填空题Beauty and Body Image in the Media A

填空题As food is to the body, so is learning to the mind

填空题How Safe Is Your Cell Phone A

填空题The economic costs of noise are several

填空题One in five US workers regularly attends after-wor

填空题It Isn't Easy Being Green Green stories of hotels

填空题.Living with parents edges out other living arrangements for 18- to 34-year-olds A. Broad demographic (人口的) shifts in marital status, educational attainment and employment have transformed the way young adults in the U.S. are living, and a new Pew Research Center analysis highlights the implications of these changes for the most basic element of their lives—where they call home. In 2014, for the first time in more than 130 years, adults ages 18 to 34 were slightly more likely to be living in their parents' home than they were to be living with a spouse or partner in their own household. B. This turn of events is fueled primarily by the dramatic drop in the share of young Americans who are choosing to settle down romantically before age 35. Dating back to 1880, the most common living arrangement among young adults has been living with a romantic partner, whether a spouse or a significant other. This type of arrangement peaked around 1960, when 62% of the nation's 18- to 34-year-olds were living with a spouse or partner in their own household, and only one-in-five were living with their parents. C. By 2014, 31.6% of young adults were living with a spouse or partner in their own household, below the share living in the home of their parent(s) (32.1%). Some 14% of young adults lived alone, were a single parent or lived with one or more roommates. The remaining 22% lived in the home of another family member (such as a grandparent, in-law or sibling (兄弟姐妹)), a non-relative, or in group quarters like college dormitories. D. It's worth noting that the overall share of young adults living with their parents was not at a record high in 2014. This arrangement peaked around 1940, when about 35% of the nation's 18- to 34-year-olds lived with mom and/or dad (compared with 32% in 2014). What has changed, instead, is the relative share adopting different ways of living in early adulthood, with the decline of romantic coupling pushing living at home to the top of a much less uniform list of living arrangements. E. Among young adults, living arrangements differ significantly by gender. For men aged 18 to 34, living at home with mom and/or dad has been the dominant living arrangement since 2009. In 2014, 28% of young men were living with a spouse or partner in their own home, while 35% were living in the home of their parent(s). Young women, however, are still more likely to be living with a spouse or romantic partner (35%) than they are to be living with their parent(s) (29%). F. In 2014, more young women (16%) than young men (13%) were heading up a household without a spouse or partner. This is mainly because women are more likely than men to be single parents living with their children. For their part, young men (25%) are more likely than young women (19%) to be living in the home of another family member, a non-relative or in some type of group quarters. G. A variety of factors contribute to the long-run increase in the share of young adults living with their parents. The first is the postponement of, if not retreat from, marriage. The average age of first marriage has risen steadily for decades. In addition, a growing share of young adults may be avoiding marriage altogether. A previous Pew Research Center analysis projected that as many as one-in-four of today's young adults may never marry. While cohabitation (同居) has been on the rise, the overall share of young adults either married or living with an unmarried partner has substantially fallen since 1990. H. In addition, trends in both employment status and wages have likely contributed to the growing share of young adults who are living in the home of their parent(s), and this is especially true of young men. Employed young men are much less likely to live at home than young men without a job, and employment among young men has fallen significantly in recent decades. The share of young men with jobs peaked around 1960 at 84%. In 2014, only 71% of 18- to 34-year-old men were employed. Similarly with earnings, young men's wages (after adjusting for inflation) have been on a downward trajectory (轨迹) since 1970 and fell significantly from 2000 to 2010. As wages have fallen, the share of young men living in the home of their parent(s) has risen. I. Economic factors seem to explain less of why young adult women are increasingly likely to live at home. Generally, young women have had growing success in the paid labor market since 1960 and hence might increasingly be expected to be able to afford to live independently of their parents. For women, delayed marriage—which is related, in part, to labor market outcomes for men—may explain more of the increase in their living in the family home. J. The Great Recession (and modest recovery) has also been associated with an increase in young adults living at home. Initially in the wake of the recession, college enrollments expanded, boosting the ranks of young adults living at home. And given the weak job opportunities facing young adults, living at home was part of the private safety net helping young adults to weather the economic storm. K. Beyond gender, young adults' living arrangements differ considerably by education—which is tied to financial means. For young adults without a bachelor's degree, as of 2008 living at home with their parents was more prevalent than living with a romantic partner. By 2014, 36% of 18- to 34-year-olds who had not completed a bachelor's degree were living with their parent(s) while 27% were living with a spouse or partner. Among college graduates, in 2014 46% were married or living with a partner, and only 19% were living with their parents(s). Young adults with a college degree have fared much better in the labor market than their less-educated counterparts, which has in turn made it easier to establish their own households.

填空题Who Needs Harvards? A

填空题The ocean is heating up

填空题Eating a Bit Less Salt Can Be a Big Health Boon A

填空题President Obama is not one of the richest presiden

填空题Master's of Your Own Field A

填空题.How Work Will Change When Most of Us Live to 100 A. Today in the United States there are 72,000 centenarians (百岁老人). Worldwide, probably 450,000. If current trends continue, then by 2050 there will be more than a million in the US alone. According to the work of Professor James Vaupel and his co-researchers, 50% of babies born in the US in 2007 have a life expectancy of 104 or more. Broadly the same holds for the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Canada, and for Japan 50% of 2007 babies can expect to live to 107. B. Understandably, there are concerns about what this means for public finances given the associated health and pension challenges. These challenges are real, and society urgently needs to address them. But it is also important to took at the wider picture of what happens when so many people live for 100 years. It is a mistake to simply equate longevity (长寿) with issues of old age. Longer lives have implications for all of life, not just the end of it. C. Our view is that if many people are living for longer, and are healthier for longer, then this will result in an inevitable redesign of work and life. When people live longer, they are not only older for longer, but also younger for longer. There is some truth in the saying that "70 is the new 60" or "40 the new 30." If you age more slowly over a longer time period, then you are in some sense younger for longer. D. But the changes go further than that. Take, for instance, the age at which people make commitments such as buying a house, getting married, having children, or starting a career. These are all fundamental commitments that are now occurring later in life. In 1962, 50% of Americans were married by age 21. By 2014, that milestone (里程碑) had shifted to age 29. E. While there are numerous factors behind these shifts, one factor is surely a growing realization for the young that they are going to live longer. Options are more valuable the longer they can be held. So if you believe you will live longer, then options become more valuable, and early commitment becomes less attractive. The result is that the commitments that previously characterized the beginning of adulthood are now being delayed, and new patterns of behavior and a new stage of life are emerging for those in their twenties. F. Longevity also pushes back the age of retirement, and not only for financial reasons. Yes, unless people are prepared to save a lot more, our calculations suggest that if you are now in your mid-40s, then you are likely to work until your early 70s; and if you are in your early 20s, there is a real chance you will need to work until your late 70s or possibly even into your 80s. But even if people are able to economically support a retirement at 65, over thirty years of potential inactivity is harmful to cognitive (认知的) and emotional vitality. Many people may simply not want to do it. G. And yet that does not mean that simply extending our careers is appealing. Just lengthening that second stage of full-time work may secure the financial assets needed for a 100-year life, but such persistent work will inevitably exhaust precious intangible assets such as productive skills, vitality, happiness, and friendship. H. The same is true for education. It is impossible that a single shot of education, administered in childhood and early adulthood, will be able to support a sustained, 60-year career. If you factor in the projected rates of technological change, either your skills will become unnecessary, or your industry outdated. That means that everyone will, at some point in their life, have to make a number of major reinvestments in their skills. I. It seems likely, then, that the traditional three-stage life will evolve into multiple stages containing two, three, or even more different careers. Each of these stages could potentially be different. In one the focus could be on building financial success and personal achievement, in another on creating a better work/life balance, still another on exploring and understanding options more fully, or becoming an independent producer, yet another on making a social contribution. These stages will span sectors, take people to different cities, and provide a foundation for building a wide variety of skills. J. Transitions between stages could be marked with sabbaticals (休假) as people find time to rest and recharge their health, re-invest in their relationships, or improve their skills. At times, these breaks and transitions will be self-determined, at others they will be forced as existing roles, firms, or industries cease to exist. K. A multi-stage life will have profound changes not just in how you manage your career, but also in your approach to life. An increasingly important skill will be your ability to deal with change and even welcome it. A three-stage life has few transitions, while a multi-stage life has many. That is why being self-aware, investing in broader networks of friends, and being open to new ideas will become even more crucial skills. L. These multi-stage lives will create extraordinary variety across groups of people simply because there are so many ways of sequencing the stages. More stages mean more possible sequences. M. With this variety will come the end of the close association of age and stage. In a three-stage life, people leave university at the same time and the same age, they tend to start their careers and family at the same age, they proceed through middle management all roughly the same time, and then move into retirement within a few years of each other. In a multi-stage life, you could be an undergraduate at 20, 40, or 60; a manager at 30, 50, or 70; and become an independent producer at any age. N. Current life structures, career paths, educational choices, and social norms are out of tune with the emerging reality of longer lifespans. The three-stage life of full-time education, followed by continuous work, and then complete retirement may have worked for our parents or even grandparents, but it is not relevant today. We believe that to focus on longevity as primarily an issue of aging is to miss its full implications. Longevity is not necessarily about being older for longer. It is about living longer, being older later, and being younger longer.

填空题The countries that have left the United States beh

填空题Everyone wants their boss to play fair

填空题A Formula for Happiness A

填空题Green Growth A

填空题According to a recent study