Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Teenagers Are Driving Much Less: 4 Theories About Why
Paul Fernhout writes "U.S. teenagers just aren't as into driving as they used to be, U.S. government forecasters acknowledged in dramatically altered projections for transportation energy use over the next 25 years." Online presence is one of the reasons mentioned, which makes a lot of sense to me as a factor, no matter the age of the drivers involved. Whatever your age, do you drive less than you did 10 years ago?
Before, teens needed to have a car to impress the girls ...
Now, they just need an internet connection and some hand-cream.
Celebrating how America is more energy efficient because its people can no longer afford to drive.
Yes I drive a lot less than I used to 10 years ago, but it less to do with the Internet and more to do with the price of gas....
http://money.cnn.com/2004/03/23/news/economy/gas_aaa/
Don't got a job because I don't have a car.
Don't have a car cause I don't have a job.
Don't have a girl cause I don't have a car.
So I'm looking for a girl with a job and a car.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I check a store's inventory and maybe make a call before I drive off. Olden days I would need to travel around to different stores to find a special item. More often than not I also mail order supplies I would have bought locally. Sorry Radio Shack. Well, not really.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
At least in CT, the age at which you can practically operate a vehicle on your own keeps creeping up, and there are always new rules restricting the privilege (only during the day, no passengers, etc). Assuming that the rest of the nation passes similar policies (given that we never repeal such things it has to be a purely additive effect anyway), I would think it obvious that teens drive less on average, as teens can't drive as much.
"Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
I drive significantly less than I did 10 years ago. I moved into the city, and am now able to take public transit to work, which was, previously, the lion's share of my driving.
As for the why... the price of fuel is a pretty big factor. Between that, and the fact that I'm now living in an area where public transit is a viable option, I don't really see the point in driving the car for anything other than shopping trips, and I can do most of those on the weekend. The very few things I may need during the week can be had at the grocery store, deli, or drug store across the street from my apartment building.
I still own a car, and I can't see myself ever giving it up, but I don't *need* to drive everywhere like I did when I lived in the country.
When I was a teenager in the late 70s, there was nothing to do except jump in the car and drive down Main Street and yell out the window to friends loitering in front of the bars, get to the end, come back and do it again, over and over. ("Cruising") or just go on a lot of joyrides.
If I had an xbox or ps4 back then, I'd have probably been on that instead.
If my son is any gauge, the reason they don't drive is because it would require them to leave the house. Whenever we go anywhere, he is always concerned with how far he will be from his computer. The iPad and 3DS will only hold off the DTs for so long...
Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
Amazon is like public transportation for "incidentals" In my household and those of my peers, there is no more "run to the store for these few items," it has been replaced with "is it prime?"
DWY is only slightly better than DWI, because it's not a choice.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
The answer is pretty obvious: Gasoline prices have skyrocketed. Not a teenager anymore by far, I don't ever buy more than 5 gallons at a time, unless I know I'm going somewhere far enough away that I know I'll need more. I'll ride my motorcycle as much as I can because it's less expensive to operate overall, but for the most part I'll stay at home as much as I can.
Additionally, there didn't used to be such an abbreviation as "NEET", but now I hear it all the time. More kids are staying home longer (even into their late twenties, much to the dismay of their parents) or even coming back home (much more to the dismay of their parents) because they're just not making it out in the world. Unless supplied with a vehicle and money for fuel by their cash-strapped parents, they're not driving anywhere.
It seems to me that the Age of the Automobile, as a lifestyle, is coming to an end. Gasoline is never going to be under a dollar a gallon ever again. Will it be resurrected as the Age of the Electric Automobile (or some other alternative fuel source? Mr. Fusion, anyone?) or will we all be riding bicycles or using public transportation or some other non-personal transportation option? Are we all destined to become herd animals? Sad.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
In 1970, gasoline cost 35Â/gallon($1.65 in 2011 dollars). The OPEC crisis caused prices to more than double by 1980, but accelerated inflation meant that the cost rose to $2.03 in 2011 dollars. By 1990, gasoline hit $1 ($1.57 in 2011 dollars). Fast forward to today, and the average US price is $3.27. In other words, after adjusting for inflation gasoline is roughly twice as expensive as it has been historically. When you factor in the increased cost of high-tech cars and a sluggish economy, it's not surprising to see reduced demand.
Another factor - most driving is no longer 'fun' - It's fighting traffic. it's a job.
The only place you don't see traffic these days is car commercials.
The whole shift in thinking about burning fuel and the problems that it leads to, however small my contribution, has certainly impacted my lifestyle.
My decision to live in a place where I can depend on public transportation was influenced by that knowledge.
The lack of attachment to a physical place, knowing that I can continue to nurture my friendships from a distance, through the internet, also played a big part.
...parent. Cars are for independence, the world of helicopter parenting doesn't allow for that.
Now, this is over 15 years, not 10.
Internet
Sure, let's get that out of the way. I don't have to go out as much to buy things, so I'd say that lowered my annual driving average by about 5%-10%
Gasoline/Petrol prices
Absolutely. When the price of gasoline went over $2.50/gal (that was 2005-ish) my leisure driving went to almost none. That was easily 25%-30% of my annual driving.
More environmentally conscious
Over the last 15 years I have definitely become more environmentally conscious and tried to drive less as well as use less electricity, etc.
Moved closer to work
I live in a medium-sized rural university town (about 50,000 without students, about 80,000 with them). I work for the university and moved to my present location in 1999. Before that I was living about three miles away and would drive to work daily. Now, I have a 15 minute walk apartment door to office door (my office, not the outer door). That cut my driving down by more than a third.
So my driving habits over the last 15 years have dropped by roughly 65%-75%. I only drive when I need to run errands or I am going to visit friends farther than I can comfortably walk. I might spend $120-$130 on gas in a "busy" month (about 1,000 miles worth), but on average I spend about $60-$65 (about 500 miles worth). I used to average between 2,000 - 3,000 miles per month when gas was under $2.50/gal. I did a lot more road trips for fun and drove back and forth to work (often multiple times a day), as well as shopping trips and other errands. People around where I live have also gotten worse driving habits over that time, so that's another reason I stay off the roads. Where I live half the population of drivers has less than eight years of driving experience, and it seems they never really learned the rules of the road, anyway. Hell, it's bad enough as a pedestrian!
When I was just out of highschool we'd drive around looking for a party. Spent half the night doing that... stopping by this house or that house... We couldn't call from the car as there were no cellphones and even if we did land line phones were often not picked up at a loud party. With modern texting/tweeting etc, teens know where the party's immediately. If it changes venue they know right away. It's just one more activity computers have made more efficient.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My commute is now a 15 minute jaunt on the highway to work, this is not by design, nor is it because I moved closer. (In fact 8 years ago I moved farther away from my current place of employment) back then I had a 30 minute commute, and I suppose if I was still living in that one bedroom apartment (with two kids would be hell) I'd have a 10 minute commute as opposed to the 15...
I drive mostly to and from work, other times, not so much.
Gas prices actually around here gas prices have gone up slightly in the past 10 years, but really, when a look on the historical gas price list. in 2004 gas was roughly 70c/l it was 2005 when gas first peaked 100c/l, this morning it was a comfortable 99.7c/l on my drive in to work. So gas prices are slightly higher, but not as bad as they were 5 years ago, and my salary in the same time has more than doubled. It's settled down. hasn't hit 130 in a long time.
Shopping has become less of a hassle as well. It used to be that when I wanted to buy a new motherboard, it took driving around to about 3-4 different stores to get pricing because not every store had an up to date website. that's greatly improved in the past 10 years, same with shopping for furniture, TVs, etc. What used to be a 10 stop shopping trip is usually down to 1-2 now.
10 years ago I was also single, online dating wasn't really all that big yet, so if I wanted to meet someone I had to go out and cruise around. heck back when I was a teenager that was the primary way to meet girls. Now a lot of people meet people online. heck I met my wife of 8 years online. Also I no longer have to drive as much to go on dates with my wife, as we live together. so that's another.
Also entertainment. it used to be more entertaining to go to the mall, the theatre, whatever the kids of the area did to hang out and usually ended up driving there. now, it's more why drive to hang out, we can hangout online and chat online. so no need for physical contact anymore. (which is another study's results that there isn't enough person-person contact with teenagers anymore.
frankly. There has been a lot of societal changes in the last 10 years, and a lot of that results in less driving. plus the whole recession that hit in 2008, kinda put a damper on being able to afford a car in your teenage years.
When I was in high school, society looked at drinking and driving very differently than today. The drinking age was 18. We would often drive around with several friends drinking. Be it driving or parked somewhere, just sitting, talking , whatever. When the cops would come, if you weren’t a complete mess, all they would do is take your beer and tell you to go home. Additionally, many activities for teens centered around driving. We would go ‘cruising’. A local area where teens would all drive an congregate. Many cities have outlawed it. In addition to social and legal change in drinking attitudes, there are now automated speeding tickets, the cost of insurance, being harassed by law enforcement if just a few teens hangout somewhere. The change is more than the automobile. It’s a social political change that generally looks at young people congregating in public with negativity.
Your conclusion doesn't follow, you know. You're assuming that not just promiscuity rates have to be the same, but individual promiscuity has to be. Picture this scenario. Ten guys and ten girls live together. All ten of the guys have slept with five of the girls in the house within the first ten days. That makes them promiscuous. However, five of the girls engaged in no sexual activity whatsoever. That gives us a 100% male promiscuity rate, and a 50% female promiscuity rate.
But how can that be! Because "statistically", according to "Sique" on /., the rates have to be equal!
No, wait, the other five girls simply had more sex. Now it makes sense!
Please avoid throwing words like "statistical" around until you understand it, for fuck's sake. It doesn't make you look smart, it makes you look like a total idiot.
Then again, I'm arguing with a total idiot on /. so what does that make me?
Gas is expensive
Insurance is expensive
Jobs are hard to come by, especially for teens
They grew up socializing on-line so r/l meets are not as important now
Did i mention jobs are hard to come by?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Driver education was a standard part of the (summer) high school curriculum when I was coming up so very long ago. I don't think that's the case anymore, and and as a result it's not as accessible as it once was. It's much less a thing you do automatically when you hit 16.
That, and kids are living more of their lives virtually now. More "tactile" skills like driving and fixing mechanical things aren't as cool as the ones involved in manipulating what you see on your screen.
I have a teenager and I can answer these questions from his perspective vs. when I was in high school 20 years ago.
1) Home entertainment is so much better. He can play his x-box, talk to friends on live, play on the internet. All of this is in lieu of personal contact or face-to-face conversation. When I was a kid, if I wanted to play with someone, I had to do it at their house. The only way to get there was driving or riding a bike.
2) Cell phones allow for faster communication. Relationships which were either face to face or on the phone when I was a kid. Now you can have face to face, Skype, video chat, etc. on your cell phone along with texting and other forms of media on your hand held which makes it much easier for them to maintain a relationship with much less effort.
3) Effort. When I wanted to do something, I had to leave the house or host people at my place. This was effort and sometimes was taxing. Most kids now days see the effort in hosting people at your house or going to someone else's house as a waste due to the reasons #1 and #2 being the way to get your human interaction.
4) Legal issues. Shit I used to do when I was a kid is now illegal. I am not talking drugs or anything like that, I mean like meeting up with friends at a jr. high and playing some ball, or 100 other things I used to do. We live in an extremely litigious society and as such things that were simple when I was a kid, you cannot do anything and kids are trained from a young age to rely on mommy and daddy to do things for them as they are the only ones who can take a risk.
5) Cost. While this is somewhat true, I don't think it is that much different than when I was a kid. While gas costs 3 times more, they also make double the amount of money at work due to minimum wage increases. Insurance is the same (dollar for dollar) as when I was driving and when my son is driving. Cars cost the same (a good $3k car is still there for people to get for kids). It all depends on the quantity of money and how much you make your kid responsible for their costs.
At the end of the day, there are many other things, but I remark #1 and #2 as the biggest differences between generations. If I didn't see a friend, I didn't talk to them. Now there is a dozen way to talk to a friend, and never leave the couch. Thus driving was the only way for me to see them.
So it's a take your pick from...
* Lack of low paying jobs because over qualified people flooded the market.
* Lack of low paying jobs because of immigrants.
* Lack of interest in going out because of gadget X, Y, or Z.
* Price of gas.
* Price of cars.
* More space at home to avoid other family members.
* City life.
* Online life replacing offline one. (Friends)
* Online shopping replacing brick and motor stores.
Sounds like a large combination of things really and no one specific thing.
~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
no, the military is bloated to satisfy the corporations and their rich investors. The reason for the difference between western europe and america is 1) america is larger and 2) america has a strong checks and balances/seperation of powers govt and 3) america is more heterogeneous/diverse. Western europe on the other hand is smaller and have a parliamentarian govt and is more homogeneous. This means that Western european nations are more democratic. Democracy means heeding the will of the people. because the USA is less democratic the corporations run things. Corporations want revenue and profits. A bloated military and wars bring corporate profits. QED
With all the outsourcing and all our manufacturing jobs (that aren't done by robots) pretty much gone I see more and more adults in Fast Food. That means less of these jobs for teenagers. Plus American Kids get a _lot_ more homework now. They have to keep up with the standardized testing, and companies don't like training workers so they demanded the schools do _something_ so they don't have to, and the schools responded with a tonne of homework.
It boils down to an eroding middle class due to massive wealth inequality, but we're not allowed to talk about that (the same folks who benefit the most also own the media outlets). It's fun to watch these pundits that aren't allowed to talk about what's really happening (or who've got the blinders on too tightly to see) try to come with reasons for it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Your problem is that promiscuity rates are not usually measured in average partners; they are measured in modes or quartiles or something like that. From the article you link to:
"A 1994 study in the United States, which looked at the number of sexual partners in a lifetime, found that 20% of heterosexual men had only one partner, 55% had two to twenty partners, and 25% had more than twenty partners."
See? No average partner numbers. Instead, proportions in a defined class.
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
There is a flaw in your logic. What is probably confusing you is that the ratio used was 50%. However, modifying the example, lets say all 10 guys slept with one only two of the girls.
Now you have 10 boys having average sex with 2 grils each, giving a promiscuity rate of 2 sexual parterners per boy. 2 girls have slept with all 10 boys and 8 girls have had no sex at all, which using your version still gives a rate of 2.
However, 80% of the girls have had no sex and 100% of the boys have had sex. Are you really trying to say in the example that the girls in the control group are as promiscuos as the boys?
Being promiscuous, according to the Free Online Dictionary is " Having casual sexual relations frequently with different partners; indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners." Promiscuity is the measure of how promiscuous a population is (in the examples the population would be 10 males and 10 females). It doesn't measure how many average partners the population has, it measures the average of how many are promiscuos.
The reality is that promiscuity is not measured the way you are trying to measure. In the example given previously (10 boys with 5 girls), the promiscuity rate among the boys is 100% and among the girls is 50%. In the example I gave, it is still 100% for the boys, but only 20% for the girls.
Historically, in the West, men were encouraged to sow their oats before settling down, but to marry a virgin. As such, culturally women were far less promiscuous then men. Today, studies show that woman are far more promiscuous than they were in the past, but still far behind men (by anywhere from 30% to 50% fewer partners depending on the study).
BTW, this doesn't mean that the woman who are not promiscuous necessarily virgins, it simply means that they do not meet the standard definition of promiscuity (likewise for the males who are not promiscuous).
There are 20 people. 10 male. 20 Female.
I lost it.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
If we're going to discuss this properly then I think we need more info on any possible threesomes.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Think about where the European debt came from. Thinking about 2008 and events in the USA is a good starting point. Those governments bailed out their US exposed companies (and things like Goldman Sachs fucking over Greece) and are left with the debt.
I just never bothered (I'm in my early 30s). I lived in suburbs near big cities, or in big cities proper all my life across a handful of countries, and there was rarely anywhere I needed to go that I couldn't reach via public transportation of some sort, with the very occasional (2-3 times a year) place I'd just take a cab to.
There's a few annoyances (when moving I hire movers, but if I'm packing myself, carrying all the empty boxes and packing material from wherever I get it is a pain), but all around its just a whole lot less worry.
Didn't save me any money though, considering how brutally expensive a houses near main subway lines are though. So its really just because I prefer this lifestyle.
I live in California, where driving seems to be more important than in other parts of the U.S. and in Europe. I live in Silicon Valley where a persistent housing shortage and higher demand for workers means that people who have high paying jobs often have long commutes, 40+ miles one way.
I don't drive, never have, due to poor vision. So, I have arranged my life around either public transit or walking to work. I worked for about 23 years where I was able to walk to work and another 20 years where I had short bus or train rides. Since I have retired, the cost of public transit has more than doubled in absolute currency so I can understand the claim that the price of fuel could be a reason why fewer teenagers drive. The same with insurance rates.
Having been in Europe 30 years ago, I can say with confidence that the public transit there is better than what we have here. It is better integrated.Also the cities and towns still have the human scale of pre-industrial cities. No town in California has been designed, or has evolved, with the idea that everything you need should be within walking distance, although some are nearly so. As someone who has never used a car, I have to be choosy about where I live to take advantage of that fact. One of the reasons higher density living is being developed is because there are fewer places to build and more and more people do not need or want a car. So the layout of urban areas that assume commutes by car might become a thing of the past. But even if urban sprawl is replaced by high density communities, they will be located along rail routes.
Thinking about the Boomerang Effect, where adult children of Baby Boomers have to move in with their parents because they can't afford to live on their own, to the tune of about 17 million, as I recall reading recently. That may say that the reason kids drive less is economic and is a ringing indictment of our economic system that changes in the economy have made it harder for young people to realize what their parents had. All of the reasons given so far, the cost of gas, insurance, social factors, might be true to some extant, but the fact that many in that age group are forced to move back in with their parents after college points to a larger set of factors, economic ones, inbalances in the economy that didn't affect their parents. The quality of jobs ins't there, the investment to create decent jobs isn't there. I would argue that it is tech and the digital revolution and the international labor market it has created that is to blame. That is the dirty little secret that many engineers are loth to admit, that the promises for a better future for all through the use of computers has not been realized. Only a very few have benefited the most, but most people have to do lower-paying less quality jobs because of the misbalanced set of incentives created by the application of computers to work.