While reading an article by Adrian Slywotzky on how the lack of basic research investment over the past 20 years has doomed the US economy to a slow “recovery”, I decided to take a look at the raw BLS numbers myself. You don’t need a PhD. in economics to spot the “oh-sh*t” part of this chart:

source: BLS

The average annual rate of job growth in the U.S. over the 1980s and 1990s was around 1.9% a year. The annual rate of job growth over the 2000s (the ‘00s?) was… 0.2%! Even if you take out the 4.3% decline of 2009, the 10-year annual growth rate was only 0.8%, less than half the rate of the prior decade.

Here’s a more shocking number: If job growth had continued at the historic 1.8%/year rate since 2000, we should have north of 154 million jobs by now, instead of the actual 130 million. That means that we are short 23 million jobs for this decade! That’s about the population of Taiwan, and more than 50% higher than the official unemployment rate (14.9 million this month).

It gets worse if you also factor in record numbers of gen-Ys entering the labor force. There are currently 2.7 million more 20-something year olds (gen-Y) than there are 30-something year olds (gen-X):

source: U.S. Census

If something isn’t done to keep all those high-energy individuals gainfully employed, one can only shudder to think about the possible consequences.

Picture by aussiegall

If the 80s is the decade of excess, and the 90s the decade of irrational exuberance, then this last decade (the 00s?) will surely be remembered as the decade of fear. Fear of terrorism, fear of economic collapse, fear of the future.

The important question is what will the next decade be known as? What will we make it be known for?

It’s easy to just extrapolate and think of extremes: i.e.  either there will be the second great depression, or a return to corporate excess, or a descent into spiraling conflict. These are all possibilities, but they have always been possibilities in every decade, and will always be possibilities that we must assiduously guard against.

It is also tempting to place our hopes on miraculous new breakthroughs that will usher in a new global golden age. Will green energy, biotechnology, and medical science save us in the nick of time? Certainly, there will be an increasing rate of advances and innovations that will disrupt the status quo. However, the past 15 years of the Internet provides a stark picture of how quickly certain things change, and yet how much many things remain the same.

The Internet and globalization promised to create a global village that would ensure world peace, and bring education and the means of self-sufficiency to millions. This, in large part, has actually happened – Indian call centers and Chinese manufacturing have literally helped lift millions of people out of poverty; the largest advance in human history by any stretch. Yet, these two symbols have ironically become either so mundane as to be ignored, or synonymous with evil corporatization.

The problem is that we have removed ourselves from the equation. We expect technology to solve the world’s problems and keep things stable so we can ignore them and get on with our own lives. We have created a global market, but are failing miserably at building global relationships, let alone a global village. When we buy made-in-China goods at Walmart or call our credit card company’s operators in Bangalore, we are practicing drive-through globalization. We have to start thinking more as citizens, not just as consumers.

We need to build meaningful and lasting relationships with people across the world. World peace must be stitched together one relationship at a time. Today, we have the means to instantly communicate with billions of people virtually anywhere, free-of-charge. Yet, we lack the motivation or the conventions to do so. While there is a huge opportunity to provide better contexts and conventions for a global community, it also comes down to our individual participation. Rather than hold back, we need to just jump in – start now, and learn along the way.

So, I humbly propose that we make the next decade the decade of participation. To dedicate ourselves to meaningful social and global participation, in whatever form we choose. Participation puts us in the driver’s seat. We have the means to create the world we want, we just need to realize that we do, and act upon it.

How do you plan to participate more in the world in 2010?

Halls of Learning by Josiah Mackenzie

One of my personal passions is to drastically improve our means of education. My initial focus is on college-level education, which represents the largest investment we make before we even enter the workforce. According to Forbes, the average public 4 year program costs $18,000 a year (for tuition, fees, and room and board), while private colleges average $37,000 a year, with elite schools costing $50,000 a year and up. This means you’ll need at least $70,000 for a 4 year program. That’s a lot of money.

So what do we get (or think we get) in return for becoming economic slaves? Let’s try to break-down the total received value from a typical 4-year college experience. Here’s my stab at a list:

1. Knowledge, information, and instruction (60%, ~$49K out of a $70K 4-year budget)

Not surprisingly, I'd expect that the main thing I'm paying for is education.

2. Certification (10%, ~$7K)

There's value in graduating from a known school vs. just reading a bunch of books. The school is saying "yes, we think this person is at a known ability level." By attending, you are in-effect buying lifetime membership in the school’s “brand”.

3. Living and social experiences (15%, ~$10K)

For most people, going to college is also learning to live by yourself for the first time, dealing with diverse people, and making important choices in a controlled environment.

4. Inspiration and motivation (5%, ~$3,500)

Having people who you can look up to, and who will motivate you is valuable. So is having a nice environment, the arts, and similarly motivated people around you.

Can any of these be cut or obtained much more cheaply? Could you obtain most of the knowledge for much less than $49K in much less than 4 years? I think the answer is yes, and we need revolutionary changes.

What do you think?

Here's how Americans voted in the 2008 presidential elections by age group (from CNN):

Note the overwhelming (66%) majority of votes for Obama in the generally more liberal 8-29 group, which more than offset the more conservative 65+ age group that preferred McCain.

The great thing about targeting younger voters is, of course, that they will be around for a longer time. If the Democrats can expand this base across Gen-Y, it will be a game changer in American politics as that generation replaces the baby boomers in the years to come.

I just watched Susan Blackmore's talk at TED.

I believe that the true danger a meme (or gene, or teme) poses to the underlying replicator (organism, i.e. us) is that it can create a cascading effect that circumvents homeostasis.

By definition, every stable organism or ecosystem has a form of self-regulation that prevents catastrophic changes in state. However, just like a virus, a meme has the effect of perturbing the regular behavior of the replicator as it spreads among their population. Normally, the effects may be benign or inconsequential (e.g. a slight fever here and there, or some excess pollution that is quickly cleaned up).

However, certain types of memes (take consumerism for example) can perturb the ecosystem to such an extent, in such a rapid way, that its replicators' homeostasis is unable to cope with the change in time, to the extent that the system spins out of control. This is the catastrophe that is staring us as a species in the face right now.