Why Our Children Will Be Better Off Than We Are -- In Ways That Matter

Everyone wants their kids to be happy. No one wants their children to be worse off than them. So it becomes news when the Pew Research Center reports that the number of Americans who believe that their children will be better off than they are is in decline. The actual question was about our children's standard of living, and in the news reports this was automatically associated with "better off," the assumption being that economic success is the measure of well-being.

If we measure well-being just by consumer spending, household income, capital investment and similar signposts, the future is certainly in doubt. In a rebalancing world, all these measures are going to decline. There is an alternative way of thinking and a growing number of voices -- David Korten, the New Economics Institute, Olivia Saunders and Peter Barnes, plus the country of Bhutan (see article in Yes! magazine), for example -- who are defining what a new economics, a post-consumer society, would look like.

It all begins with shifting what we value and counting what is in abundance and within our means. This means that measuring ourselves and our children by financial wealth is not news; it is not even particularly important and does them a great disservice. And if income as we know it shrinks, there will actually be some fringe benefits.

Our children will be better off than we are, but not because they will make more money.
Here are some measures that a new economic conversation will be taking into account:

• Our children's health will be better. They already know more about nutrition, vitamins, exercise, smoking, fast food and weight than any of us knew at their age. Even if their actions are slow to catch up with what they know, the net effect will be better health.
• They are going to pay more attention to the planet. They already know more about that, too. Over time their purchases, their way of building, traveling and relating to the earth will have to adapt to what the earth can hold. The environment may not get better, but how they relate to it will shift in a good direction.
• They will find satisfaction within walking distance. More of what they want and need they will produce themselves or find nearby. This will result in a more satisfying life. With less money, the high cost of fuel and the shrinking traditional economy, they will have to participate in creating their own entertainment, growing their own produce, tending to their own children, wearing the same clothes longer, cooking what is in season and available.
• They will barter and trade more. This means looking more carefully at what talents and resources are invisible but close at hand. Neighbors can be providing what we used to go to professionals for, like sewing, car repair, child care, health tips, pre-owned clothes and maybe even, some day, a cup of sugar.
• They will have more passports. They will be more likely to have been in other cultures and maybe be less drawn to like-mindedness. Building walls may be the long-term political agenda for the West, but more of our children will have studied a second language and at least have met and been among the people that we want to keep out.
• They will be more locally and self-employed. They will stop working at disappearing jobs with big companies. Which means they will be less mobile, keep what they have longer, learn to get by and be less dependent on others.

What this calls for is a shift in our assessment of well-being. It can no longer be about the money. New indicators of "better off" require a shift in what we measure -- from what is scarce, subject to competition, must be purchased and is disposable, to what is abundant, based on cooperation, homemade and can be conserved.

Photo credit: D Sharon Pruitt

John McKnight is emeritus professor of education and social policy and co-director of the Asset-Based Community Development Institute at Northwestern University. He is the co-author of "Building Communities from the Inside Out" and the author of "The Careless Society." He has been a community organizer and serves on the boards of several national organizations that support neighborhood development.

Peter Block is founder of Designed Learning. They are coauthors of "The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods." See other McKnight and Block posts at www.AbundantCommunity.com

 

Comments

[Sherry Ackerman]

01:58 AM on 02/15/2011

There is a critical distinction between a Good Life and a "goods life". A Good Life has depth and engagement. A "goods life" is shallow and isolated. The authors have nailed that distinction perfectly. A Good Life springs from contentment; a "goods life" is necessarily discontent (it always craves more "stuff"). http://www.amazon.com/Good-Life-Sustainable-Fulfilling-Lifestyle/dp/0984603204/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297752965&sr=1-1

[Peter Block]

03:57 PM on 02/14/2011

Several comments rightly express concern about the obesity of the next generation, the assault on the environment, the dependency on electronic stimulation, the violence in the world and in the neighborhood. I completely agree. These are all real. What is important is that we see clearly the link between consumerism, which has become the dominant theology of our culture, and the symptoms all around that so distress us.

If we want a better future for the next generation, we will stop believing that satisfaction can be purchased. The shopping center has replaced the neighborhood, social services have become a substitute for friendship. We need to become citizens rather than consumers, which means that regardless of how isolated it seems right now, we re-inhabit our neighborhood and discover the humanity, talents and connections that will restore our faith in the future.

[SarNobz]

02:20 AM on 02/14/2011

Nice list!!! :) Go us!!!!

[jsehgal]

05:29 AM on 02/13/2011

Reading the comments, it is apparent that pessimism about the future is lodged itself hard in our collective psyche, and for very good reasons. Peter Block's optimism is blocked out here.

[RMankovitz]

04:55 PM on 02/12/2011

When I peer into the future, I see something quite different than the authors. From decades of research in the area of nature-based illness prevention, I find it entirely possible that we have gone past the survival tipping point with respect to our environment. Between climate change and toxins, we may no longer be able to support the reproduction of our species beyond say four future generations.

Nature has certainly given us plenty of clues of things to come for our offspring, which we, in our ignorance and arrogance, continue to ignore. Here are just a few:

A Potential Decline in Life Expectancy in the United States in the 21st Century
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr043743#t=articleTop

Environmental Causes of Infertility
http://www.chem-tox.com/infertility/

The Disappearing Male
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3450754654538943#

Genetically Modified Soy Linked to Sterility, Infant Mortality in Hamsters
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html

Global climate change, war, and population decline in recent human history
http://www.pnas.org/content/104/49/19214.full

“Collapse”, by Jared Diamond
http://www.ted.com/talks/jared_diamond_on_why_societies_collapse.html

In our absence, nature has millions of years to cleanse herself of our legacy, regenerate, create many new species, and perhaps evolve an improved human model.

Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
A research organization

[Hawley Roddick]

12:13 PM on 02/12/2011

Of course we want our kids to be better off than we are. But doubts come to mind for each of the six points:

1: Tomorrow's adults may know what food choices are healthy but may not make healthy choices more consistently than their parents. 2. Treating the planet with greater responsibility will be good for the planet and for future generations, but our grown kids may not feel or be better off by today's standards. 3. Not everyone will enjoy gardening or find local entertainment as satisfying as great performances by professional performers. 4. Perhaps only those who like to barter will feel better off doing so, and having to depend on neighbors for skills they may not possess sounds fairly grim..5. Traveling, speaking a second language, and appreciating other cultures could make life at home ~ where walls keep out people they appreciate ~ as painful for them as it is for us; but the adults building those walls are some of today's children, and, alas, may indeed feel better off. 6. Learning to get by with less doesn't really equate with feeling better off.

Although our kids may not feel better off than we are, because we're handing over to them a planet we've trashed and are depending on them to cope with the fallout, it can be comforting for us to redefine what "better off" will mean to them and to hope they will agree.

[nothingchanges]

11:24 AM on 02/12/2011

I wish I could shared your optimism. I can't.

I see a country that has been in decline for nearly 30 years. Morally , ethically, and for most of its people financially.

The headlines read all about cuts, cutting aid to the poor, cutting taxes for the rich, cutting "unneeded" regulatory agencies like the EPA, but not the DOD.

Gas lines exploding, bridges collapsing, no money to be had for infrastructure, but bailing out the banks was a "necessity".

The country is engaged in the longest running war in it's history, against a foe with no borders, no nationality, and no scruples. A war with no end in sight against a people who view us as invaders, and whose to say they aren't right?

Our leaders owe their jobs to the money provided by multinational corporations, corporations that now have the "right" to buy our elections outright by Supreme Court ruling. Yet we somehow still expect politicians to work in "our" interests over theirs.

I see people living beneath bridges in makeshift cardboard homes, while across town others spend thousands for a single nights drunken entertainment.

Ghandi once listed the 7 things that will destroy a democracy.

Politics without principle,
Pleasure without conscience,
Wealth without work,
Knowledge without character,
Business without morality,
Science without humanity,
Worship without sacrifice"

I see all of these at work in the U.S. today.

What I see, makes me glad I decided not to have children. I wish you and yours the best.

[twinpossible]

11:17 AM on 02/12/2011

I agree that in those ways they are better off, but as far as the quality of their childhood...I believe that is declining with every passing generation due to children wanting to be adults before their time. We wanted to ourselves, but not in the extreme ways they do now. Did you have a cell phone at 7, 8 years old? No I didn't have a beeper until 16. (Don't think we had cell phones, but UKWIM).

Did 10 year olds wear mini skirts & make up trying to look like Hannah Montana and other icons, leading often to sex too soon, and maybe more teen pregnancy down the line, though I will admit education in that department has gotten better.

I just think kids should use their minds more, play stick ball, paint pictures, play with barbie dolls, exercise more by playing sports like we did, because with the obesity increase among kids, they will NOT be living longer and be a healthier generation then we were.

Don't grow up too fast kiddos, use your minds more then your Wii's and strive for your dreams at every turn..NOTHING is impossible. That is my advice for this current generation.

xoxo

Shelly

http://www.twinpossible.com

[cheryl tobin]

11:06 AM on 02/12/2011

Thanks for sharing how a future, not based on mass consumerism, could help children develop a different and improved criteria for an meaningful and enjoyable life.

[whalepeace]

05:34 PM on 02/11/2011

Wow, talk about fantasies.

Young people today are less healthy than their forebears. Twenty-year-olds already are ridden with cardiovascular diseases. Autism strikes 1 in 150, up from 1 in 2000 a few decades ago. Birth defects, endocrine disorders and cancer rates grow exponentially. Half of today's children have allergies or asthma courtesy of internal combustion engine poisons. Obesity and diabetes are at epidemic levels. Toxic exposure in a poisoned enviornment causes cancers and other diseases and the world is becoming ever more toxic as corporations go unregulated and population grows unchecked.

In a large group that I was assigned to manage recently, I was astounded to realize that everyone under the age of 30 in the group was on medication. Anti-anxiety medication, antidepressants, lithium salts, these were common. Two had already suffered from cancer before the age of 18.

Yes, the young will have gadgets galore and pretend virtual lives (E.g., 3000 Facebook "friends" but no nonvirtual social life), but recent research shows that today's young are 40% less empathetic than their predecessors. A society full of unempathetic people is not conducive to happiness.

The young will be hit by global climate change in a major way. Agriculture is being disrupted and food may be scarce and expensive. Climate devastation has only just begun.

What freedom will the young have? None. Every move will be monitored by cameras and metal detectors and searches and computer databases in the world of Patriot Act and Big Brother.

[Peter Block]

10:05 PM on 02/11/2011

Friend,

What you say has truth to it. It is anecdotally correct and I see what you see. And I also grieve for what appears to be the trend. The romance of the technology and industrialization is increasing our isolation. What passes as policy is a polarized conversation that takes us nowhere. We need to face the pain of what the next generation is experiencing.

There is, also, a parallel story. As the consumer society hits the wall, our children will be forced to fall back on their own resources, which leads to a less electronic and medicated life. One where they will have to create and find locally what they thought they were entitled to and could be bought.

Who is to say? The possibility is there.

~ Peter ~

[wwew]

02:56 PM on 02/11/2011

the worlds ecosystems and environment will be ravaged by climate change and the worlds food supplies will be disrupted and govts. will collapse. theyll have better iphones though but probably still have crap reception and insane texting and data charges.