. I'm not suggesting that you are being disruptive.

But you have expressed an opinion that GC's point is valid. I am interested to know why you think this to be the case.

[hrmjustin]

26. The poster said "You will notice that the ratio is still higher for men".

That is true according to you chart. That was my point when I said valid point. The second part of the statement I was not agree or disagreeing with.

[lumberjack_jeff]

27. Okay, thanks. n/t

[hrmjustin]

28. YW!

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. Here's what's happening to wages

This is due to the systematic denial of education to men. The root cause of the shape of this graph has been described as a "great accomplishment".

I assume from the fact that since your profile indicates that the men's group is your favorite group, that you are a man. If so, you're economically worse off than your father OR your grandfather.

Don't take it personally, it was a policy decision.

Over the past 40 years, a period in which U.S. GDP per capita more than doubled after adjusting for inflation, the annual earnings of the median prime-aged male have actually fallen by 28 percent. Indeed, males at the middle of the wage distribution now earn about the same as their counterparts in the 1950s! This decline reflects both stagnant wages for men on the job, and the fact that, compared with 1969, three times as many men of working age don’t work at all.

[Gravitycollapse]

6. That men still suffer does not discredit male privilege.

Maybe you should really think about that before you post something else that doesn't disprove male privilege.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. I don't think it's up to me to prove the negative.

It is up to those who blame their high cost of dry cleaning on the pervasive nature of male privilege to prove their point.

[Major Nikon]

8. Per the Census, 96.5% of stay at home parents are moms

Which kind of destroys your point.

The current unemployment rate for men is higher than women and has been consistently so since 1980.
http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr613.pdf

[Gravitycollapse]

10. How on God's green earth does that destroy my point?

[Major Nikon]

12. Because you assume unequal outcomes means unequal opportunity

Which is a piss poor assumption when a far higher percentage of women voluntarily remove themselves from the workforce. The option to stay at home or go back to work, is an example of privilege. You seem to think the reverse is true which is ridiculous.

The whole point of the OP was that men suffer disparately during a recession which the unemployment figures demonstrate.

[Gravitycollapse]

14. Did you just argue that stay at home moms are a part of "female privilege?" You're joking.

Clearly you can't be serious.

[Major Nikon]

16. ...

More than 88% of moms who stay home do so primarily to care for children, the report says; 42% of stay-at-home moms had children under age 3. Thirty-nine percent of moms and 30% of dads were under age 35.

About 98,000 dads also stay home, but only 16% say they were out of the labor force to care for children; others cite illness or disability (45%); could not find work (11%), going to school (9%) or other reasons.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/bythenumbers/2004-11-30-census-momshome_x.htm