"middle class americans"
elizabeth warren cites the interests of "middle class americans" as her motivation to run for the US senate. fair enough. (tony's helpfully linked her campaign announcement on the dick howe site). but the coincident release of US census data showing that almost a full 15% of americans are living below the poverty line (boston globe coverage here) points to a disturbing truth--there is rapidly becoming no "middle class" in america anymore, even while the vast majority of us stubbornly and still self-identify as being members.
the median income for a family of four in this country is less than $50k (7% less than its peak 18 years ago) meaning that fully half of american families are getting by on less than that. almost a third of those unfortunates getting by on less than that are actually beneath the arbitrary "poverty line" of $22k, which sadly and coincidentally also represents almost a full 20% of american children. so is this the "middle" elizabeth so eloquently espouses? isn't it actually now truthfully best described as the "lower"?
ah, but there's the political rub. if we say "lower", we're to be accused of "class warfare" aren't we. (yes, with apologies to tony for my snarky comments, the republicans surely are worse on this one).
but that's the long and the short of it. income inequality has ballooned to such extremes that americans previous usefully referred to as "middle class" have slipped in enormous numbers to de facto "lower class" status, and are barely getting by. republicans are even spitefully claiming that these americans are no longer pulling their own weight and something has to be done about it, since these must-be-lazy people have fallen beneath federal guidelines for income tax payments, even though they're faithfully paying their fica and medicare/medicaid and unemployment and all their other payroll taxes just like always. yes, republicans are claiming they ought to be taxed more highly so to spare the wealthiest americans having to give back their tax breaks which cause them to pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes as people making a tiny fraction of their income. you just can't make this shit up.
so can we please stop the madness, and fairly discuss what's going on?
elizabeth, i appreciate your needing to phrase it that way, but, let's be honest--there's no "middle class" anymore. scott brown, if you get it, you'll need to better distance yourself from your party platform or you and your pickup truck are going to be sent packing. everybody else, i know it's not fair that nobody in the media is paying any attention to you anymore now that they've settled on giving us only the scott vs. liz option, but perhaps if you get it too, you can say something meaningful that will help us understand the best way forward.
elizabeth isn't wrong. (if only she wasn't attaching herself to a party machine proven to have no interest in righting things).
the median income for a family of four in this country is less than $50k (7% less than its peak 18 years ago) meaning that fully half of american families are getting by on less than that. almost a third of those unfortunates getting by on less than that are actually beneath the arbitrary "poverty line" of $22k, which sadly and coincidentally also represents almost a full 20% of american children. so is this the "middle" elizabeth so eloquently espouses? isn't it actually now truthfully best described as the "lower"?
ah, but there's the political rub. if we say "lower", we're to be accused of "class warfare" aren't we. (yes, with apologies to tony for my snarky comments, the republicans surely are worse on this one).
but that's the long and the short of it. income inequality has ballooned to such extremes that americans previous usefully referred to as "middle class" have slipped in enormous numbers to de facto "lower class" status, and are barely getting by. republicans are even spitefully claiming that these americans are no longer pulling their own weight and something has to be done about it, since these must-be-lazy people have fallen beneath federal guidelines for income tax payments, even though they're faithfully paying their fica and medicare/medicaid and unemployment and all their other payroll taxes just like always. yes, republicans are claiming they ought to be taxed more highly so to spare the wealthiest americans having to give back their tax breaks which cause them to pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes as people making a tiny fraction of their income. you just can't make this shit up.
so can we please stop the madness, and fairly discuss what's going on?
elizabeth, i appreciate your needing to phrase it that way, but, let's be honest--there's no "middle class" anymore. scott brown, if you get it, you'll need to better distance yourself from your party platform or you and your pickup truck are going to be sent packing. everybody else, i know it's not fair that nobody in the media is paying any attention to you anymore now that they've settled on giving us only the scott vs. liz option, but perhaps if you get it too, you can say something meaningful that will help us understand the best way forward.
elizabeth isn't wrong. (if only she wasn't attaching herself to a party machine proven to have no interest in righting things).
posted by kad barma at 7:32 AM
2 Comments:
I think that there has been a changing of the definition of Middle Class, to the detriment of the nation. Last night, at dinner, my middle Brother (lets face it, he is a new style liberal) asserted that my younger Brother and I are both "rich" people because we earn more than $200,000 a year. Afterwards my wife suggested he included himself, but I said that I thought not, since neither he nor his wife is working at this time. I do suspect he is defined as being part of the "labor force" because he volunteers 15 hours a week for this or that activity.
First I had to explain to everyone at the table that I don't make that amount and not even close. That I was retired and not even in the labor force last week. (The previous week I was in the labor force.) It is all in the definitions.
But, I think of myself as "Middle Class". And, if we talk about what we have, vs a comparison with our neighbors, we are all much better off than we were 50 years ago. Further to that point, for a long time everyone pretty much thought of themselves as Middle Class, as opposed to the UK, where the definitions were more strict. The person in 102A High Street might be Middle Class, because he wore a suit to work in an office, while the person in 102B High Street, even though he made more money, considered himself "Working Class", because he wore coveralls and was in a union.
I think that in Elizabeth Warren we have the choice of the Intelligencia. Amongst the Democrats running, I like the other Warren, Setti Warren.
I see Ms Elizabeth Warren as one of those people who knows what is good for us and is going to give it to us, whether we like it or not, good and hard.
Regards — Cliff
The bizarre consequent possible truth among the census figures is that a breadwinner for a family of four making $50k a year is a "rich person" compared with more than half the nation. The greater truth is that even people making $200k (the top 2% of earners) are poor by comparison to the very top 0.5% of earners, and the gap widens every day. In any case, that people making well less than $200k on fixed retirement incomes might be considered wealthy by anyone else is a troubling development in our national perception of means.
A significant element to any discussion of wealth is, of course, wealth itself. People with zero wage income are often obscenely wealthy when you consider all their property and other "stuff". Likewise, given consumer and mortgage and other debts, there are plenty of people making well more than $200k who are actually, when all is added up, said and done, quite impoverished. (Though they do get to enjoy riding around in nice cars while they go bankrupt).
My concern is how income inequality, and the widening gap between the oligarchy at the very tippity top of the pile, and the misery that is proliferated among the bottom segments of the income pyramid, serves to tear apart the fabric of the nation, and will undoubtedly, if you ask me, produce something akin to the French Revolution sooner or later unless it is addressed. People with nothing to lose think nothing of assembling in the street to demand redress of their needs, and if we think we're so far from the "Arab Spring" example here, we haven't been paying attention. (Wisconsin's recent politics being a fascinating case in point).
I just spent four hours in a Lowell city council meeting listening to retirees and public employees speaking eloquently and forcefully about their health insurance plight. I have no trouble imagining it leading to violence if nothing is done to stop the trend towards penury for most, and obscene wealth for very few who are perceived to be causing the penury for everyone else.
Troubling times...
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home