Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Dear Millennials: Get Over Yourselves and Get to Work
Dear Millennials: Get Over Yourselves and Get to Work
Jan 15, 2026 4:34 AM

This is a guest post by Michael Hendrix in response to the recent debate sparked by a provocative poston millennials and Gen Y “yuppie culture.” Michael serves as the director for emerging issues and research at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. He is a graduate of the University of St. Andrews and a Texas native.

By Michael Hendrix

Over the past few weeks, much has been written on GYPSY unicorns and my generation’s dashed hopes (warning: strong language). For my fellow millennials who get overly defensive on such matters, I have a request: Get over yourselves and get to work.

We are entering an era of profound economic change, and I fear that the career prospects of many in my generation have too much mon with those of the horse at the advent of the automobile. Consider these words from the economist Gregory Clark, who’s quoted at a key point in Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee’s Race Against the Machine:

There was a type of employee at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution whose job and livelihood largely vanished in the early 20thcentury. This was the horse. The population of working horses actually peaked in England long after the Industrial Revolution, in 1901, when 3.25 million were at work. … But the arrival of the bustion engine in the late 19thcentury rapidly displaced workers, so that by 1924 there were fewer than 2 million. There was always a wage at which these horses could have remained employed. But that wage was so low that it did not pay for their feed.

Structural changes ing. Information munications technologies (ICT) are bringing about a shift equally as profound as that of the Industrial Age. Just as steam power and the bustion engine swept away inefficient production and labor, so too will the Information Age’s connectivity and automation advance on so many of the jobs we hold dear. What Brynjolfsson and McAfee argue — and not without controversy — is that technology is advancing on parative advantages in a way that previous revolutions never could. Building a steam-powered hammer to take on John Henry’s brawn is one thing; fashioning a highly cognitive robot with fine motor skills is quite another. And while this future hasn’t fully arrived yet, it’s the process of getting there that we must prepare for.

Every industrial es in stages, and today is simply the beginning of what the Information Age will bring. Just think about the Industrial Age one more time. It came in two main stages, beginning with steam and railroads in the early 1800s and then culminating decades later in a new burst of innovation with electricity and the engine (and much more). Even then, the true precursors to the revolution began in the 1750s. Similarly, the ICT revolution required telephone lines and punch puters before we could ever get to the iPhone. Although the lines from today’s Siri to tomorrow’s SkyNet remain blurred, they do exist.

We should be excited about this future. Vast new opportunities ing that will alter the course of human history. Technological change today is already occurring faster and more substantively than we realize (the rate of algorithmic growth is but one indicator of this). As with any change, however, there will be winners and losers.

For these reasons, I’m beginning to think that the angst-ridden articles written by my fellow millennials are evidence of much larger forces at work. Changes are happening so fast that as jobs and career opportunities are being destroyed, the ability to retrain or reset expectations isn’t keeping pace. Even if peoplecould retrain, the cyclical downturn we’ve experienced since the Great Recession has meant less job creation over all. To twist the knife further, even smart journalists are feeling the pinch as some types of knowledge work go the way of manual work. Is it at all surprising they feel obligated to spill so much ink as their livelihoods slip away?

Here’s the economist Tyler Cowen, who’s done much of the good thinking on today’s stagnation:

Self-driving vehicles threaten to send truck drivers to the unemployment office. Computer programs can now write journalistic accounts of sporting events and stock price movements. There are puters that can grade essay exams with reasonable accuracy, which could revolutionize my own job, teaching. Increasingly, machines are providing not only the brawn but the brains, too, and that raises the question of where humans fit into this picture—who will prosper and who won’t in this new kind of machine economy?

Who will prosper indeed? If you are highly-skilled at the things that are in demand today, are a capital-owner, or are a superstar in your field, you will succeed beyond your wildest imaginations. The rest of us will fight over the scraps — that is, until organizational innovations and broader human capital developments are able to re-wire the economy so that average workers can thrive again.

How do we stay among the winners? By building on our intuition and creativity—two things that, placed in the right sphere, remain immensely valuable. We must also recognize the intense petition each of us faces as a worker. We mustn’t just work—we have to work hard. Unfortunately, too many members of my own generation can’t seem to wrap their minds around that reality. They don’t readily fit into the four types of people Cowen believes are likely to thrive in the future:

The conscientious and motivatedPeople who listen puters and who can work well with themPeople with a marketing touchManagers who are motivators

It isn’t so much that we’ll have winners and losers that gets me. It’s that many millennials aren’t facing up to the tough choices they’ll need to make to align their visions with reality. When the bustion engine came along and rendered horsepower to the pages of Motor Trend, these animals had little choice over their fate. We are different. We can look square-eyed into a future of vast change. We can work hard at the tasks set before us, for we were made to do so. Put another way, we can avoid the glue factory.

Guest contributor, Michael Hendrix

Things will get worse for this generation before they get better. The real tragedy of big government in this world is that we have a less agile economy, unable to adjust and absorb those who will inevitably lose out. Instead, the losers are really lost—and they will have been done in by the very institutions aimed at protecting them. Are we facing social disruption? Completely, and it will prey especially on family dissolution.

We should rest our dreams in the reality of the future, rather than in the shuttered factories and dissolved pensions that are now a legacy of the past. That’s where many on the Left falter and will continue to do so in the years ahead, looking to past dividends in order to bail out their futures. But that won’t work.

The future is enough trouble for the millennial. We can and should work toward far better dreams.

You can follow Michael Hendrix on Twitter at @Michael_Hendrix.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The Economist, Catholicism, and Europe
When es to the sophistication of its coverage of religious affairs, the Economist is better than most other British publications (admittedly not a high standard) which generally insist on trying to read religion through an ideologically-secularist lens. Normally the Economist tries to present religion as a slightly plex matter than “stick-in-the-mud-conservatives”-versus-“open-minded-enlightened-progressivists”, though it usually slips in one of the usual secularist bromides, as if to reassure its audiences that it’s keeping a critical distance. A good example of this is...
The Ecumenical Movement and the Nuclear Question
It’s worth noting that the original context of engagement of the ecumenical movement by figures like Paul Ramsey and Ernest Lefever (two voices that figure prominently in my book, Ecumenical Babel) had much to do with foreign policy and the Cold War, and specifically the question of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Last week marked the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and today is the anniversary of the Nagasaki detonation. As ENI reports (full story after the break), the...
Publicly Funded Films: A Cautionary Tale
The most basic lesson of all of the various efforts, by both state and federal governments, to provide incentives for films to be made is that with government es government oversight. Once you go down the road of filing for tax credits or government subsidy in various forms, and you depend on them to get your project made, you open yourself up to a host of regulatory, bureaucratic, and censorship issues. It shouldn’t be a surprise, for instance, that states...
Family vs. the State in Indian and Chinese Entrepreneurship
This August 3 Wall Street Journal article is based on a Legatum Institute paring Indian and Chinese entrepreneurship and raises important issues about the roles of the state and the family in promoting entrepreneurship. mon elements between Indian and Chinese wealth-creators are their optimistic view of the pared to Americans (“Why I’m Not Hiring”) and Europeans (“Everything’s Fine With Greece, Just Ignore Some Facts”) presumably, and their lack of concern about the impact of the global financial crises on their...
Carbon Regulation: Ecological Utopia or Economic Nightmare?
In this week’s Acton Commentary, I discuss whether the Environmental Protection Agency’s planned regulation of carbon emissions can be justified from a Christian perspective. The EPA has found that carbon emissions endanger “public health and welfare,” and it is on track to begin regulating vehicle and power plant emissions. Environmentalists claim that policies targeting carbon emissions, such as EPA regulation or a cap-and-trade program, will stimulate the economy by creating green jobs. Unfortunately, this is not the case – the...
Acton on Tap – August 12: American Exceptionalism
Join us on Thursday, August 12, at Derby Station in Grand Rapids as we continue our Acton on Tap series, a casual and fun night out to discuss important and timely ideas with friends. The event is scheduled for 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm and discussion starts at 6:30. American Exceptionalism is a newsworthy topic as some on both the political left and right lament that America’s greatness is slipping away. But what does American Exceptionalism mean and how did...
Re: Broken Windows – University Funding Edition
As Kishore Jayabalan noted yesterday, the fallacy of “broken windows” is, unfortunately, ubiquitous in discussions of public finance and macroeconomics. Though we are told that government spending and public works have a stimulating effect on economic activity, rarely are the costs of such projects discussed. Such is the case with several stimulus projects in my own hometown of Atlanta, GA. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reportson a list that Sen. John McCain and Sen. Tim Coburn drew up,criticizing wasteful stimulus projects throughout...
Do We Need Pro-Family Tax Policies?
Last month, in “Europe’s Choice: Populate or Perish,” Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg observed: At a deeper level … Europe’s declining birth-rate may also reflect a change in intellectual horizons. A cultural outlook focused upon the present and disinterested in the future is more likely to view children as a burden rather than a gift to be cared for in quite un-self-interested ways. Individuals and societies that have lost a sense of connection to their past and have no particular...
Abela: Will Teaching Business Ethics Make Business More Ethical?
On the National Catholic Register, Andrew Abela confesses to a “nagging suspicion that teaching business ethics in a university is not delivering on what is expected of it.” The question is both concrete and academic: Abela is the chairman of the Department of Business and Economics at The Catholic University of America and an associate professor of marketing. He was awarded the Acton Institute’s Novak Award in 2009. Here, he explains the problem with “amoral” business attitudes: … we often...
Audio: Rev. Sirico on ‘The Principle of Subsidiarity and the Service to the Poor’
On the new Reclaiming the Culture radio show, host Dolores Meehan recently interviewed Acton President Rev. Robert A. Sirico on the subject of “The Principle of Subsidiarity and the Service to the Poor.” Here’s how Meehan describes the show’s mission: Bay Area Catholics are some of the strongest Catholics in the country. Reclaiming the Culture grew out of the desire to show that the Catholic Church in the Bay Area has the resources to confront the prevailing secular culture. Our...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved