Prof. Galloway: “Do We Love Our Children?”
If you are a child advocate, a parent or grandparent, somebody who works with children, or somebody who just cares about our future, the TED 2024 Talk by NYU Professor Scott Galloway entitled “How the U.S. is Destroying Young People’s Future” is a must-watch.
In addition to his compelling TED Talk, Prof. Galloway dives into these issues in his podcast episode titled “No Mercy / No Malice: War on the Young.” Although the content overlaps to some extent, the episode inspires further introspection and thought about our nation’s priorities and future.
According to Galloway, as narrated by George Hahn in his podcast, our future is threatened by “America’s war on the young.”
The American Dream, once a fundamental story about the promise and hope of America, has eroded. Galloway explains:
We’ve broken the social contract that binds America. Hard work, play by the rules, and you’ll be better off than your parents were. For the first time in our nation’s history, this is no longer true. Today's 25-year-olds make less than their parents and grandparents did at the same age. Yet they carry student debt loads unimaginable to earlier generations.
This “war on young people” is illustrated by this chart that Galloway presented in his TED Talk, which highlighted the significant challenges facing different generations at the age of 25.
Source: Scott Galloway, Podcast Episode, No Mercy / No Malice: War on the Young
Much of this disparity is due to structural economic changes that have favored “capital” (benefitting the elderly) over “sweat” and labor (younger workers). Between the tax code and growth in the stock market and real estate holdings, Galloway says these are part of a “series of transfers of wealth from earners (youth) to owners (seniors).”
Galloway adds that this trend is often driven by political decisions and is compounded by how the nation chooses to invest its resources. On the podcast, he explains:
In 1985, the federal government spent 3 times more per capita on seniors than it did on kids. By 2019, that ratio has risen to 8 times. We've cut senior poverty from 17% in the 1970s to 9% today, which is admirable. But child poverty has risen over that same period, from 16% to 19%.
Source: Scott Galloway, TED 2024, How the U.S. is destroying young people’s future
Money matters.
As Galloway points out, the inflation growth of Social Security in 2023 alone was $135 billion and Congress has set it up to occur automatically. In contrast, an extension of the improved Child Tax Credit would have cost $11 billion, but the U.S. Senate allowed that to expire. These are policy and political decisions.
Source: Scott Galloway, Podcast Episode, No Mercy / No Malice: War on the Young
Galloway adds:
The “demo” in democratic is failing us, as seniors vote seniors into office who then vote themselves more money. With neither age limits nor term limits, and incumbent reelection rates over 90%, congressional seats have become lifetime appointments.
Source: Scott Galloway, Podcast Episode, No Mercy / No Malice: War on the Young
In fact, the system is set up so that Congress does not even have to “vote themselves more money” because the adult portion of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid automatically grow for both population and inflation while the same is not true for many children’s programs. For example, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is intended to help low-income children and families, but it is financed as a block grant that awards states the same amount of money today that it did back in 1997.
As the Congressional Research Service (CRS) explains:
The TANF block grant has not been increased since the enactment of the 1996 welfare law. There has been no adjustment for inflation or population change. From 1997 to 2023, the basic TANF block grant has lost 47% of its value to inflation.
Even within TANF, funding has been diverted by politicians to projects that have little to nothing to do with helping low-income children and families.
This would never be tolerated for senior citizens.
A Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) report, Budgeting for the Next Generation: Does the Budget Process Prioritize Children?, adds that the federal budget process systemically disadvantages and shortchanges our nation’s children.
CRFB’s analysis concluded:
While much of spending on adults is mandatory, spending on children is disproportionately discretionary and thus must be reviewed and renewed with other appropriations.
Spending on children is disproportionately temporary, and it requires far more regular reauthorization and appropriation than programs for adults.
Spending on adults is rarely limited while spending on children is often capped, constraining what can be spent for most major children’s programs.
Most programs for children lack built-in growth, leading spending on children to erode relative to spending on adults and relative to the economy.
Programs for children lack dedicated revenue and thus lack the political advantage and protection of programs for seniors that enjoy this benefit.
Growing spending on adults is burdening younger generations by driving up debt and thus reducing future income and increasing costs.
As CRFB explains:
These features of the current budget process are increasingly leading spending on children to be crowded out, as the burden we place on children rises.
Consequently, if nothing is fundamentally changed with the budget, the Urban Institute estimates that the federal share of the adult portion of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid would rise from 33% in 2021 to an estimated 49% in 2032. In contrast, the children’s share of all federal spending is projected to drop from 9.4% in 2021 to 6.4% to 2032.
Source: Hannah Daly, Cary Lou, and Heather Hahn, Urban Institute, Federal Entitlement Spending on Adults Is More Than Triple Total Children’s Spending, Feb. 2023.
Galloway’s Challenge and Recommendations
Galloway is not one to just admire the problem. He offers recommendations and a challenge us to do better by our children.
He opens his podcast asking:
Do we love our children? We say we do, but as a society, our actions suggest otherwise.
If we actually care about our kids, he argues that we must transform our nation’s priorities in a number of ways, including:
Investing in Education: Increase funding and educational opportunities by measures, such as enacting universal pre-K and demanding higher education stop building their endowments, and instead, offer young people an affordable, quality education without the burden of crippling student debt.
Promoting Economic Policies More Favorable to Young Workers and Families: Implement policies that create job opportunities and ensure fair wages for young people entering the workforce.
Rebalancing Government Spending: Shift some of the financial focus from senior entitlements to programs that directly benefit children and young families, such as a “negative income tax” or fully refundable Child Tax Credit to cut child poverty and create a more balanced and equitable society.
Encouraging Political Engagement: Inspire younger generations to engage in the political process, ensuring their voices are heard and their needs are addressed by policymakers.
On this latter point, the Professor calls for term limits, which is something I have opposed in the past because it would reduce the experience and competence of policymakers and greatly empower the bureaucracy over elected officials. However, Galloway makes compelling arguments for term limits from the standpoint that greater turnover would allow younger generations to become more engaged in the political process, including as political leaders themselves, and for political leaders to be more understanding and responsive to the needs, concerns, and challenges of our children and youth.
Furthermore, in light of the Supreme Court’s endorsement of rigged electoral maps and gerrymandering (including racial gerrymandering) and this presidential election being a contest between two white men over the age of 80, we may need term limits for politicians or, at the very least, term limits for Supreme Court justices who also wish to use “originalism doctrine” to roll back progress on human rights for people of color, women, and children by decades or even centuries.
Between the TED Talk and podcast, Galloway’s insights are a crafty and forceful call to action. His urging of a full reexamination of our societal values, policies, and priorities as it pertains to our young people is welcome and much needed.
If you would like to help ensure that children and their needs, concerns, and best interests are no longer ignored by policymakers, please join First Focus Campaign for Children as an “Ambassador for Children” or become a paid subscriber to help us continue our work. We do not have dedicated financial support for this work and rely on readers like yourself to support it. Thank you for your consideration.