American Demographics November 2019

N OV E M B E R 20 1 9

What the Economy Could Look Like in 2028 Bureau of Labor Statistics offers some clues What Happened to the Nuclear Family?

It’s down to 20% of U.S. households Looking Under the Mattress Census Bureau releases survey that takes a peek Transportation Spending Is Down Americans are keeping their cars longer On the Bookshelf New books and films are putting population trends into focus

MEET THE HENRYS: High Earners, Not Rich Yet

“When you’re Gen Z, you’re Gen Z all the way, fi from your e-cigarette to your birthday”

IN THIS ISSUE OF

NOVEMBER 2019

PUBLISHER Phillip Russo

EDITORIAL STAFF

4 American Demographics is Back!

Brad Edmondson Cheryl Russell

5 What the Economy Could Look Like in 2028

Pamela N. Danziger Joe Azzinaro George Puro

6 W hat Happened to the Nuclear Family?

8 Meet the HENRYs: High Earners, Not Rich Yet

12 L ooking Under the Mattress 14 T ransportation Spending Is Down 15 This Month’s Bookshelf New books and films are putting population trends into focus

Dane Twining Tom Prendergast

CREATIVE DIRECTOR Melissa Subatch

American Demographics and americandemographics.com are owned by the Private Label Manufacturers Association, 630 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017 and licensed for publication by Kent Media, 240 Central Park South, New York, N.Y. 10019. Periodicals postage paid at Macedonia, OH and additional mailing offices.

All rights reserved under the Library of Congress.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted in writing by the copyright owners.

N OV E M B E R 20 1 9

What the Economy Could Look Like in 2028 Bureau of Labor Statistics offers some clues What Happened to the Nuclear Family?

It’s down to 20% of U.S. households Looking Under the Mattress Census Bureau releases survey that takes a peek Transportation Spending Is Down Americans are keeping their cars longer On the Bookshelf New books and films are putting population trends into focus

MEET THE HENRYS: High Earners, Not Rich Yet

American Demographics is Back!

elcome again to American Demographics.

In this month’s issue, we turn our attention to the economy of the future and where Americans are holding their money. We also look at how the nuclear family has dropped to third as a category of American households and how the car has apparently lost a little of its luster.

Our cover story, though, is about a growing segment of the population. They are called HENRYs which stands for high earners who are not rich yet. Think of it as an American slice-of-life story which crosses ethnic lines. HENRYs have plenty of money and want to spend it. But how?

This month’s issue also marks a turning point for the magazine. Website designers will shortly be hard at work transitioning American Demographics from a print publication to a new digital format with video coverage capturing the true transformation of our society.

For more than 25 years, American Demographics has been the place to go for information about the trends impacting our lives. A staff of editors, reporters and experts pored through the dense governmental and academic publications in demographics, geology, gerontology, sociology and other fields to bring you insight into the diverse world around us. Beginning in 2020, you will not only be able to read American Demographics, you will be able to see the trends for yourself.

American Demographics is back and better than ever.

to subscribe, visit: www.americandemographics.com

4

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I NOVEMBER 2019

By Cheryl Russell

What the Economy Could Look Like in 2028 Bureau of Labor Statistics offers some clues

hat does the future hold for the U.S. economy?

Here’s a crystal ball of sorts: the employment projections produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics every two years. Happily, this is one of those years.

The bureau’s employment projections are designed to give businesses and policymakers a heads-up about what to expect during the next 10 years. Between now and 2028 the projections show, for example…

•T he labor force should grow 0.5 percent a year, down from the 0.8 percent annual growth rate in the decade 2008–2018.

•W orkers aged 55 or older will expand from 23 to 25 percent of the workforce.

• G DP will grow at an annual rate of 1.8 percent, the same as the 2008–2018 rate.

• L abor productivity will rise to 1.6 percent annually, up from 1.3 percent in the decade 2008–2018.

• E very major occupational group will add jobs— with three exceptions.

Those three exceptions are perhaps the most interesting—and alarming—specter looming in the crystal ball. Between 2018 and 2028, jobs are projected to decline in 1) sales occupations; 2) office and administrative support occupations; and 3) production occupations.

Among the 10 occupations projected to lose the largest number of jobs between 2018 and 2028, two are in sales: cashiers and retail salespersons. Another two are in production: assemblers and

fabricators; and inspectors, testers, and sorters. The remaining six biggest losers are all in office and administrative support: secretaries; office clerks; bookkeeping and accounting clerks; mail carriers; bank tellers; and customer service representatives.

These 10 occupations will lose more than 1.1 million jobs during the decade ahead as e-commerce and automation change the way we buy, sell, make, and monitor things. “These employment declines will be largely because of productivity growth in the manufacturing sector, automation of clerical and administrative work, and increasing competition from e-commerce,” explains the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The problem is, many of these occupations are some of the biggest. Secretaries, cashiers, office clerks, retail salespersons, and customer service representatives are among the largest occupations in the United States, employing 17 million people in 2018.

That’s more than 10 percent of the labor force.

So, what opportunities will be available to these workers as jobs in retail, office management, and production become harder to find?

For a clue, take a look at the 10 occupations projected to gain the most jobs in the decade ahead. Four are in health care: personal care aides, registered nurses, home health aides, and medical assistants. Three are in food service: food preparation and serving workers, cooks, and waitstaff. The remaining three are software developers, general and operations managers, and janitors.

Fortunately, the projected growth in the 10 occupations forecast to gain the largest number of jobs greatly outstrips the losses in the 10 occupations forecast to lose the most jobs. But there are important differences between the Big Gainers and the Big Losers. One difference is in earnings. Six of the 10 winners are low-paying occupations, with median annual earnings below $30,000. Among the losers, only three occupations have such low pay. Another difference is education. None of the Big Losers requires a bachelor’s degree.

Among the winners, the three occupations with earnings above the median require a bachelor’s degree.

The crystal ball shows an economy where advances in e-commerce and automation will shuffle many less-educated workers into lower paying jobs. This is likely to intensify growing economic inequality in the United States where, increasingly, a college degree divides the haves from the have nots.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I NOVEMBER 2019

5

What Happened to the Nuclear Family?

It’s Down to 20% of U.S. Households

y, how times have changed. Fifty years ago, the most common household type in the United States was the nuclear family—defined as a married couple with children under age 18. Fully 40 percent of the nation’s households in 1969 were living the Father’s Knows Best lifestyle, according to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey. Today, only 20 percent of households are nuclear families.

“

Behind the steep decline is this startling fact: Although the number of households more than doubled between 1969 and 2019, expanding from 62 million to 129 million, the number of nuclear families remained unchanged at 25 million. No change in 50 years! Consequently, the nuclear family share of total households plunged from 40 to 20 percent.

Empty-nest households outnumber

nuclear families by nearly 12 million

”

6

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I NOVEMBER 2019

Because the number of married couples with children under age 18 has not been growing, nuclear families were toppled from their position as the most common household type. Empty-nesters took their place. Married couples without children under age 18 at home have been the number-one household type in the United States since 1982. Because the number of empty-nesters increased at the same pace as overall household growth, the empty-nest share of households has remained essentially unchanged—30 percent in 1969 and 29 percent in 2019.

Today, empty-nest households outnumber nuclear families by nearly 12 million. Okay, not all of these households are empty-nesters. Some are young adults who have not yet had children. But most couples without children under age 18 at home are on the far end of their childbearing years. Fully 67 percent of empty-nest householders are aged 55 or older, with an average age of 59.

The three most common household types

1969

2019

NUCLEAR FAMILIES EMPTY-NESTERS PEOPLE WHO LIVE ALONE

EMPTY-NESTERS PEOPLE WHO LIVE ALONE NUCLEAR FAMILIES

Nuclear families are not even the second most common household type in the U.S. today. They fell into third place in 1997 when they were surpassed by single-person households. Single-person households now account for 28 percent of total households—slightly less than the 29 percent of households headed by empty-nesters. Behind the growth of both empty-nest and single-person households is the aging of the population, and in particular the aging of the baby-boom generation.

There’s more to come. Because of the aging of the population, the number of single-person households is growing faster than the number of empty-nesters. At the current rate of growth, we are only two years away from single-person households becoming the most common household type in the United States. That could happen in 2021.

2021

(projection)

PEOPLE WHO LIVE ALONE EMPTY-NESTERS NUCLEAR FAMILIES

“

Single-person households now account for 28 percent of total households

”

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I NOVEMBER 2019

7

BY PAME L A N . DA NZ IGER

MEET THE

the most consumer very marketer is searching for the Holy Grail in business: longterm profitable growth. Looking at the 330 million consumers who live in the vast $16 trillion American consumer economy, there is one group that stands out as the answer to a marketer’s quest. It is the most powerful, most acquisitive and most engaged consumer segment in the market today: the HENRYs, or the High-Earners-Not-RichYet consumers.

8

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I NOVEMBER 2019

HENRYS:

important segment in america

With household incomes from $100K-$249.9K, HENRYs are doing better than about three-fourths of the consumers in the country, though they are one-rung below the ultra-affluent segment ($250K+) above them. But owing to their far greater numbers than ultra-affluents—32 million HENRYs as compared to 5.6 million ultra-affluent households—HENRYs as a group wield significantly more influence in the consumer economy. As a result, the HENRYs account for a larger share of the consumer economy (~35-40%) in aggregate than the ultra-affluents (~1015%), despite the ultra-affluents’ greater spending power individually.

While the HENRYs are defined first by income, they are secondarily bisected by age. Young HENRYs, aged 24 to 54 years (millennials and GenXers) are in the lead economically among their cohorts and are likely to continue to gain as they age. Given that incomes tend to peak

between 40-55 years, the majority of HENRYs are still climbing the ladder and on track for accumulating significantly greater levels of income and wealth as a result.

The main reason their incomes are likely to continue to rise is thanks to their higher levels of educational attainment. Whereas college graduates head up only about one-third of all American households, that rate more than doubles among HENRYs where two-thirds have a college degree or higher.

Further, young HENRYs tend to have a more traditional lifestyle than their less educated and not as career-minded peers. They are more likely to be married, have or expect to have children, and be leaning in to living a successful, comfortable and healthy long life, rather than having a “live fast, die young” approach. Further, they are much more likely to invest in homeownership than the less affluent members of their cohorts.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I NOVEMBER 2019

9

When shopping, HENRYs value convenience above all, but price is a close second. Convenience is a priority because they have demanding careers, busy lives and often live in two-earner households. Saving money and finding the best price is a priority too, because they are good money managers and know how to stretch their budgets to afford most if not all that they want. They take pride in being smart, conscientious shoppers who can find the best for less.

People’s purchase behavior can change on a dime as new brands and new purchasing opportunities present themselves.

Like all those in the younger generations, HENRYs are more diverse. For example, 20% of Hispanic households have incomes over $100K, totaling some 3.6 million. This makes Hispanics the most highly represented ethnicity in the upper-level income range. By comparison there are 3.3 million Asians (alone or in combination) with incomes over $100K and 2.1 million blacks (AOIC). Whites alone remain the dominant ethnicity, however, with 29 million households led by them. (Note: these numbers include both HENRYs and Ultra-affluents because the Census doesn’t provide household counts by race/ ethnicity above $200K).

Given their higher levels of income, young HENRYs of all ethnicities are in their prime as far as consumer spending goes. While baby boomers are still in the game, the more affluent members of the millennial and GenX cohorts are at an acquisitive life stage, purchasing houses, home furnishings, wardrobes, cars and all the other accoutrements that define their lifestyle aspirations and goals.

What’s more, they are digital natives who know how to use all the tech tools at their disposal to find what they want, where they want it, and at the price they want to pay. They take no notice of distribution channels. Rather, they are the epitome of omnichannel shoppers.

They don’t conform to traditional paths to purchase, but forge their own unique paths, using digital, mobile, in-store or a combination of all three to score what they desire. They have given rise to all kinds of new retail business models, including showrooming (research in-store, buy online), “webrooming” (research online, buy in-store), buy-online-pickup-in-store (BOPIS), subscriptions, second-hand marketplaces, and rental services.

10

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I NOVEMBER 2019

Among the perspectives necessary to understand the HENRYs, getting a fix on their purchase motivations is the most important and ultimately the most predictable. People’s demographics change; they age year-afteryear and incomes can go down, as well as up, though for HENRYs the trajectory is more likely to be up, unless an economic crisis occurs.

Further, people’s purchase behavior can change on a dime as new brands and new purchasing opportunities present themselves.

And at different life stages, which are typically marked by age, consumers will have different purchase category needs.

But people’s underlying motivations, i.e. why they buy, remain fairly constant over time.

That is not to say that consumer motivations don’t change, but their motives basically are their set point as consumers. A luxury-indulging consumer is likely to choose a luxury alternative when considering a purchase that

matters, though even luxury-leaning consumers will opt for a lower-priced alternative for less-important purchases. A penny-pinching one is likely always to look for the cheapest choice that meets most, if not all of their needs.

Regarding young HENRYs on the road to true affluence, one of the biggest mistakes marketers can make is to think of them as “aspirational,” in the sense that they to aspire to acquire luxury labels to gain social status.

Nothing could be further from the truth. HENRYs don’t need flashy status symbols to signal to the world they have made it. They are confident in their identity and self-worth.

HENRYs define status by who they are and what they do, not by the things they own or brand names they wear. In a recent focus group, a young HENRY lawyer said that the “gray-haired” partners in his law firm all wear Rolex or Patek Philippe watches to tell the world how much money they make. But he chooses a $99 Timex Ironman Triathlon watch which says to the world, “This is who I

HENRYs define status by who they are and what they do, not by the things they own or brand names they wear. am. I am a triathlete. This is the watch I need.” In other words, his status comes from who he is, not how much money he makes or spends.

Traditional status symbols have taken on a highly negative cast in the current culture, being associated with conspicuous consumption, excess, elitism, exclusivity—and only for the wealthy one-percenters. These old luxury ideas push HENRYs away, rather than pull them in.

Young HENRYs are attracted to a new style of luxury that is practical and

functional (like the Ironman watch) not wearing luxury brands just for show.

New luxury is authentic, not phony with attention-seeking logos. It is inclusive and democratic, not exclusive and just for the elite. And its quality has to be top-notch.

HENRYs are more than willing to pay up when the purchase warrants it, but too often luxury brands miss the mark. HENRYs may offer two-orthree times better quality than the mass-market brand, but they also can charge ten-to-twenty times more. That isn’t a value/price equation that adds up in the HENRYs’ economy.

One motivation for young HENRYs that is never going to go out of style is a desire to live a life of luxury, but its luxury defined on their own terms, not those of some outside authority like a brand, designer, celebrity, or social media influencer.

For HENRYs a luxury lifestyle means living a life free of worries, most especially monetary worries, and one that is personally fulfilling, comfortable, and true to their personal value system. It is a lifestyle which will, sooner or later, cast its light on all other consumer segments and define their goals and aspirations.

11

Looking Under the Mattress Census Bureau releases survey that takes a peek ow much money do Americans have stashed away in their home, checking and savings accounts, IRAs and 401(k)s, mattresses and mason jars? It’s not often we get an update on these numbers. The Federal Reserve Bank fields the definitive measure of wealth—the Survey of Consumer Finances—only every three years.

The Fed’s 2019 survey is currently underway. But there’s another, lesser-known survey of wealth conducted by the Census Bureau every few years through the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP).

Median net worth of households by age of householder, 2016 MEDIAN NET WORTH

MEDIAN NET WORTH MINUS EQUITY IN OWN HOME

$94,670

$29,410

Under age 35

10,200

5,044

Aged 35 to 44

68,400

25,080

Aged 45 to 54

110,600

39,740

Aged 55 to 64

168,500

65,100

Aged 65 or older

209,300

64,370

Aged 65 to 69

223,300

86,630

Aged 70 to 74

211,700

58,370

200,700

50,840

TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS

Aged 75 or older

Source: Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation

The results of the latest SIPP survey were released this fall. Here are the three most important things you need to know about the wealth of American households …

12

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I NOVEMBER 2019

Wealth rises with age. American households had a median net worth of $94,670 in 2016, according to the SIPP results. Unlike income and spending, which peak among middle-aged householders, wealth peaks in old age.

Householders aged 65 to 69 have the highest median net worth, at $223,300 in 2016. Householders aged 70 or older also have a median net worth above $200,000. There’s a reason wealth rises with age. Keep reading.

2

3

Most wealth is home equity. Subtract the equity they have in their own home, and American households have a median net worth of just $29,410. Chump change. Home equity accounts for an astounding 69 percent of the net worth of the average household. This explains why wealth rises with age. The oldest householders are the ones most likely to have paid off their mortgage, owning their homes free and clear. Because they have less debt and more home equity than younger age groups, older Americans are the wealthiest. Homeownership is the pathway to wealth in the United States. This explains why renters are the demographic segment most likely to have no wealth—34 percent of renters have zero or negative net worth, according to the SIPP results. Among homeowners, only 4 percent have no wealth. At the other extreme, 71 percent of homeowners have a net worth of $100,000 or more compared with just 12 percent of renters.

Home equity accounts for an astounding 69 percent of the net worth of the average household.

Four assets. Only four assets are owned by the majority of households: a bank account, a vehicle, a retirement account, and a primary residence. Bank accounts are the most commonly owned asset, with 92 percent of households having a saving and/or checking account (median value = $5,000. Not much wealth there). Equity in a vehicle is the second most commonly owned asset, with 83 percent of households owning a vehicle (median value = $6,137. Again, not much). Retirement accounts are owned by 54 percent of households (median value = $65,000, and far from enough for a comfortable retirement). Equity in their own home is held by 63 percent of households (median value = $100,000, and the only six-figure asset owned by the majority of households).

In about a year, we will get a new assessment of wealth.

The Federal Reserve Board will release the results of the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances late in 2020. While it’s likely median net worth will have grown because of the aging of the population, the three most important things you need to know about American household wealth will not have changed.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I NOVEMBER 2019

13

Transportation Spending Is Down Americans are keeping their cars longer

Percent change in average household spending on transportation, 2000 to 2018 (in 2018 dollars)

9.7% TOTAL TRANSPORTATION

20.2%

Vehicle purchases

14% Other vehicle expenses

12% Gasoline and motor oil

31.4% Public transportation Note: Other vehicle expenses includes vehicle financing, insurance, maintenance and repairs, rentals, leases, parking fees, and tolls.

14

hat is the second biggest expense for the average American household? If you said transportation, you’re right. The average household spent nearly $10,000 in 2018 to get from here to there, including the cost of buying vehicles, filling them with gas, taking an Uber, riding a bus or train, and flying to vacation destinations. That’s a substantial 15.9 percent of the household budget, second only to housing.

But it used to be worse.

The share of the household budget devoted to transportation was as high as 19.5 percent in 2000. Then came the Great Recession. Vehicle purchases plummeted. By 2009, transportation’s share of the budget had dropped to 15.6 percent. Surprisingly, the transportation share of the budget has not returned to pre-Great Recession levels. You have to go all the way back to the 1960s, when most households had only one car, to find a time when the transportation share of the household budget was lower than it is today.

What explains the decline? Most of it is explained by a reduction in spending on vehicle purchases, which fell 20 percent between 2000 and 2018 after adjusting for inflation. Spending on “other vehicle expenses” (which includes finance charges) was down 14 percent. In contrast, the average household spent more on gasoline, because gas prices were higher. Public transportation spending also rose because of a big increase in spending on taxi service (a category that includes ride-hailing services) and smaller increases in spending on airline fares, ship fares, and other travel items.

Why are today’s households spending so much less on vehicle purchases than their counterparts

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I NOVEMBER 2019

in 2000? It’s not as though more households are going carless. The percentage of households with at least one vehicle did not change between 2000 and 2018, remaining at 88 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Nor has the average number of vehicles per household declined, remaining at 1.9 throughout the time period. But one thing has changed—the average age of vehicles on the road has increased by one-third—from 8.9 years in 2000 to 11.8 years in 2019, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and Automotive News. By keeping their cars longer, Americans have reduced their spending on vehicle purchases and financing.

The willingness of the public to forego shiny new cars suggests a change in the American psyche.

Automobiles do not seem to be as important to younger generations as they were to boomers and older Americans. The results of a 2018 survey by Arity, a transportation research firm, found evidence of this. Only 31 percent of baby boomers believe “owning a car is not worth the investment.” But fully 47 percent of Gen Xers and 51 percent of millennials believe cars are not worth the expense.

2016. Indeed, Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen has predicted that half of the colleges and universities in the U.S. would be bankrupt within the next 10-15 years.

Gone are the days when college enrollment grew rapidly. Over the course of 14 years from 1997 to 2011, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), undergraduate enrollment at degree-granting institutions grew 45%.

But the latest report from the NCES, published in February 2019, predicts that enrollment growth will slow to just 3% between 2016 and 2027. In fact, according to the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, spring 2019 enrollments decreased 1.7% compared to the previous year.

Demographics and The Demand for Higher Education In higher education circles, it’s called “The Apocalypse.” That would be 2026, the first year that all those babies that people stopped having in the Great Recession would have started college.

That’s the subject of the insightful, data-driven book Demographics and The Demand for Higher Education (Johns Hopkins University Press) from Nathan Grawe, an economics professor at Carleton College in Northfield, Minnesota. Grawe became particularly interested in the topic when he spent a few years as an associate dean at Carleton and began wondering about the future of institutions like his.

For some colleges, the hard times have already started. Several colleges, such as Bucknell University and La Salle University in Pennsylvania have fallen short of their targeted enrollment numbers for this year. At a conference of college presidents in September, Brian Rosenberg, president of Macalester College in St. Paul, MN told of 10 Midwest liberal arts colleges that failed to reach even 70% of their enrollment targets.

Other colleges, like Hampshire College, are exploring mergers or, like, Wheelock College have already done so (it’s now part of Boston University). Mount Ida College, a 119-year-old college in Newton, MA, closed its doors in 2018, one of more than 20 private colleges to shutter since

But if you thought things were already getting bad, just wait until 2026. That year, enrollment will begin its drop of 15% within five years.

But not every institution will feel the pinch equally, according to Grawe.

Grawe observes: “As any admissions officer can confirm, while the number of college-aged children is an important component of higher education demand, who is in the prospective student pool is at least as important.”

In the book, Grawe attempts to measure how the upcoming drop in college-age students would affect different kinds of institutions. To that end, he developed the Higher Education Demand Index, or HEDI, a formula that predicts the likelihood of various demographic groups to attend college. HEDI also takes into account differences in institutional types, with separate forecasts for two- and four-year colleges, regional vs. national, elite vs. non-elite and public vs. private.

ticularly because 90% of their students come from within the same state as their school, and a majority come from within a 35-mile radius. Two-year colleges in New England and the Pacific will see enrollments drop 13 and 17 percent respectively. But areas such as the East North Central, Middle Atlantic and East South Central will drop 20-30 percent.

At four-year colleges, Grawe’s HEDI predicts growth through 2025, followed by a four-year period in which about 280,000 students will be lost. But because of the gains through 2025, losses compared to now will only be about 150,000 students.

Demand at elite schools will remain strong, expected to grow by more than 15 percent through by 2029. In contrast, demand at non-elite schools will weaken.

Regional colleges and universities are expected to see about a 15 percent dip in enrollment from now until 2029, while national colleges and universities should be down about 10 percent by the end of the forecast period.

Grawe anticipates three possible strategies to dealing with the impending demographic changes. One, schools can take a hard-nosed approach, by either finding ways to increase revenue (such as high tuition/high aid) or cut budget. Two, they can take a hopeful approach, by bucking trends and increasing attendance. Three, they can take a hybrid approach. Whatever the approach, challenging times are ahead for many colleges and universities.

Grawe says not all regions of the country will be affected equally. New England, where there is a wealth of colleges, will be hit particularly hard. By 2029, there will be 24 percent fewer high school graduates likely to enroll in a college than there were in 2012. Other areas that would see a decline include the Midwest and the Mid-Atlantic and other areas of the Northeast.

Two-year colleges will see a sharp drop in enrollment across the country, par-

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I NOVEMBER 2019

15

Month by Month at a Glance

AMERICAN DEMOGRAPHICS Meet the Henrys The Real Cost of Student Debt

(November)

(October)

Gen Z: Listening to the Footsteps (December)

Living with Surging Waters (September)

Welcome to the World of Labor Shortages (January)

Let American Demographics be your umbrella against the uncertainties of tomorrow’s raindrops.

Visit www.americandemographics.com and subscribe.