For three decades, the gap between the rich and everyone else has grown in the United States. At the same time, working people have faced greater economic uncertainty, their incomes have fluctuated more dramatically, and both employers and governments have cut back on measures such as pensions and health insurance that helped mitigate the uncertainties of life. Yale political scientist Jacob… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (12)Page 1 of 1 pages“These middle class workers found their ... , or, like many Enron employees, their 401(k) retirement accounts collapsed with their employer”
Silly foolish naive. NEVER invest all of your retirement savings into a single company, ESPECIALLY the one you work for (Duh!). That is the lesson that some (very greedy and foolish) poeple should learn from this particular thing. (I feel as sorry for them as the people who lose it all at a craps table, tragic but stupid.)
I am all for economic reform, but we need to address the greed of the US consumer, middle class or poor. The standard of living in the US has crept up to unsustainable levels (poor people with cable tv, color tv, eating fast food, etc etc). The unpopular message should be “live within your means”, rather than more more MORE!!!
So some might have to give up on some luxuries, but surely we - collectively - can afford to provide health care to all, and maybe even education through college as well. Maybe this will require cutting back on some middle class luxuries, three cars in every household (financing the crazys in the middle east), etc.
Just a thought.
Posted by wolf on Nov 29, 2006 at 12:43 AM I’m a Texas boy who still backs congressman Dennis Kucinich.
He has a practical cure for our country’s ills.
He does remember that “we’re all in this together.”
Posted by wash1945 on Nov 29, 2006 at 6:30 AM This title is something we should all remember—Live At Your Own Risk!
We should expect nothing more than a chance. We are not owed anything more than that. From the moment of birth life is risky.
But I agree with most of the author’s assertions and observations. Our middle class is an endangered species. In addition the lowest rung on the ladder will be filled by someone stepping down — not a good thing for those struggling to move up or even stay even.
The article on the Opinion Journal site today exemplifies the basic lack of understanding by those in a position to improve the situation. Worse yet, they are very effectively helping to erase the opportunities for U.S. workers.
I have been in a discussion group for retirees at our junior college for about two years. What I have noticed there parallels what I see at In These Times, The Wall Street Journal and a host of other sources on the left/right scale in between. Neither side is open to the possibilities that their slice of life which influences all information could be less than accurate or universal.
Yesterday this was voiced by the discussion leader and many heads nodded agreement, “I just can’t stand to read or listen to any more neocon, right wing spin.”
Others proceeded to label people with divergent views on Iraq, school funding, and economic issues as idiots, racists, blind, imperialistic and arrogant.
I find it interesting that while I agree with some of their ideas and some of those “idiots” mentioned I see the same attitudes shaping the opposite opinions.Last week a newsperson speaking with Bill Maher said whatever the level of violence in Iraq, at least our being there has prevented any more attacks in the U.S. Maher vehemently responded that it proves no such thing, since you can’t prove it wouldn’t have happened if we had not gone there.
When Donald Rumsfeld was called to task months ago for not finding any large stockpiles of WMD he replied, “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
They are both right and both will arrogantly maintain his ground.
The risks will continue to mount.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 30, 2006 at 3:23 PM Sorry, I forgot to include the article I mentioned/.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110009316
Change for the Better
The case for economic turbulence.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 30, 2006 at 3:25 PM “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
Yeah but you need evidence to invade a sovereign country. Does every country in the world have to prove that they don’t have WMDs to our satisfaction or face invasion ? We have a lot of invading to do!
Maher has credibility, Rumsfeld does not. Maher is not sending our soldiers to die for an illegal war without a plan; Rumsfeld is.
It’s these kinds of word games they play to draw attention away from their crimes. You can call it liberal bias if you want. It doesn’t make it so. It was against the law; not a liberal law or a conservative law. It was U.S. and international law. No bias. Just justice!
Posted by kagreen2k on Dec 1, 2006 at 10:16 PM kagreen2k,
International law: Talk about word games. War by its very nature is lawless. It is born of fear, greed, self preservation, survival, or whatever motives — and always more than just one motive. Those who start it and those who fight it don’t necessarily do so from the same motive.
Without someone to enforce it there is no international law or any law, anywhere.
My point was only that left or right, both believe their opinion at the exclusion of other possibilities. Rumsfeld and Maher were using the same logic to support opposite views on the war. Both could be accurate and both can be wrong.
In a sandbox the size of Iraq anything could be hidden. The U.S. may have prevented future attacks since 9/11 — or the terrorists could have planned to wait until we are all at odds with each other over here. (In which case it is working just fine.) Whoever they are, or wherever, they are not stupid.
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 2, 2006 at 3:39 PM I agree with whattheheck…also besides Saddam Hussein boasting of having WMD, the Clinton administration believed it also.
Bill Maher has credibility? OK and the sky is green.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 4, 2006 at 10:44 AM Considering that after 9/11 America was urged to “go shopping” I don’t see how we can have it both ways.
Certainly working people could divert some greater portion of their earnings toward better health care plans (and subsequently avoid some percentage of illness-related bankruptcy.)
However, how much of this diverted “disposable” income would then be removed from our domestic economic circulation?
Not to mention - the actual and real costs contained within the process of debt maintenance, government-sponsored (and ax-based) medical bailouts for people whose conditions initially could have been diagnosed and treated with preventative care at a fraction of the ultimate cost, when those conditions escalate to something far more serious.
I make this point, thinking of the classical example: The $30 regular oil change instead of the much more expensive engine replacement.It appears to be standard and accepted fact now that we live in such a “risky” world. Why?
Posted by littleplanet on Dec 9, 2006 at 10:32 PM “In a sandbox the size of Iraq anything could be hidden. The U.S. may have prevented future attacks since 9/11 — or the terrorists could have planned to wait until we are all at odds with each other over here. (In which case it is working just fine.) Whoever they are, or wherever, they are not stupid.”
Talk about words games. You take the cake dude. We could stay at perpetual war for nothing by your logic. Our young soldiers are dying for what WE KNOW were lies and you still want to play word games like the BushCo coward draft dodgers. Put a uniform on and get your ass over there if you still think we should be in Iraq.
“This invasion will take 6 days, maybe 6 weeks, I doubt 6 months”
- D. RumsfeldThat’s just for starters. I got lots more where that came from. You can post the Maher lies, I will post the Rumsfeld lies, and we will see who runs out first. I have a nice picture of Rummy shaking Saddam’s hand and a letter from Rummy saying what a great guy he is too.
Posted by kagreen2k on Dec 10, 2006 at 2:53 PM littleplanet,
“Considering that after 9/11 America was urged to “go shopping” I don’t see how we can have it both ways.”
I totally agree! We’ve been getting mixed messages all along. The urging to carry on here with business as usual (or they win) and a cavalier attitude toward border and port security has raised doubts among the most avid initial supporters that there is a genuine threat to the U.S. Now we’re selling airlines and sections of the Interstate to foreign companies, but “Our economy is good.”
They’ve never made this seem like a real war here at home. It has become a daily video game to those without personal risk. Most of us have not only made no sacrifices, we’ve been encouraged not to do so to keep consumer spending up.
Business has adopted the same short term methods as government. CEOs and politicians do whatever will serve themselves best while in office. Large shareholders such as mutual funds control business and special interests control government. The media seldom take time to investigate — they want to be first more than accurate. As individuals we have little or no influence.
What option is there other than to accept the increases in risk? It seems most people see little risk. Until things get even more chaotic who can change anything?
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 11, 2006 at 3:52 PM kagreen2k,
Who can argue with such solid, objective reasoning?
:-)
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 11, 2006 at 3:58 PM This thread is interesting but a little off base.
The internal danger has been created by our government directly
as a result of our longstanding one-sided partisanship in supporting
Israel and rightwing Arab tyrannies. Some of us suspected that when
the Commies disappeared a new bogeyman would arise and it will
never end until we decide it will. We will be fighting Martians next.
Perpetual War For Perpetual Peace as Harry Elmer Barnes put
it over 53 years ago.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 14, 2006 at 5:57 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by David Moberg
- Labor’s New Leader
The AFL-CIO stakes its future on Richard Trumka. - The Retail Devolution
Two new books explore corporate evil. - Who’s Got the Power?
Progressives find themselves outmaneuvered on healthcare reform. - Not Your Parents’ Labor Movement
Why the Republic sit-in failed to inspire other worker actions. - Solidarity Reunited?
Unions rally around shrunken UNITE HERE as it takes on its former ally. - Can a Union Divided Stand?
UNITE HERE dissolves in conflict ... with a little help from SEIU.
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
