We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Close

Jilted Generation: How Britain Has Bankrupted Its Youth (Kindle Daily Deal - 99p)

NewboldNewbold

Born after September 1979? Struggling to find a decent job, even though you're a graduate? Can't afford to buy or even rent a house? No prospects? Welcome to the jilted generation. Things go wrong in society all the time, but rarely do they go wrong for an entire generation. Drawing on their own startling new research and writing with an irresistible polemical energy, twenty-something journalists Ed Howker and Shiv Malik argue that, in stark contrast to their parents' generation, millions of young Britons today face the most uncertain future since the early 1930s. Radical, angry and passionate, Jilted Generation takes a closer look at who's to blame for locking out Britain's youth - and leaving our country not just broken but broke.


About the Author
Ed Howker, 29, is associate editor of The Spectator, previously worked for Channel 4 Dispatches and The Independent. Shiv Malik, 29, was listed among the Evening Standard's most influential Londoners in 2008. Between them they have written for the New Statesman, Observer, Private Eye and the Sunday Times and The Daily Telegraph and have appeared on Sky News, Front Row, Newsnight, the Jeremy Vine Show as well as Radio 4's PM and The Moral Maze.

TIP: Get the Best Deals In Your Inbox

or

All Comments (24)

Jump to unread Post a Comment
1
    Joe90_guy
    I was born in 1956 and I would gladly swap places with my kids! You might not have noticed but you grew up with central heating, computer games, DVDs, foreign holidays, decent food and loans from the Bank of Dad. All we got was boils and tinned peas!
    DoubleDown77
    Joe90_guy
    I was born in 1956 and I would gladly swap places with my kids! You might not have noticed but you grew up with central heating, computer games, DVDs, foreign holidays, decent food and loans from the Bank of Dad. All we got was boils and tinned peas!


    I think you might be missing the point. Do you have a decent job that's appropriate to your qualifications? Do you own a house? How difficult was it for you you to get a mortgage? Frankly all the computer games, DVDs and foreign holidays aren't worth a damn when you're denied the fundamentals of life; the things that people of your generation probably took for granted. Now which would you prefer; a few meaningless luxuries or a solid foundation upon which to build a meaningful life? If you really have decided that it's the former then I'd be more than willing to swap with you.

    Edited By: DoubleDown77 on Mar 26, 2012 10:56
    leeparsons
    DoubleDown77
    Joe90_guy
    I was born in 1956 and I would gladly swap places with my kids! You might not have noticed but you grew up with central heating, computer games, DVDs, foreign holidays, decent food and loans from the Bank of Dad. All we got was boils and tinned peas!


    I think you might be missing the point. Do you have a decent job that's appropriate to your qualifications? Do you own a house? How difficult was it for you you to get a mortgage? Frankly all the computer games, DVDs and foreign holidays aren't worth a damn when you're denied the fundamentals of life; the things that people of your generation probably took for granted. Now which would you prefer; a few meaningless luxuries or a solid foundation upon which to build a meaningful life? If you really have decided that it's the former then I'd be more than willing to swap with you.

    I totally agree with you mate. He has missed the point, that to get started off is completely impossiable. Why is it that so many people are living at home longer, or house sharing on the dozen. If thing's arent that hard then?
    The problem I feel is that people who where the cause the problem, have been let off scot free, as far as i am conerned. Shame on the goverment for letting this happen. I certainly know what I would do, but apprantley we are Eu and have human rights.

    Edited By: leeparsons on Mar 26, 2012 11:07
    crazylegs
    Wake up you muppets and go and get lives, its just as hard regardless of the year you were born, Lets get the violins out shall we!! Jeez talk about mollycoddled generation more like!
    dwain
    Call me lucky, but I have 3 kids all born after 1979, all have good jobs, all have a fantastic work ethic, and incidentally none have degrees in the arts or other equally useless qualifications. Study the right subjects, work hard and you will find a job. Only the youngest lives at home. Don't expect it all on a plate, it won't happen!
    DoubleDown77
    crazylegs
    Wake up you muppets and go and get lives, its just as hard regardless of the year you were born, Lets get the violins out shall we!! Jeez talk about mollycoddled generation more like!


    And another person who just doesn't get it. There's a generation of people who have worked hard, yet found it impossible to get the things their parents took for granted. House prices have go through the roof and nobody, even if they are paid what would have been considered a decent wage, can afford the mortgages to buy one.

    Try sending out literally hundreds of job applications for positions for which you are amply qualified, without receiving a single response, negative or otherwise. This is, perhaps, a cliché, but try walking a mile in another man's shoes before you judge them.

    This is not the result of a "mollycoddled generation" as you put it. There's something more at work here. The fact that you've resorted to idiotic name calling really does say it all. The fact is, us muppets (as you've so charming named us) have been trying to do exactly what you've suggested; we've been trying to get ourselves lives, yet our every attempt has been frustrated. Perhaps you should pick up a copy of this book and get yourself educated about the realities faced by a whole generation who have, through no fault of their own, been entirely disenfranchised.
    CHEEPSTUFFRULES!
    dwain
    Call me lucky, but I have 3 kids all born after 1979, all have good jobs, all have a fantastic work ethic, and incidentally none have degrees in the arts or other equally useless qualifications. Study the right subjects, work hard and you will find a job. Only the youngest lives at home. Don't expect it all on a plate, it won't happen!


    You (and your kids) are very lucky.
    cibarious
    Political Correctness yet again - if the business isn't there to employ people, how do you make jobs for the unemployed? It's all very well blaming the politicians (whatever their affiliation) and saying the government should pay to create jobs but let's not forget where the government gets its money from - it's those who are in work and paying taxes - and what sort of jobs do you create if there is no need for those jobse due to the fact that there isn't the business around to justify them? Round and round the loop we go...

    I agree that a lot of people can't get jobs and so the unemployment statistics are high ***BUT*** even if the unemployment figures are correct at around 9%, I see that as 91% do have a job.

    All this whinging about appropriate jobs for appropriate qualifications is also nothing new, one of my relatives used to work in the a University Library in the NW and the chief librarian proudly announced over coffee one day that he could fully staff the checkout desk with PhD's - that was at the end of the 70's.
    cibarious
    @DoubleDown77 - if you were running a company that happened to have 3 different vacancies and you advertised them and, typically, had 300 replies for each position, how would you deal with those responses and how would you choose who to interview?

    I would suggest that you could not afford to send out 897 rejection letters for the positions you advertised.

    As to who to interview, it's impossible to read 900 CV's to decide, the only "sensible" (and I use that word advisedly) way to do it is to close your eyes and randomly choose 5 CV's from each of the stacks and interview them and, if necessary, repeat this until the positions are filled.
    UncleWilly
    DoubleDown77
    crazylegs
    Wake up you muppets and go and get lives, its just as hard regardless of the year you were born, Lets get the violins out shall we!! Jeez talk about mollycoddled generation more like!


    And another person who just doesn't get it. There's a generation of people who have worked hard, yet found it impossible to get the things their parents took for granted. House prices have go through the roof and nobody, even if they are paid what would have been considered a decent wage, can afford the mortgages to buy one.

    Try sending out literally hundreds of job applications for positions for which you are amply qualified, without receiving a single response, negative or otherwise. This is, perhaps, a cliché, but try walking a mile in another man's shoes before you judge them.

    This is not the result of a "mollycoddled generation" as you put it. There's something more at work here. The fact that you've resorted to idiotic name calling really does say it all. The fact is, us muppets (as you've so charming named us) have been trying to do exactly what you've suggested; we've been trying to get ourselves lives, yet our every attempt has been frustrated. Perhaps you should pick up a copy of this book and get yourself educated about the realities faced by a whole generation who have, through no fault of their own, been entirely disenfranchised.


    Utter drivel. The problem with young people today is that they think the world owes them a living and that a meaningless mickey mouse degree in Media Studies entitles them to a £40k a year job. I haven't read this book but then I don't need to as it'll be the usual left wing rant about how everything is the Tories fault. Take responsibility for your own life!
    cibarious
    UncleWilly
    Utter drivel. The problem with young people today is that they think the world owes them a living and that a meaningless mickey mouse degree in Media Studies entitles them to a £40k a year job. I haven't read this book but then I don't need to as it'll be the usual left wing rant about how everything is the Tories fault. Take responsibility for your own life!

    Whilst I agree in part with with you say, I just wish it were that simple. :)

    Firstly I would make all qualifications, A level and upwards, much more difficult to get by setting quotas based on the qualifications that the country needs for particular areas of expertise. It seems pointless to me to have 1,000's of people get qualifications for things that are non-wealth generating when we are crying out for technical and science quailifications that would have some chance of being utilised.

    Whilst I can see that some folks have a genuine interest in a degree in something esoteric, I do not see why they are surprised when they cannot get a job that reflects that qualification. I also don't see why, if there is no real chance of them getting a job based on that qualification, they should expect the working population to pay for them to obtain said quailification!!!

    Edited By: cibarious on Mar 26, 2012 13:09: .
    cibarious
    To everyone reading this thread - whilst the education system continues to churn out far more people with "qualifications" than there are jobs to be filled, what is your solution?

    Job creation sounds great in theory but in reality just does not work unless those jobs are genuine and productive. Creating jobs just to massage numbers is a complete waste of everything.

    Would any of the new graduates please explain to us why, if qualifications are supposed to be such hard work, so many companies are having to run literacy and numeracy courses for their staff?
    Joe90_guy
    To all of those people who are complaining that life today is hard, can I just say that, as I remember it, life was always hard.
    When I went to uni in 1974, I got a yearly grant of £900 with no top money from Daddy, no credit card or overdraft, no mobile phone, no tv and hardly any clothes. You needed a part-time job to supplement your grant just for basics like food.
    When I started work in 1978, the basic rate of tax was 35%. If you managed to get a pay rise, it was quickly wiped out by 26% inflation!
    When I took out my first mortgage in 1981, the interest rate was 15% and you had to save the deposit first.
    Oh to be young again in 2012. Bliss!
    CHEEPSTUFFRULES!
    Joe90_guy
    To all of those people who are complaining that life today is hard, can I just say that, as I remember it, life was always hard.
    When I went to uni in 1974, I got a yearly grant of £900 with no top money from Daddy, no credit card or overdraft, no mobile phone, no tv and hardly any clothes. You needed a part-time job to supplement your grant just for basics like food.
    When I started work in 1978, the basic rate of tax was 35%. If you managed to get a pay rise, it was quickly wiped out by 26% inflation!
    When I took out my first mortgage in 1981, the interest rate was 15% and you had to save the deposit first.
    Oh to be young again in 2012. Bliss!


    The key thing I take out of that is you got a job after uni and a mortgage 3 years later. I had various jobs to get me through uni (including working for a year before I went to save) and now I am overqualified for lower paid jobs (I have applied for many) and under experienced for the jobs I want (I have applied for even more).

    People who think all young people want it all on a plate are wrong. Some people are like that, but not any I know. It is more about being told to work hard, stay in education and then you will get ahead. You do all that and then find out you would have been much better to leave school at 16, get any job and work your way up.

    Your early life history you have outlined above sounds 10 times better than what I am looking at right now.

    Also, I got NO grant and now have a fairly substantial student loan (although I now expect I will never be able to pay it all back). Still want to trade?

    Edited By: CHEEPSTUFFRULES! on Mar 26, 2012 19:34: &
    alasrati
    The average age of a first time buyer is currently 37.
    DoubleDown77
    cibarious
    @DoubleDown77 - if you were running a company that happened to have 3 different vacancies and you advertised them and, typically, had 300 replies for each position, how would you deal with those responses and how would you choose who to interview?

    I would suggest that you could not afford to send out 897 rejection letters for the positions you advertised.

    As to who to interview, it's impossible to read 900 CV's to decide, the only "sensible" (and I use that word advisedly) way to do it is to close your eyes and randomly choose 5 CV's from each of the stacks and interview them and, if necessary, repeat this until the positions are filled.


    I completely understand the problems companies face when inundated by CVs and applications though it wouldn't take all that long, or indeed, cost that much to have somebody send out a generic email to let you know what's going on.

    I had suspected that there was an aspect of the lottery to candidate selection and having my fears confirmed has somewhat deflated my hopes of ever getting a look in. If you have any suggestions for getting noticed by employers then I, and no doubt others, would appreciate hearing them.

    UncleWilly

    Utter drivel. The problem with young people today is that they think the world owes them a living and that a meaningless mickey mouse degree in Media Studies entitles them to a £40k a year job. I haven't read this book but then I don't need to as it'll be the usual left wing rant about how everything is the Tories fault. Take responsibility for your own life!


    Oddly enough, I suspect that people with Media Studies degrees are more likely to find employment than their peers whose degrees are of a more academic bent. Media Arts degrees are, after all, far more vocational (assuming that your chosen vocation exists somewhere within the media) than many other courses. In actual fact, I don't doubt that, in some instances, having a degree can actually hamper your chances of employment

    I do find your response to be a tad ill-considered and, I'm afraid, full of the same sort of tired rhetoric that's inevitably wheeled out on these occasions. I wouldn't say that it's likely that the authors of this book will conclude that everything's “all the Tories fault” since I'm sure that their analysis of the problem would have to be more in depth. After all, simply concluding that it's "all the Tories fault" wouldn't fill up many pages. I suspect that they may conclude that Tory policies from the 80's and 90's are at least partly to blame, but then, from '97 Labour had a pretty go got of messing up the country too. You only have to look at the last budget to see that our current government is unwilling to address the problems that beset many of the countries people. The NHS ebbs ever closer to oblivion whilst the Chancellor further lines the pockets of the mega-rich (many of whom reside within the cabinet) with a tax cut.

    I think, perhaps, that the problem is that we were sold a lie by countless generations of politicians and parents who told us that, if we studied hard, and worked hard, we could earn ourselves a comfortable life. I'm not talking about earning £40K plus a year; I'm talking about simply earning enough to keep the wolf from the door. I'm talking about earning enough to buy your own house and not be forced into a rental market where prices are high enough to pay of the mortgage of the wannabe property developer who owns your rented abode, whist still leaving him/her a tidy profit. Despite this, banks simply won't lend you the increasingly astronomical amounts of money that it takes to buy a house. Should we really be living in a time when the monthly cost of ownership is actually below the cost of renting? Should people, desperate for their own home, be forced to moved miles away from their home towns just to find somewhere they can afford? I'm not talking about people who earn very little, I talking about people who earn what many would consider to be a decent wage. In fact, adjusting for inflation, they probably earn a comparable amount to members of the previous generations who all had no trouble buying their own home exactly where they wanted to live. Is it fair that an entire generation be denied that which was commonplace for people in the same position a mere 10-15 years ago? Is it really right that things should actually be worse and harder for people now than they were before?

    I don't think that most people really want to be mega-rich and I don't think that most people have the over-inflated sense of entitlement which you seem to attribute to them. Most people just want to live a happy life, in their own home and a nice family without the constant worry that someone's going to take it all away from them. It's a little dream, perhaps, but it's a dream that's been snatched away from countless people. The divide between the "haves" and the "have nots" is becoming a yawning chasm and, the way things are going, the chasm's only going to become wider.

    To address your final point, I'm sure that even you would have to conceded that certain aspects of life lie outside of any given individuals control. One could, as you suggest, take full responsibility for one's life yet still be no better off owing to factors outside of their control; factors which, I'm sure, this book is attempting to explore.

    A couple of years ago, I went for a job interview. After being put though a battery of aptitude tests and, I'm told, passing them all with flying colours, I was then informed that, although they thought I was brilliant, they would not be offering the job to me because they thought I would get bored with it too quickly. I imagine that the same situation is played out the length and breadth of the country. People who want to work, and who may in fact be the most able candidates, are passed over in favour of applicants who, by the tacit admission of the employers, may actually be less able. This I suppose, must be a contributing reason for the general decline in services/customer services that even I, during the course of my comparatively short existence, have noticed.

    I want to try to understand how things work and why everything seems to have gone so wrong; because make no mistake, they have gone so very wrong. That's why I've bought the book. I'm open to reading about what they have to say. I can only hope that you open up your own mind and accept the possibility that there may be more going on in the world than you realise. Dismissing that possibility is ignorance and arrogance of the highest order and indicative of the kind of blinkered thinking that can only result in further decline. After all, if people can’t acknowledge the existence of the problem, then what hope is there of ever solving it?



    Edited By: DoubleDown77 on Mar 26, 2012 20:06: layout
    DoubleDown77
    cibarious
    To everyone reading this thread - whilst the education system continues to churn out far more people with "qualifications" than there are jobs to be filled, what is your solution?

    Job creation sounds great in theory but in reality just does not work unless those jobs are genuine and productive. Creating jobs just to massage numbers is a complete waste of everything.

    Would any of the new graduates please explain to us why, if qualifications are supposed to be such hard work, so many companies are having to run literacy and numeracy courses for their staff?


    I would say then that the fault lies with the companies afford employing illiterates and innumerates in the first place when there are countless other applicants out there who are infinitely more able, both graduates and non-graduates. You'll notice that I included non-graduates too. Well, that's because, in my opinion, a degree is no longer the indicator of intelligence and competence that it once was. Some of the most stupid people I've met have degrees. Some degrees, after all, simply want you to parrot back information without requiring any original though or creativity whatsoever. An idiot with a fair memory can remember a few facts and quotations for the duration of an exam, but it doesn't necessarily follow that they truly understand what they're saying.

    Of course, if, as your earlier poster suggested, candidates are selected using methods akin to a lottery, then it's no surprise that so many simply don't actually meet the required standards.

    Edited By: DoubleDown77 on Mar 26, 2012 20:08
    cibarious
    CHEEPSTUFFRULES!
    I am overqualified for lower paid jobs (I have applied for many) and under experienced for the jobs I want (I have applied for even more).


    Hi, this sentence begs the question - what were you expecting when you left Uni?

    The following is NOT a dig at you but an honest question. If you feel that you are under-qualified for the jobs that you want, what does that suggest about the current job market or, perhaps, the level at which you stopped your education?

    My interpretation is that due to the parlous state of the whole job market, employers are looking for **even better** qualified people than they used to look for because it takes time and money to train people and both of those commodities are in short supply.

    As to sending out emails as a form of "rejection letter", it's a good idea but still costs time and resources to do so (897 email addresses take a long while to type and check and then to deal with the incorrectly typed ones that slip through the checks) and both of those commodities are in short supply.

    Edited By: cibarious on Mar 26, 2012 21:29
    CHEEPSTUFFRULES!
    cibarious
    CHEEPSTUFFRULES!
    I am overqualified for lower paid jobs (I have applied for many) and under experienced for the jobs I want (I have applied for even more).


    Hi, this sentence begs the question - what were you expecting when you left Uni?

    The following is NOT a dig at you but an honest question. If you feel that you are under-qualified for the jobs that you want, what does that suggest about the current job market or, perhaps, the level at which you stopped your education?

    My interpretation is that due to the parlous state of the whole job market, employers are looking for **even better** qualified people than they used to look for because it takes time and money to train people and both of those commodities are in short supply.

    As to sending out emails as a form of "rejection letter", it's a good idea but still costs time and resources to do so (897 email addresses take a long while to type and check and then to deal with the incorrectly typed ones that slip through the checks) and both of those commodities are in short supply.


    Under experienced, not under qualified. I have been told by quite a few professional people now that I should not list my degree on some applications as it may hinder rather than help. At the moment I do admin for OFSTED higher education inspections (freelance, not many hours), but this has no relevance to my degree.

    I did not mention email 'rejection letters' but since you have, one of my many temp jobs since leaving uni included doing the first round of shortlisting applications for jobs (I won't say who for). I basically went through all the CVs and made a shortlist of the ones who had half a chance to give to my boss. As I had personal experience in applying for jobs at the time I made sure to email everyone who applied to let them know how they had done after my stage, I am not sure what my boss then did regarding correspondence as he did not say.
    cibarious
    DoubleDown77
    cibarious
    To everyone reading this thread - whilst the education system continues to churn out far more people with "qualifications" than there are jobs to be filled, what is your solution?

    Job creation sounds great in theory but in reality just does not work unless those jobs are genuine and productive. Creating jobs just to massage numbers is a complete waste of everything.

    Would any of the new graduates please explain to us why, if qualifications are supposed to be such hard work, so many companies are having to run literacy and numeracy courses for their staff?


    I would say then that the fault lies with the companies afford employing illiterates and innumerates in the first place when there are countless other applicants out there who are infinitely more able, both graduates and non-graduates. You'll notice that I included non-graduates too. Well, that's because, in my opinion, a degree is no longer the indicator of intelligence and competence that it once was. Some of the most stupid people I've met have degrees. Some degrees, after all, simply want you to parrot back information without requiring any original though or creativity whatsoever. An idiot with a fair memory can remember a few facts and quotations for the duration of an exam, but it doesn't necessarily follow that they truly understand what they're saying.

    Of course, if, as your earlier poster suggested, candidates are selected using methods akin to a lottery, then it's no surprise that so many simply don't actually meet the required standards.


    Whilst I agree with quite a bit of what you say, I have to point out that it would be the perfect solution to find people with the correct qualifications that can write proper sentences and "know their numbers" but, of course, it's not that easy.

    Whilst we continue to flood the marketplace with people that do not have correct and good qualifications for industry and engineering it becomes necessary to recruit what's available and that, regrettably, means that sometimes time has to be spent teaching them reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic.

    It's a likely fact of life that it makes more sense to teach someone with an engineering qualification how to write a report in clear and concise English than it does to take someone who is already able to write a report in clear and concise English and teach them engineering skills. In my experience, engineers are born not taught - but that's another story. :)

    Yes, I was suggesting that interviewees are often chosen in a close to random fashion but circumstances dictate that's the way it has to be. Once upon a time, when there were too many applicants for a nominally graduate-level job (50 was considered a large number), the recruiter dumped all the folks with no A Levels, then all without a degree, then marched up the degree ladder until the remaining number was manageable. That's just not possible today as it's likely that at least 50% of the applicants will have a degree, that still leaves 150 people to plough through. Even marching up the degree ladder too frequently leaves too many people to interview who have at least a 2.1.

    In my own opinion, any education establishment that is allowed to grant people a degree in anything, without making literacy and numeracy a prime part of that qualification, needs closing down immediately.

    Edited By: cibarious on Mar 26, 2012 22:21: .

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

I Approve
Your Comments On This Post
Comment Preview
Close

PRIVATE MESSAGE

Close
Sorry, you can’t currently send PMs. Once you’re a more active member of the forum, the PM service will be unlocked for you.
Welcome to HUKD!
Close
Join the Community