I delivered newspapers between 1982 and 1987. A quarter century later, kids don't have paper routes. Adults do. That's too bad. Paper routes intill good habits in children. Not the least of which, as I note in my article @ the American Spectator, is a passion for current events.

I had a very large route delivering the Washington Post. It is too bad that kids don't get this kind of experience anymore. Yeah, I lost money a few times due to EXCESSIVE deadbeats. And I had to generally deal with the same crap described in the article. But you've got to prepare SOMEtime for that crap. Better sooner than later.

I had a morning route and an evening route. A job that kids will do! A job they are unable to do because adults have been doing these jobs at least here in NYC.

Ok - When I was a boy......

But really. When I was a kid I could not have considered not working. A paper route when I was 10 was one of those jobs. I got up before school at 5 o'clock and delivered to roughly 50 customers by foot or by bike (depending on the degree of the inclemency of the the weather) and finished up in time to have some breakfast and get to school.

The money stunk and the tips were not that much better but it was a job. And it taught me how really to run a business as the papers were dumped in bulk at a given location, had to be broken down, folded and then distributed to new and hold customers who were maintained on a list with quantities and some basic financial tracking.

In general Working has always been a natural thing to do.

Kids today are another story. And even though my kids are not indulged (necessarily), they are comfortable because their parents have done alright in life and unfortunately have an aversion to work. In fact, if I did not push them, they would not.

I don't find this to be a healthy attitude going forward.

In terms of paper routes, not even in their vocabulary. Too much work. In fact, my brother and cousin have quickly inherited their kids' paper routes so it does seem to be epidemic among our young these days.

Or - just another job Americans won't do?

Great piece Dan. My son also delivered the Globe in the 80's and early 90's. He got the scholarship money and I used to admire his constancy and quiet responsibility. These qualities have served him well in his current professional life. I also have fond memories of collecting on my paper route the night of the first moon landing (talk about people blowing you off!) Anyway, I wrote a song called The Last Paper Boy which is on my latest album Random Emotion. I've attached a link in case you or any of your readers might be interested.

Here's the link to the song, The Last Paper Boy.
http://www.jerryvelona.com/music.html

The major reason why there are relatively few paperboys today is that they have been replaced by adult immigrants. I delivered the Washington Post for five years from ages 11 through 16. Typically, I had approximately 40 subscribers, and my friends had similar numbers of subcribers on nearby routes. Today, a two-man team of paper-immigrants have much bigger routes that deliver several thousand papers every morning.

I delivered papers by walking up to every house and putting the paper between the front door and the storm door. Whereas, today's paper-immigrant drives around in a car and his partner throws the newspapers somewhere on the subscribers' driveway or lawn. This is the only way that a grown man can make a living by delivering newspapers.

The newspapers have benefited a great deal from this arrangement because they have replaced approximately twenty-five to thirty American adolescents with one two-man team of foreign-born adults. The adolescents gave better service when they worked, but they had all sorts of little issues that are common to pre-teens and teens, and the papers needed so many of them that there was always a problem route. Whereas, two grown immigrants who depend on delivering papers for their livelihood are quite dependable and will comply with the most unreasonable demands placed on them by management.

The Robber Barons of the late 19th Century would be envious of the Washington Post's (and every other major newspaper's) labor policies when it comes to paper delivery.

Did a quick read the first time. But have to say that on a second, slower more savored review, that was one of the most excellent pieces I've read.

Howevaugh, paying hard earned money for a Stasny Q Nords shirt (especially being from Boston) evades.

When this country has suffered from 3 decades of upward redistribution of wealth due to Reaganomics and market worshipers, it's no wonder that adults are taking whatever job they could get. An important fact to keep in mind is that this generation is the first American generation that will be less educated and poorer than the previous.

That's pretty funny. UPWARD re-distribution of wealth.

Non-taxpayers are at 52 percent and the wealthy and middle class take on the lion's share of the burden. Meanwhile, welfare and entitlement programs (funded or non-funded) are through the roof.

Re-distribution downward is more likely the reality.

asdf wrote,

Re-distribution downward is more likely the reality.

I know you don't care about facts, but in this case they are of central importance.

You obviously don't know the facts. Due to the laws of basic arithmetic, because the lion's share of income gains and wealth gains have gone to corporate profits and the top 1% of earners, DEFINITIONALLY the distribution of wealth has become more concentrated at the top.

The only way you could be correct is if the facts were different. Since they aren't, you're factually wrong 100%.

Keep in mind also, that any government activity by definition is a "redistribution of wealth," because the government regulates tax payments and allocates resources whenever it engages in any activity. The wealthy and powerful have captured nearly each and every government apparatus and have calibrated it to their advantage. Case in point: a 2000+ page tax code with innumerable loopholes.

Oh, and your cute little 52% of earners don't pay taxes is also 100% factually incorrect. As a percentage of income, each socioeconomic bracket pays a sizable portion of their income in taxes, whether they're local, state, payroll, FICA/SS, or if you're fortunate enough, income taxes.

In many instances the tax system is regressive, and shockingly, effective tax burden (including local and state) as a percentage of all income is highest within the middle sectors.

Meanwhile, welfare and entitlement programs (funded or non-funded) are through the roof.

I have not read this anywhere. What source are you citing because the quote I've been hearing is that non SS/Medicare/Medicaid entitlement programs are at their lowest level as a percentage of the budget since Eisenhower. Conversely, corporate and Wall Street subsidies (corporate welfare that people like asdf love while getting their panties in a bunch if poor mothers and children receive assistance) are at their highest levels ever as a percentage of the budget.