Archives: Reg Murphy Pubs

Roscoe Scarborough

Rising Energy Costs Increase Energy Insecurity

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

Our most recent power bill was $315 for a 1450 square foot home—a new high for our household. A work colleague’s power bill was over $1,000 last month. Replacing his inefficient HVAC system would cost $18,000. Energy prices have risen about twice as fast as overall inflation since the pandemic. Many households are struggling.

According to July 2026 Gallup poll data, 28% of Americans viewed economic issues as the most important problem facing our nation. Americans took a broad view on the nation’s economic challenges. 11% of respondents noted “high cost of living” as the most important problem in the U.S. and another 11% highlighted “economy in general.”

“Energy insecurity” is an inability to meet household energy needs. 43.56 million out of 132.54 million households in the U.S. experienced energy insecurity in 2024, according to preliminary results from the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s Residential Energy Consumption Survey released earlier this year.

Some households are at greater risk of facing energy insecurity than others. Low-income households experience higher levels of energy insecurity, in large part due to spending a larger percentage of their take-home pay on energy and having little to no discretionary income. Seniors and households with children are also at an elevated risk of energy insecurity. Certain racial and ethnic groups experience higher rates of energy insecurity, including Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Native Hawaiians or Pacific Islanders. Lastly, energy insecurity is more pronounced in the South than in other regions of the U.S.

Rising energy costs force hard trade-offs and sacrifices to keep the lights on and the temperature at a comfortable level. Many Americans scale back on luxuries like eating out, travel, recreation, or purchasing a new vehicle. More consequentially, millions will stop taking medications, forego medical or dental work, skip meals, curtail grocery purchases, cut retirement contributions, keep their home at unsafe temperatures, or make other strategic decisions to pay their power bills.

Making matters worse, elevated energy costs indirectly raise the price of many goods and services. Additionally, producing certain commodities is energy intensive, including aluminum, many electronics, and beef. Elevated costs are passed on to consumers. Consumers are seeing some higher prices today, but more increases are on the way if energy costs do not fall.

Several factors are directly exacerbating energy insecurity. Conflict in the Middle East is driving up the cost of energy. Opening of data centers can contribute to higher power bills for consumers by creating a spike in demand for energy and requiring new energy infrastructure. In Georgia, cost overruns associated with Georgia Power’s Plant Vogtle resulted in a $7.56 billion tab for ratepayers.

Other factors indirectly impact one’s ability to cover increased energy costs, including inflation, the cost of housing, and cooling wage growth. Additionally, millions of low-income Americans’ monthly budgets are further strained due to loss of Medicaid or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits.

Improving the energy efficiency of homes has long been touted as a solution for rising energy costs. Replacing single-pane windows, installing solar panels, or replacing insulation have significant upfront costs. These expensive upgrades are out of reach for many low-income and fixed-income households. These individual solutions only address the symptom of the problem, rather than mitigate the cause.

Institutional solutions are warranted, including increasing energy supply, improving efficiency through regulation or incentive programs, improving electricity transmission infrastructure, expanding competition in electricity markets, and diversifying energy sources. Government can invest in strategic projects, streamline permitting, create geopolitical energy security, and expand consumer support for energy insecure households. A manifold approach is needed to address the energy insecurity crisis.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.

Collective Memory Defines What ‘American’ Means

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

Last weekend, Americans celebrated the semiquincentennial of the signing of our nation’s Declaration of Independence. Anniversaries provide an opportunity for reflection.

What does it mean to be American? What is American history? What should we celebrate about America? The sociological subfield of “collective memory” helps us to understand how answers to these questions are social and contested.

The sociological subfield of collective memory examines how societies or groups construct and preserve shared narratives. Collective memory scholars contend that groups’ collective identities, memories, knowledge, and beliefs are transmitted to people through social institutions like education, physical culture like monuments, and group rituals. Individual memories and worldviews are shaped and sustained by our group affiliations.

There are many understandings of what it means to be an American. Enlightenment ideals are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, including “unalienable Rights” that include “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Others may celebrate the American Dream, principles of republicanism, participation in democratic elections, or take pride in the U.S. being a nation of immigrants.

Our understandings of what it means to be an American are a product of our institutional and group experiences. What it means to be an American is shaped by school curricula, displays in museums, public monuments, the mass and social media we consume, and the rituals of our families and friends.

Consider how we remember the American Civil War. Textbooks and instructors in grade school or college shaped what you know about the causes, significant events, and consequence of the conflict. Additionally, maybe you watched the popular Ken Burns miniseries, read books on the topic, or encountered information on social media. Social institutions shape our collective memory of the Civil War, just like all other historical events.

This can also be applied to modern happenings like the events on January 6, 2020. Will history record the events of that day as a protest or as an insurrection? Today, there are polarized interpretations of the event that are shaped, in large part, by one’s mass and social media consumption. It is likely that a “collective memory” of the what happened and its significance will coalesce over time.

Various groups often have disparate experiences of being an American. Black and White Americans experienced the American Civil Rights Movement differently. Wealthy and poor Americans had different experiences in the Great Recession. Democrats and Republicans are having different experiences during President Trump’s tenure. These groups’ collective memories shape how they understand America and its history.

History is contested. There are always a variety of views on what should be included and excluded. Groups in positions of institutional power in government, media, religion, and education try to control the dominant narrative of events. Though there are many unique experiences of our reality, only some stories or perspectives get recorded. Institutionally, certain perspectives are enshrined in our history books, museums, and our collective memory.

Culture wars over school curricula, monuments in our communities, the imagery on our currency, and displays in museums are contentious and politically charged. In recent decades, these debates have become increasingly partisan. These are battles over who gets to shape our collective memory.

Changes in our media climate have democratized knowledge production, for better or for worse. In the past, culture industries defined our official narratives through news, books, and mass media programming. Walter Cronkite would declare, “And that’s the way it is.” Today, anyone with a social media account can tell their story. The plurality of voices sharing their perspectives has expanded exponentially. These voices in the virtual public square shape our collective memory.

Our collective memory of America and its history is a social phenomenon. Americans from different walks of life may have different understandings of America and its history. Our collective memory is contested and evolving. It is likely that our grandchildren will likely have a very different understanding of America than we do today.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.

Melissa Trussell, Reg Murphy Columns

Dads and the Gender Pay Gap

Written by Melissa Trussell on . Posted in Melissa Trussell, Reg Murphy.

If you grew up before the days of streaming entertainment, you know that summers are for re-runs. In that spirit, and since my last week had very little writing time between summer camps, VBS, dentist appointments, and the first day of summer classes, this week I am re-running a piece I wrote in June 2018. I have updated to include the most recent available data.

One of the classes I regularly teach is a research methods course in which I teach students how to find or collect and analyze data. In one of their assignments in the course, students have to use the U.S. Census Bureau website to look up and report data on Glynn County. Then, I ask them what most surprised them about what they found. Every semester, most of them are most surprised by the wage gap between men and women with comparable levels of education in Glynn County.

According to the 2024 American Community Survey (ACS), within the population of adults age 25 and over who have earnings, women’s median earnings are approximately $16,000 less than men’s. Much of this gap may be explained by differences in education, so the ACS breaks the population out by educational attainment. The estimated median earnings gap, approximated in parentheses in the following list, persists for those with less than a high school degree ($4600), high school diploma ($8800), some college ($29,000), bachelor’s degree ($24,800), and graduate or professional degree ($23,500).

These gaps are astounding, and they always tend to shock and anger students, with good reason. Wage gaps are complicated statistics and certainly can be partially attributed to non-discriminatory factors. But, gaps this large and within education groups almost surely indicate widespread labor-market sexism.

The good news is that evidence suggests Glynn County is experiencing the same progress as the rest of the country in this regard. On the whole, the gender wage gap in 2024 was smaller than 10 years earlier.

One of the reasons for this narrowing gap is that women are increasingly entering occupations that have historically been male-dominated. And much of the credit for this trend goes to the fathers of those women. In a 2011 publication, economists Judith K. Hellerstein and Melinda Sandler Morrill find that women born in 1977 were 13-20% more likely to enter their dads’ occupations than women born in 1909 and that this increase could be attributed to fathers’ influence and transfer of knowledge and skills to their daughters.

As it has become more acceptable for women to enter male-dominated fields, their fathers have begun to encourage and train them to do so.

I am a product of this type of fatherly encouragement. My dad is an electrical engineer and tried hard to convince at least one of his three daughters to follow in his footsteps, exposing us to his work and hobby as often as we would tolerate when we were kids and teens. He did not succeed with my siblings or me, but he is now working on his grandkids, most of whom are also girls.

Dad didn’t convince me to become an engineer, but through his trying, I did gain the confidence that I could be successful in whatever field I chose.

So, I am an economist. When I graduated in 2015, only 31.7% of new Economics Ph.D.s were women. And when I was hired to my first tenure-track job, 41.2% of people in similar positions were women. Today, I am one of the 36.2% of Associate Professors of Economics at non-doctoral institutions who are women. And my dad couldn’t be prouder.

As we approach Father’s Day, I celebrate those dads, like mine, who encourage and enable their daughters to thrive in whatever occupations they choose, especially those that have historically been dominated by men.

Thanks, Dad. Happy Father’s Day.

————-

Dr. Melissa Trussell is a professor in the School of Business and Public Management at College of Coastal Georgia who works with the college’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. Contact her at mtrussell@ccga.edu. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

The Power of Collective Effervescence

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

Have you ever been to a concert or a college football game and felt the electricity that comes from being part of the crowd? That’s “collective effervescence,” a term coined by the sociologist Émile Durkheim more than a century ago. The concept can help us to understand religion, teen takeovers, or why people love live music.

My colleague Dr. Heather Farley’s column on the arts from last week provided inspiration for today’s column. Dr. Farley reflected on going to see the Coastal Symphony of Georgia at CCGA’s new Center for the Arts. She wrote “…what stuck with me was the shared experience of it all… There was a buzz in the building that’s hard to define… There is something unique about sitting in a room with other people and experiencing art together.” That buzz is collective effervescence.

When members of a likeminded group come together, maintain a common focus, and participate in some shared action, collective effervescence often occurs. Sociologist Émile Durkheim discusses the concept in The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Durkheim notes that groups often gather for rituals that focus on a totem—a symbol that represents the shared values of the collective. Sacred group rituals produce emotional energy, a loss of individuality, feelings of belonging, and reaffirmations of shared identity. Collective effervescence is a foundational mechanism of group solidarity. Durkheim was writing about Aboriginal groups, but collective effervescence occurs among secular groups as well.

Durkheim claims that collective effervescence is likely to emerge in rituals that are sacred to the group, but collective effervescence is less likely to occur in profane or instrumental actions like work or cleaning. Sacred activities are “things set apart and forbidden,” while profane activities involve mundane, individual, or instrumental behaviors.

Consider collective effervescence among Georgia (football) fans. Gamedays are sacred. There is no shortage of group rituals, including gathering with other Georgia fans, wearing red and black, Calling the Dawgs, drinking, and eating gameday foods. When a true fan takes their pilgrimage to Sanford Stadium, rituals including the Dawg Walk, ringing of the chapel bell, and other traditions. These rituals leave participants with an emotional charge that reaffirms one’s commitment to the team and to the university. Every fandom has its own sacred rituals that produce collective effervescence.

Collective effervesce also emerges in protests, riots, and teen takeovers. The concept explains how otherwise rational and well-adjusted people can engage in unruly behavior in these group settings.

A quarter century ago, Robert Putnam said that Americans were “bowling alone.” Now, we are “scrolling alone.” Modern technologies like smart phones and social media give us the illusion of deep connection and intimacy, while depriving us of rich relationships and community. Though we are more connected virtually than at any point in history, belonging has become scarce.

Americans have lost our “third place;” too few people have a place where they congregate with others outside of home and work. A church, a bar, a barber shop, a pickleball court, a local nonprofit, or a café can provide an anchor for community life. It might seem insignificant to not know your neighbors, but wholesale withdrawal from civic and social life leaves us ripe for poor mental health, substance abuse, or radicalization.

How did we get here? Modern technologies like the internet and smartphones play a central role, but there’s more going on. Religious participation has declined. Declining marriage rates, the rise of single parenthood, and more people living unpartnered all change how we socialize. Many Americans struggle economically; some work overtime, some take on a second job, and others cut back on recreation to afford necessities.

Most of us are missing out on the collective effervescence of the symphony, the congregation, the concert, or the protest. Too many lack a third place. We are deprived of opportunities to engage in shared rituals with likeminded people. The true cost is the loss of belonging.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.

Student Research Summarizes Local Economic Conditions

Written by Melissa Trussell on . Posted in Melissa Trussell, Reg Murphy.

With their permission, I have added 22 co-authors to my column this week. My Principles of Macroeconomics students have just wrapped up a research project, and their findings are worth sharing here.

They produced a 2026 Coastal Georgia Beige Book. The Federal Reserve publishes their Beige Book 8 times each year. It contains qualitative summaries of economic conditions in each of the Fed’s 12 districts, organized by market sector within each District.

My students were divided into 7 teams, each assigned one sector of our local economy: Retail, Hospitality, Construction and Real Estate, Transportation and Logistics, Banking and Finance, and Nonprofit. Groups identified firms or organizations in their sector in Glynn, McIntosh, and Camden Counties. They spent two weeks visiting managers, owners, or directors of those organizations to request participation in a survey. The survey included questions about product demand, labor market conditions, and business activity, comparing the present to the recent past and to expectations for the near future. Sixty-one local leaders responded to our survey. Thank you!

The students produced the following summary of their findings, reflecting local economic conditions prior to the beginning of U.S. combat operations in Iran.

——

Summary of Economic Activity. Economic activity in Coastal Georgia increased at a moderate pace during the reporting period. Employment levels were largely stable, though contacts in the nonprofit sector reported plans to reduce paid staff and increase reliance on volunteers. Wages were flat, even as purchasing power declined slightly. Retail sales increased modestly, and hospitality activity remained generally stable. However, contacts in these sectors expected demand to rise in coming months due to seasonal factors. The market for residential real estate remained strong, supported by declining mortgage interest rates and an uptick in new construction. Transportation and logistics activity in the region was flat to slightly declining, while the manufacturing sector showed signs of expansion during the reporting period. Overall, the financial sector experienced a period of expansion, despite reports that delinquencies are on the rise. Nonprofit organizations reported budget pressures amid increasing demand for their services.

Labor Markets. Employment levels in Coastal Georgia were largely flat during the reporting period. A few contacts reported recent reductions in permanent staff, while a growing number of firms reported plans to increase head count. About half of contacts reported difficulty finding qualified workers. On balance, wages remained unchanged in the region, and only a small number of firms reported plans to raise wages in the coming period.

Prices. Prices in the region increased slightly during the reporting period, with regional price growth remaining below the national average. Contacts in the retail, hospitality, and transportation and logistics sectors reported increased use of discounts and incentives to encourage consumer spending.

——

Through this project, students learned about our local economy and the types of data the Fed uses to inform economic policy. They also developed research, writing, and presentation skills they will use as future business leaders. Before distributing surveys, students completed training in the ethical conduct of research. Afterwards, we spent time in class analyzing the survey data, calculating diffusion indexes to indicate contraction or expansion in each sector over the reported time periods. Dr. Jennifer Gray, Director of the Writing Center at CCGA, led us in a workshop to understand and practice writing in Beige Book style. Dr. Mary McGinnis, Director of CCGA’s ENDEAVOR Center for High Impact Practices, taught students how to create posters to present their work at the ENDEAVOR Conference, which was held on campus last Friday. To view our research posters and download a complete copy of the 2026 Coastal Georgia Beige Book, go to bit.ly/CoastalBeigeBook.

My Co-authors: Thad Burns, Amy Canseco, Taegan Elium, Madison Fink, Alex Flores-Lopez, Luke Frisbee, Jaime Gaona, Michaela Godwin, Giselle Heetland, Lyla Johnson, Aaron Logan, Jaden Meyer, Logan Mobley, Elliott, Maritza Morales, Lei Nonu, Lupe Nonu, Philip Paradise, Dawson Parke, Nora Stephens, Emma Williams, Evan Worst.

———–

Dr. Melissa Trussell is a professor in the School of Business and Public Management at College of Coastal Georgia who works with the college’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. Contact her at mtrussell@ccga.edu. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

There is a Future for the Social Sciences

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

The social sciences, especially Sociology, have been caught up in the culture wars. Last month, the State University System of Florida Board of Governors removed Introductory Sociology from the list of courses that can count toward general-education requirements, relegating the course to an elective. The probable result will be fewer Sociology majors and fewer graduates entering helping professions in Florida.

Last week, my colleague, Dr. Heather Farley, wrote a column in this space discussing if today’s college majors will still matter in the job market of the future. The perennial concern about whether college graduates will be able to get a job with their degree is exacerbated by fears associated with artificial intelligence replacing jobs. Dr. Farley concluded that colleges must develop curricula that promise “preparation to think critically, solve problems, communicate clearly, lead teams, make ethical decisions and adapt when tools and markets change.”

The social sciences provide the opportunity to develop many skills or career competencies that employers desire, including critical thinking, oral and written communication, analytical reasoning, professionalism, and interpersonal skills. Social science majors challenge students to develop research skills, data literacy, perspective-taking, creativity, ethics, and social responsibility. These soft skills are conducive to both engaged citizenship and gainful employment, even in the age of AI.

College students often struggle to articulate how their classes and cocurricular activities yield marketable skills. To address this gap in my own Introductory Sociology class, I incorporate an assignment each semester that tasks students to identify skills or career competencies that are acquired in our class and link these to specific class activities. Students are forced to articulate how they are honing skills that will used in their intended career. Everyone can benefit from taking a social science class, but professors can do more to explicitly define the value of our courses for students’ professional and personal growth.

Training in the social sciences prepares people for a wide variety of careers, including working with children and families, counseling, social services, and research. Working with people is an obvious application of one’s social science training, but many social science graduates have careers in health care, education, criminal justice, and business.

The “Undergraduate Degree Earners Report” from the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center offers a window into college graduation trends nationally. Over the past decade, Psychology enrollment has increased, but enrollment has declined in other social science majors. From 2023-2024 to 2024-2025, enrollment in both Psychology and other social science disciplines increased.

There is strong enrollment in the social sciences at the College of Coastal Georgia. Psychology is the fourth largest major by enrollment with modest growth in recent years. The most popular minors at Coastal are Psychology (#1), Criminal Justice (#2), and Sociology (#3).

There is significant projected job growth in social science careers. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics projections, community and social service occupations are projected to grow much faster than the average for all occupations from 2024 to 2034. There is significant growth projected in a range of helping professions, including: social work; substance abuse, behavioral disorder, and mental health counselors; marriage and family therapists; and community health workers.

Artificial intelligence will impact a range of careers, including many helping professions. Generative AI may offer an individual helpful tips to deal with depression, but it is no substitute for a mental health professional. The future will reveal if any of our jobs are AI-proof. However, the skills developed in the social sciences hold promise to have enduring value in the job market of tomorrow. Also, there are expanding job opportunities in social science careers.

It appears that there is a bright future for the social sciences.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.

How Declining Religiosity Is Reshaping the U.S. Economy

Written by Melissa Trussell on . Posted in Melissa Trussell, Reg Murphy.

Last week, my colleague Dr. Roscoe Scarborough presented data on trends in religiosity in the United States. Dr. Scarborough stated that the proportion of Americans identifying as Christian has declined from 90% in 1990 to less than two-thirds today, and the number claiming no religious affiliation has risen from 5% to over 25%.

Even before national surveys started to show shifts in religious affiliation, churches were seeing declines in attendance. An article published in the early 2000’s by Christianity Today references concerns about falling church attendance beginning as far back as the 1960s.

The trend matters not only to struggling churches but to society as a whole. There is little doubt religious participation has an impact on GDP. The size and direction of that impact, however, is not a matter of consensus among scholars.

An oft-cited, 2016 article by sociologist and attorney Grim and Grim finds that the impact of religion on the U.S. economy at the time was at least $378 billion per year, the combined revenue of faith-based organizations. The authors argue this is a gross understatement, and when they add in their estimates of the value of goods and services provided by religious organizations and faith-based businesses, they calculate an economic impact of $1.2 trillion per year.

These numbers should cause us to pause and consider how declining religiosity is impacting our country. For example, if one religious household left the faith, would that household then contribute more or less to the economy? It is hard to tell from the Grim and Grim article alone.

I dug into this question and have been fascinated by the findings of economists who have studied the relationship between religion and economic growth using statistical techniques that do allow comparison to a counterfactual.

Rachel McCleary, an associate with the Hoover Institution at Stanford, describes a two-way street between religiosity and economics. Comparing outcomes across countries with varying levels of economic development and religiosity, she finds that increasing economic development reduces religiosity, as the opportunity cost of religious participation rises. Studying the reverse causality, she finds that religion has a mixed effect on economic development. Religious beliefs (e.g. in hell, heaven, and the afterlife), which tend to be associated with positive ethics, also tend to increase productivity and growth in a society. But, religious participation (i.e. church attendance) has a negative effect on economic growth, perhaps by diverting time and resources away from market activity. As McCleary describes it, “the main growth effect that we find is a positive response to an increase in believing relative to belonging (attending).”

McCleary remarks that the U.S. is an outlier in her study. For a country with such a high GDP per capita, we also have very high rates of both religious belief and formal religious participation.

Even so, within our country, at least one of the trends McCleary describes seems to hold up—religious participation negatively affects local economies. A 2023 study by economists Petach and Powell looks at trends in county-level religious participation between 2000 and 2020 compared with county GDP growth over the same time period. They find that a 10% increase in religious participation in a county reduces that county’s per capita GDP growth rate by 19% relative to the average county’s growth rate.

A key mechanism through which Petach and Powell find religious participation negatively affects GDP is actually a very bright silver lining for religion. They find that the strength of religious social networks prevents the demise of unproductive firms, stunting economic growth in more religious counties. Dr. Scarborough wrote last week, “Americans are starved for connection and community.” I agree, and I’d argue more religious participation might be what we need, even if it comes at a cost to GDP.

———–

Dr. Melissa Trussell is a professor in the School of Business and Public Management at College of Coastal Georgia who works with the college’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. Contact her at mtrussell@ccga.edu. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

Religiosity Has Declined in Recent Decades

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

As recently as 1990, 90% of Americans identified as Christian and 5% were religiously unaffiliated. Recent data show that less than two-thirds of Americans now identify as Christian and at least a quarter are religiously unaffiliated. This represents a seismic institutional shift in Americans’ religiosity in a few decades.  

Data from multiple sources offer insight on the state of religiosity in the United States. Gallup found that 68% of Americans identified as Christian in 2023. The General Social Survey found that 64% of Americans were Christian in 2022. Pew Research finds that 62% of all adults identified as Christian in 2023-24. All of these surveys estimate that about 7% of Americans practice Judaism, Islam, or other faiths.

The most significant change in our nation’s religiosity is an increasing percentage of Americans who are religiously unaffiliated. These are people who identify as atheist, agnostic, or having “no religion.” Recent estimates of religiously unaffiliated Americans vary: Gallup estimates 22%, the General Social Survey finds 27%, and Pew estimates 29%. By comparison, a mere 5% of Americans were religiously unaffiliated in 1990.

Younger Americans are far less religious than older Americans. Data from Pew shows that 83% of people born before 1954 identify with a religion. Conversely, only 57% of people born between 1995-2007 identify with a religion. Younger generations are less likely to pray daily, less likely say religion is very important, and less likely to attend religious services. Nationally, much of the decline in religiosity is due to less religious younger generations replacing more religious older generations over time.

Compounding this trend, Americans have become less religious as they have aged in recent decades. Gen Z and older Americans have experienced slight declines in religiosity over time, but Americans in middle adulthood—folks in their thirties and forties—have discarded religion at higher rates. Historically, changing one’s religious beliefs after thirty was rare.

Young people are less involved in formal religion, but retain high levels of spirituality. Pew data show that among 18- to 24-year-olds, only 27% report praying daily and only 25% attend religious services. Among this same age group, 82% believe that people have a soul or spirit and 71% believe that there is something spiritual beyond the natural world. There are only modest differences among young people and older generations on these questions.

Several factors contributed to the mass religious disaffiliation that began in the 1990s. Reasons for not practicing a religion vary: some Americans are disenchanted, others dislike organized religion, some are unsure of their faith, and others report being too busy to attend. There have been clergy scandals that led some to lose trust in religious institutions. There are increasing rates of religious intermarriage. Additionally, the association of Christianity with conservative policies has driven some liberals away from religion.

Declining religiosity might not reflect a shortcoming of organized religion or the leadership of any particular congregation. Rather, declining religiosity reflects Americans’ widespread withdrawal from civic and social institutions in recent decades. Empty church pews and unstaffed volunteer fire departments reflect a common issue—the erosion of community connections. Americans have shifted away from collective, in-person activities in favor of Netflix and doomscrolling. Americans are starved for connection and community, religious or secular.

After a precipitous decline in religiosity between 1990 and 2020, recent data suggest that religiosity has leveled off. The percentage of Americans who self-identify as Christian, attend religious services, and pray all show several years of post-pandemic stability as of 2023-24. Time will tell if this is a new normal. Future religiosity in the United States will by shaped by the practices of religious institutions, rates of interfaith marriages, patterns of immigration, legislation, fertility patterns across groups, and ever-evolving cultural attitudes toward religion.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.

Would Jesus Choose Capitalism or Socialism?

Written by Melissa Trussell on . Posted in Melissa Trussell, Reg Murphy.

A Christian pastor recently asked me what economic system Jesus would establish if He were to show up today to set us straight. Here, I offer my response by comparing two prominent economic systems: capitalism and socialism. I have no formal theological training but am a committed Christian. Jesus himself avoided debates like this, and nothing that follows is essential to salvation. What I offer here is an intellectual exercise—my attempt to think carefully and humbly about how economic systems align, or fail to align, with Christian moral principles.

Neither capitalism nor socialism fully captures the message and example of Jesus, yet both reflect moral commitments that appear repeatedly in His teaching.

In its purest form, socialism is an economic system in which private ownership of production and private accumulation of wealth are minimized or eliminated. Production is a means toward social provision, not profit. Government allocates resources so all members of society have basic needs met. There are two Christian values that I believe align well with socialist systems: 1) a reordering of priorities away from individual wealth and 2) a shared responsibility for basic human needs. Jesus admonishes we should not “store up […] treasures on earth” (Matthew 6:19), and He commands that we care for “the least of these” (Matthew 25).

Capitalism, in its purest form, is an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned, and wealth is accumulated and determined through voluntary exchange in markets. Markets allocate resources to those with the highest willingness and ability to pay. There are two Christian values that I believe align well with capitalist systems: 1) stewardship and 2) moral agency. Jesus calls us to be “faithful and wise manager[s]” (Luke 12:42), entrusting us with resources and the freedom to choose to “give to the poor” or “[go] away sad” (Matthew 19:21–22).

Each system also incentivizes moral failings. Socialism leads to greed among the most powerful, who hoard wealth at the expense of society, and to slothfulness among the working class, who have little incentive to steward their gifts to care for their neighbor. Capitalism leads to greed at all levels, which manifests as dishonesty, discrimination, and general disregard for one’s neighbor. 

No economic system will solve the problems sin creates. Still, I believe well-regulated capitalism gets us closer to Christian ideals than any version of socialism history has seen. While wealth inequality is an abiding byproduct of capitalist systems, history suggests that market freedom leads to better outcomes for “the least of these.”

The percent of the world’s population living in extreme poverty shrank from 89% in 1820 to 63% in 1950 and to 10% in 2018, and health has improved with wealth. Most scholars agree that a major factor—though not the only one— driving these changes has been global shifts toward capitalist, free-market economies. Today, fewer than 2% of citizens in the world’s most economically free countries live in poverty, compared with more than 15% in the world’s least free economies.

Additionally, I believe we experience “love thy neighbor” most genuinely when we give and receive freely rather than by government mandate. Greed, however, necessitates regulation. Economist Esteban Ortiz-Ospina of Our World in Data notes that global progress correlates both with the spread of capitalism and with the growth of government. I imagine that in Jesus’ economy, government would establish and enforce property rights and contracts while also ensuring equal opportunity and a reasonable floor to living standards.

To my Christian friends who disagree, I don’t condemn you. Jesus did not answer this question, and He likely would be more creative than choosing either of these two systems. Indeed, these thoughts may not be my final answer. My faith journey is one of continual growth, and I just enjoy the conversation.

———–

Dr. Melissa Trussell is a professor in the School of Business and Public Management at College of Coastal Georgia who works with the college’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. Contact her at mtrussell@ccga.edu. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

Adulthood Milestones Are Changing for Young People

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

Most young adults fail to achieve traditional markers of adulthood. Compared to previous generations, fewer young adults are (1) living away from their parents, (2) working, (3) married, and (4) living with a child. In 2024, only 21% of those who are 25 to 35 years old in the U.S. have achieved all four adulthood milestones.

At age 35, I had only achieved two of four traditional markers of adulthood: living away from parents and working. Almost every conversation with my parents or extended family led to questions about when I was getting married and having kids. A dozen years living away from home, a Ph.D., a career, a mortgage, and an eight-year relationship didn’t seem to count for much. “The curse stops with me” was my preferred response, which I hoped would temper questions about marriage and kids.

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1975 and 2024 Annual Social and Economic Supplements offer insights on the morphing character of young adulthood. The top five most common circumstances of young adults at each period are listed below.

Back in 1975, 45% of people 25-35 in the U.S. had achieved all four adulthood milestones. 22% of young people lived away from parents, were married, and had children. 15% lived away from parents, worked, and were married. 6% lived away from parents and worked. 3% were in the labor force.

In 2024, 21% of people 25-35 in the U.S. had achieved all four adulthood milestones. 28% of young people lived away from parents and worked. 14% lived away from parents, worked, and were married. 9% were in the labor force. 8% lived away from parents, worked, and had children.

The most common milestones associated with becoming an adult have changed over the past fifty years. Today’s young adults prioritize economic security over getting married or having children. Several societal changes contributed to these shifting norms: women’s participation in the workforce, access to reproductive healthcare, varied family structures, more people choosing to live unpartnered or with parents, and the high costs of housing, food, healthcare, and other expenses.

Fewer young adults get married or have kids today. Young adults are delaying marriage or skipping it altogether. Correspondingly, young people are delaying having children or choosing childless lifestyles.

Labor force participation is now the primary marker of adulthood for young adults. Decades ago, a significant portion of young adults, mostly women, did not work, but achieved other traditional markers of adulthood. This is no longer the case. Today, it is more likely for a young adult to be an unwed parent who works and lives away from one’s own parents than it is to be a married, stay-at-home parent who lives away from one’s own parents.

Home ownership remains elusive for young adults. The average age of a first-time homebuyer in the U.S. is now around 40. The median home in the U.S. now costs more than $400,000, up about 90% in the last decade. The high cost of home ownership also drives up the cost of rent, which diminishes how much young people can save to purchase a home. The result is more young people living with parents or other family. In fact, more than 1.5 million more adults under age 35 now live with their parents compared to a decade ago.

Despite my declarations to the contrary, the curse did not stop with me. By my early forties, I had achieved all four traditional markers of adulthood by getting married and having a child. Like most young adults today, I did not achieve all of the traditional adulthood milestones by age 35. Now, my septuagenarian family members want to know when I’m having a second kid. I guess they didn’t read my September column explaining declining birth rates in the U.S.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.