Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Slow Death of the Middle Class

By Laura Barcella, AlterNet. Posted September 6, 2006.


Conservatives are working hard to dismantle almost every policy that protects average American workers. Air America host Thom Hartmann speaks up about how we can fight back.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Laura Barcella

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

In his new book, Screwed: The Undeclared War Against the Middle Class, Air America host Thom Hartmann provides an exhaustive argument that America's backbone and lifeblood -- its middle class -- is vanishing. (Or being cast out, set aside, and methodically destroyed, depending on your perspective.)

Hartmann blends current affairs with a vital crash course in history to demonstrate the ways in which -- under 25 years of right-wing wonkery -- working people, once treasured as the foundation of our economy, are now neglected to the point of extinction. Through concrete examples of laws passed, unions busted and programs dismantled, Hartmann reminds us how, since Reagan's 1980 ascension to the throne, conservative policiticans have done little except "conserve" their own wealth- and power-grubbing interests.

But it wasn't always like this, as Hartmann makes sure we remember. With the creation of post-Depression initiatives which benefited everyone, such as Social Security, antitrust laws and the minimum wage, America's most forward-thinking politicians helped revitalize the economy and make the country a more unified whole.

Why can't it be like that again? In an AlterNet telephone interview, Hartmann explains that it can -- but that it will only happen when more Americans get out and elect the few politicians who actually give a damn about the rest of us.

Laura Barcella: What are the three biggest hurdles currently affecting the middle class?

Thom Hartmann: Free market ideology; a variety of practices to drive down the cost of labor -- from destruction of the union movement to encouragement of immigration, both legal and illegal; and the promotion of the idea that democratic institutions are an aberration, that vast wealth is the natural order of things in the human and animal kingdoms.

LB: In Screwed, you write about the "Golden Age" of the middle class. Can you remind us of what a healthy middle class looks like?

TH: Teddy Roosevelt was the first in the modern era to identify what it would mean to [have a] middle class in a society that wasn't propped up by slavery and land taken from the Native Americans (which was largely responsible for the first middle class, in the 1700s).

The Republican Roosevelt realized that without government intervention clearly defining the rules of [business] to serve society as well as capitalism, there couldn't be a middle class.

[Roosevelt] suggested that the hallmarks of a "living wage" (he was the first person to use that phrase), were that with an honest week's work, a single family's wage-earner would be able to support their family, raise their children, provide education for those children -- including college, care for all their health needs -- even in times of sickness (quoting Roosevelt), take an annual vacation, and set enough aside that retirement and old age would be comfortable and secure.

Franklin Roosevelt set about putting that vision into place 30 years later with the Wagner Act in 1935, which established the right to unionization, and the Social Security Act providing a safety net for old age (and for people incapable of working due to 'circumstances of birth'). ... All of this led to the strongest middle class this nation has ever seen, in the '50s, '60s, '70s and the beginning of the '80s.

LB: And then what happened?

TH: Then in the 1960s and '70s, a group of worried ideologues saw the social upheavals of that era -- women demanding equal pay and reproductive rights, African-Americans demanding voting rights, working people demanding [fair wages], activists demanding a clean environment -- and the ideologues thought what they were seeing were symptoms of society melting down.

It confirmed their fear, which echoed a fear of the early founders (John Adams and Alexander Hamilton), that too much democracy would lead to social anarchy. A ruling elite operating under the guise of democracy was the most stable form of government, and if we had a strong middle class like we had in the '60s and '70s, people had too much time on their hands and too little fear. ...


Digg!

Laura Barcella is an associate editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Tyranny beats mobrule ANY DAY!!!
Posted by: TT2 on Sep 6, 2006 12:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, blame it all on the evil globalist and there immigrants lackies. Another far cry for white middle-class(mob)rule. Gee, where have i heared this again;=)?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tyranny beats mobrule ANY DAY!!! Posted by: BlueStateBitch
» Ignorant Trash Talk Posted by: terradea
Interesting!
Posted by: TT2 on Sep 6, 2006 12:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The occupation of Iraq has been financed by borrowing money in our names -- and in the names of our children and grandchildren -- from China, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and a few very wealthy families, like the Bushes. Those creditors will be beneficiaries of the war, and the middle class will pay the bill eventually, just like the economic difficulties Jimmy Carter suffered after the bill was due for Vietnam. The next generation will have to confront some very difficult times as a result of Bush's $9 trillion debt."

So your basicly saying;scrue the innocent civilians, it's American money and soldiers were concerned about!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Interesting! Posted by: BlueStateBitch
when progressives aren't
Posted by: edith on Sep 6, 2006 1:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
correctly leads the list of the decline of an upwardly mobile middle class. but what greased the skids of the unions was not only the leadership of unions own short sightedness and failures to organize baby boomers and newly liberated blacks in the 70s and 80s but the advent of free trade as gospel by Democrats and Republicans alike. Clinton's NAFTA was the nail in the coffin. Labor reform and protection against unfair trade are way down on Nancy Pelosi's to do list. All the Dems can propose to more tuition aid so that their buddies on college boards of trustees can simply raise tuition and start that vicious cycle all over again.

Teddy Roosevelt and Wilson, both very conservative men who favored moderate reforms to save capitalism, were vertiable Socialists compared with today's neoliberal blowdried Clinton-Gore-Kerry Ivy League Wall St oriented "progressives".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Middle Class: Too Stupid to Survive.
Posted by: Rolomax on Sep 6, 2006 1:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
C'mon.. The middle class:

They expect others to take care of their problems. They don't actively participate in politics that matter to them, and when they do, they actually vote against themselves. They also think God or Jesus will help them if prayed to enough.

They believe everything they hear on Fox News or other channels that claim to report news or world events. They think their senator or congressman represents them when they don't vote or even know when or where to vote on election days..and when they do, they vote according to what they hear on said news channels.

They think the National Debt doesn't 'necessarily' mean that they owe $34,000.00 per family member, when they actually do owe it. They think it's ok for their grand kids to pay tomorrow for grand-dad's hamburger today.

They think that by helping to put their country FURTHER into debt by a trillion dollars or more, in order to screw over the people of Iraq, is acceptable...! America gets nothing out of it. Friends of the Bush Administration get the money that is 'loaned' to us to 'fix' Iraq. And,these 'loans' will be passed on to our grand kids for payment.


Seriously, the middle class is like the dodo. Too stupid to survive. In the end, the lower class will be stuck with the bill. The irony is that the middle class will be added to the lower class.

Their ideology and their values are not worth a dollar, nor is it worth 8+ Trillion dollars. How much economic power can you have when your country owes that much money, plus interest?

How much world power can you have when much of the world is decades ahead of you intellectually?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Middle Class: sad but true Posted by: terradea
» Class is a state of mind! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Middle Class: Too Stupid to Survive. Posted by: constitution516
today
Posted by: rsaxto on Sep 6, 2006 1:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The government we have today is government of the greedy, by the greedy and for the greedy. It will continue this way as long as elections are managed and counted and stolen by the greedy.
All of these greedy election stealers need to be put in jail and elections need to be overseen by ordinary folks so that we can have fair elections with fair vote counting. Which is what real democracy is all about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: today Posted by: jims713
» RE: today Posted by: rhinojos
» RE: today Posted by: Sleepingcobra1
Thom is missing one thing here
Posted by: rebel_pig on Sep 6, 2006 4:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I got nothing against Thom Hartmann. In fact he might be the ONLY prominent figure in the FakeLeft blogosphere ho understands what is going on. He actually appears to he a TrueLeftist.

But he is missing one factor that is highly influential in allowing right wing policies and ideology to gain ascendancy in America recently: the pushing away of the white lower middle class from Leftism by white-hating Identity Politics. THe pushing away, this alienation is the ignored elephant in the room. It is not something that is dramatically overt. Instead it is a feeling that has been engendered over perhaps 2 decades in white people, particularly white blue collar males, a feeling that liberal America sees them as what is wrong with America. This feeling of alienation has been caused by an unwritten and widespread feeling among "politicallly aware" liberals that white people, particularly white men, and particularly "Bubba", the lower middle class blue collar white male, are the worst of America.

This anti-Bubba feeling is something that has been caused by the upper class in its search for substitute boogeymen to take the place of the plutocrat. Naturally the plutocrats do not want to be the bad guy. ANd they have the money to create propaganda to divert attention away from themselves.

This is a process that has taken decades and is carried out in a way similar to natural selection.


Cryofan has written some stuff on this at his blog here.

If Thom and the rest of the True Left want to stop the movement to the RIght, which he describes accurately, then they have to reach out to Bubba and the rest of lower middle class White America, and bring them back to Leftism. Do that by STOPPING the ideological demonization of Bubba. Bring Bubba back into the fold. Love Bubba for what he is. Stop the FakeLeft focus on women and minorities, as exemplified by fakeLeft media outlets like Alternet, which are funded by nonprofits that are funded by the upper class and plutocrats.

Once you have Bubba back on your side, the Rightwing ideology will die on the vine. If you give Bubba nowhere to turn but to Rightwing propaganda outlets like Limbaugh, then OF COURSE rightwing ideology will dominate in America.....because America is a majority white nation. Bubba is the single largest voting bloc. Blue collar white males were the largest single voting bloc in 2004.

Do the frigging math, fakeLeftists. Any Left that has as its Bad Guy the MAJORITY of the populace is BY DEFINITION not a true left. Because Leftism is by definition aimed at the bulk of the population. Bubba and his kin are the bulk. THat is why we have no Left in America. But you fakeLeftists have let the ruling class trick you into thinking that BUBBA is the ultimate evil, and not the ruling class. They have played you like puppets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thom is missing one thing here Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Thom is missing one thing here Posted by: doctorsquared
» RE: Thom is missing one thing here Posted by: Lincoln fan
From the hole we're in, there's a long climb ahead.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Sep 6, 2006 8:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the article:
"Why can't it be like that again? In an AlterNet telephone interview, Hartmann explains that it can -- but that it will only happen when more Americans get out and elect the few politicians who actually give a damn about the rest of us."

It will not be like that again until americans truly understand how and how badly they are being screwed – and the "mainstream" media, where most of America gets its news, won't tell them, truth be damned. Add to this the illusion of prosperity due to the availability of mountains of cheap plastic s**t and the deliberate dumbing-down of America by vapid stories about movie stars and other non-entities, and you have a "perfect storm" of misdirection, designed to make sure that americans "can't see the forest for the trees."

Yes, americans CAN be smart, but it takes an enormous force to move us from complacency. That force in other countries often has resulted in chaos and destruction. Pray that eventually it does not happen here – people will only allow themselves to be pushed so far before they push back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The middle class has virtually vanished. It won’t be long now.
Posted by: Betsy L. Angert on Sep 6, 2006 8:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Laura Barcella and Thom Hartmann . . .

I greatly appreciate this assessment. I think this discussion is infinitely important. However, I believe talk of the classes and the masses is often too narrow.

I experience that Economists look at policies and practices and not at the pervasive philosophy that lies beneath these. While I think it is true, after the Depression and World War II gains among the average Joe and Joann were made, the poorer began to prosper and the middle class became more settled and secure, I believe the truly rich never allowed for an authentic advancement.

Now, that the Bush Dynasty is solidly in place, the plan is firmer. Bush and his corporate cohorts have advanced strategies that secure their status in society. They have also made certain that all others know their station.

I surmise that there are the elite and those that serve them. Some within the service branch are given greater privileges. Therefore, they feel comfortable, even independent. Yet, in a nation where only the top one percent of the population is doing better I think the middle class has virtually vanished. It won’t be long now.

I invite you to read two treatises that I recently authored.
"Income Inequity. The Real Reason the Rich Get Richer. ©"
"Death Tax Keeps The Wealthy Rich. With Increased Wages, Poor Lose ©"

It is only the giving that makes us what [who] we are. - Ian Anderson. Jethro Tull . . . Betsy
Betsy L. Angert Be-Think

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the fleecing of the sheep
Posted by: 538T on Sep 6, 2006 12:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it hard to believe that the ruling class of the United States will allow the complete destruction of the middle class, such an action would seal their own destruction. What I see is the fleecing of sheep, the sheep are allowed to grow out their wool to its greatest extent before the shearer strips them naked. So-called progressive administrations allow and encourage the growth and prosperity of the middle class. When the middle class has reached sufficient levels of prosperity, Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Bush style regimes are placed in power to strip the common people of their wealth and transfer it to the coffers of the ruling class. When the common people are sheared to their limits, to the point where they may revolt against their handlers, a progressive regime returns, they are allowed to prosper, their loyalty to and trust in the ruling class is reassured, and the cycle continues.
The middle class was created as a buffer to prevent outright class consciousness and class-belligerence in the common people. The removal or lack of a middle class is a historically proven catalyst for proletarian revolution and the mass deportation and execution of the ruling class. Unless the current generation on top is a gang of dim-witted trust fund brats who families never taught them the art of control, then the middle class is guaranteed to bounce back with the "election" of a progressive regime and the ruling class will continue to parasitically thrive off the common people

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the fleecing of the sheep Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: the fleecing of the sheep Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: the fleecing of the sheep Posted by: oriondarkwood
Be careful it doesn't come around and bite you
Posted by: bookwoman on Sep 6, 2006 2:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The unexpected consequences of Ronald Reagan's breaking of PATCO was exposed after the plane crash and death of 49 people two weeks ago in Kentucky. The air traffic controllers who were hired on in 1981, after Reagan fired the largest percentage of striking controllers, are getting ready to retire. Replacements for these people, especially experienced ones, are very hard to find. As a result, we will see more and more situations, such as existed at the airport in Kentucky that morning. Namely, a lone controller trying to run the tower by himself.

I wonder how many more planes have to crash and people get killed or other like tragedies have to occur before the GOP realizes what the result of union breaking really is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about IMMIGRATION?
Posted by: Reader11722 on Sep 6, 2006 3:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clearly immigration is part of the ruin of Middle class America. Low wage, non-taxpaying Mexicans steal jobs from the people who never graduated high school. So the Construction jobs with benefits and enough to raise a family on has been torn away by an illegal invader. Multiply this by millions and you have another reason the Middle class will be extinct.
Do not even mention the loss of rights for the Middle Class such as illegal wire-taps, banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, stealing private lands, rigging elections and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies.
Middle class is dying a death from a thousand cuts.
Final link (unless Google Books bends to the gestapo):
America Deceived - Book

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

evolution of business
Posted by: dobbin on Sep 6, 2006 4:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the natural course of capitalism is a monopoly and complete market domination, then it follows that democracy is at odds against capitalism.
What America is experiencing today, with the ever more blurred lines between politics and business, is no longer democracy.
It's been said that "Socialism is when the government owns and controls the country's businesses. Fascism is when businesses own & control the country's government".
Welcome to the latest form of neo-Fascism, American-style.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Too clever by half Posted by: Lloyd Drako
So Karl Marx Was Right - But There is a Solution!
Posted by: sofla100 on Sep 6, 2006 5:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, Karl Marx was right but we have a solution. The solution, look to the countries of Western Europe and the Scandinavian Countries. Capitalism can be tempered, with "Works Councils" to protect workers rights, abolition of "free trade," progressive taxation, state funded day care, education and medical care. We can start funding this by gutting the Pentagon and National Security establishments by at least 80%, and by ending our stupid wars (Iraq) and US supported corporate schemes for world domination. Of course, if we let it go as it is going now, and it may be too late to stop it, the outcome is predictable and disastorous. A few percent will own and control virtually everything and workplaces will continue to revert into sweatshops. It must be stopped soon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liberals should stick to what they know, spending money and welfare programs! Part 1
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Sep 6, 2006 7:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, this article is a mess of liberal business theories that basically are wonderful to think but dont work!'

Lets see..point by point (sorry this is long) "

Free market ideology; a variety of practices to drive down the cost of labor -- from destruction of the union movement to encouragement of immigration..... "

Well, Unions (not all) basically destroy themselves when they look at the worker company relationship as “us and them “. Take General motors..they can’t compete because poor management and a union contract that is driving them out of business due primarily to health care costs!

There is a time and place for Unions..when having a union means a company cannot compete with foreign produced porducts, the workers get unionized out of a job. Is it not better to have a job, than one that pays a few dollars more an hour? .. Unions do need to be more responsible if they want to stay in business.

Second point "Special interest groups, like the NRA, joined forces to roll back the healthy middle class and the dissent associated with it, and replaced it with a Dickensian reproduction of Victorian-era society"

This statement makes no sense and actually is a distortion of facts as the NRA is primarily supported by the middle class!

Third point: "Nixon's Southern Strategy brought the racists into the fold in 1972, and George Bush's courting of the Christian right brought the fundamentalists into the fold. "

Actually it was Kennedy’s "Southern strategy" AKA Lyndon Johnson, that was part of the old school racist crowd- and a war monger to boot! Kennedy play this card to get the Southern vote he would never been able to"

Fourth Point - But Ronald Reagan officially launched the [war on working people]....... most workers no longer have pensions. –

"Actually this is wrong also.. Pension laws are very strict and designed to make sure all full time employees are covered. If management has a pension, so do the workers! Pensions may be defined benefit or defined contribution plans -depending on the company plan but they have it!

Fifth Point - "We've gone from 25 percent of the work force being unionized -- when Reagan came into office -- to about eight percent of the private work force being unionized. The small sliver that's still unionized is under aggressive attack, and they represent the last bastion of the classic middle class. – "

This is because the time of the unions has passed. When there was a need, they served a purpose. The need has diminished. Also consider that unions have prevented millions of Americans from obtaining jobs in highly unionized shops. The printing industry was notorious for this practice. They became an obstruction to increased productivity preventing companies from being competitive!

Sisth Point - "The conservatives can't allow them to survive; [unions] bring democracy into the workplace, so they represent a threat to conservative wealth and power." Unions bring anything but democracy into the marketplace. You don’t belong and pay your dues, your out of a job!. If you belong and your work is substandard, makes no difference, you stay! also, look at the past reputation of unions.. mob controlled and a giant voting block that can sway their special interest!

Seventh Point... "The only thing that will allow unionization to happen is force of law; ......"

Why on earth would we want to force unions on companies that don’t need them.. no wonder why liberals have never been seen as a group that could support productivity and prosperity in this country. These policies would lead to increase in foreign goods in this country and less American jobs"


continued on next post

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks for the comedic break! Posted by: YogiBear
My contribution
Posted by: leftisright on Sep 6, 2006 7:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is very unsettling to realize that the majority of younger people in this country have not F----g clue what has been lost; how great America used to be. They have bought in hook, line & sinker all the rhetoric they hear on Fox News, etc. about how well we as a nation are doing ! they have no real historic context to refute what they are told. Talk about dumbing down. These poor kids have no idea what they have and are about to lose. To be a good citizen, I try to tell them about what life was really like in the "old days"; freedom to say what you want, a good living wage and a genuine patriotic feeling that your country is right with the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

conservasaurus is as clueless on domestic policy as foreign policy.
Posted by: yellow on Sep 6, 2006 9:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all Reagan did not rebuild US competitiveness in the manufacture of consumer durables which continued to locate overseas well past Reagan's misrule. All throughout the late 1970s and 1980s we saw a period of rapid real wage deceleration with unions holding the line on wages and benefits or giving into cuts. The US working class can't compete with cheap third world labor. Evidence of this is shown in the fact that jobs have even left northern Mexico for China where factory labor is even cheaper! Reagan presided over the biggest federal and trade deficits in US history at the time. He began the grand tradition of living on borrowed money-just what Republicans criticise the Democrats for doing. He used high interest rates to attract both portfolio and direct foreign investment to finance US deficit spending on the military. The US military budget swelled under Reagan to the highest proportion of US GNP since the Eisenhower years of the military-industrial complex.

Secondly, you claim unions are undemocratic but the closed shop IS a democratic measure-it ensures that the majority who support the union can protect its existance and that it secures equal commitment from all members who receive the benefit of membership. Union density peaked in the US in the 1950s at about 35% or one in three workers. Today it is under 14% most of whom are public sector workers. The maldistribution of wealth in the US is the worst in history. The top 1% hold over a quarter of the national income. Nearly 35% of US households earn less than $30,000/year putting one third of families below or dangerously close to the poverty line for the average size household. Poverty rates are nearing record levels. Nearly 47 million people lack health coverage many of them children. Meanwhile, corporate CEOs are earning millions in salaries and benefit packages. The ratio of the richest to poorest Americans is over 2,100 to 1. The minimum wage has not been raised in almost ten years as corporate profits near an unprecedented 12% of the GDP. This was done not by the market but by corporate control of our government. I want to know why this is regarded by conservatives as progress!

We are in a horrible state because globalization succeeds by creating a global division of labor that marginalizes five-sixths of the world population with the rest considered the "bankable sector" which actively participate in the system on a beneficial basis and have a chance to accumulate real wealth have a good life relatively free of unmanagable debt. Conservatives really don't see what is going on and are politically in denial. They bray on and on like so many donkeys about the unprecedented number of households invested in the stock market without also noting that most of the bottom fractiles are so invested in unstable 401k plans that have replaced more desirable guaranteed benefit plans. They also fail to note that the average value of stock holdings of the lowest fifth of the income ladder is under $7,000 while the average value of the richest 1% who hold most of the stock is about $250,000. The biggest stock holders are institutions. Most 401ks are losing money and now they want to privatize social security whereby it is guaranteed that one third of wage earners under such a scheme would actually lose money at retirement. So much for the ownership society. Why don't righties just come out and say what they really mean-they hate ANY redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. To redistribute wealth the other way is fine for them. And that's just what they have set about doing over the last two and one half decades!

We need business to pay living wages. We must use money wasted on the military to employ people in work programs that meet human needs like affordable housing, education, health care, and community services. Real unemployment levels are probably nearer 8% than 5%! We need to revitalize America now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Conservasaurus you are out of touch with real people!
Posted by: zooeyhall on Sep 7, 2006 6:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sir:

I know you are a right-wing troll on this site. I am just an ordinary middle-class guy who came of age in the '70s. I wasn't particularly liberal or conservative, very much the in the "undecided" category when it came to elections. All I can say is that for me and many, many others like me the last 25 years have just been shit as far as getting and keeping decent jobs, trying to maintain a middle class lifestyle, etc. Surely when I graduated from high school in 1973 I was correct in my assumption that I would at least have the economic security that my parents had! The ideas you promote and the world-view you have have finally been been shown for how fake and pro-elitist they are. You and your ilk on the conservative side have nothing to offer middle-class people like me for our problems!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Until the twelfth of never
Posted by: shangrilalad on Sep 7, 2006 8:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After five years of the most rapacious corruption in our nation’s history, middleclass Americans deserve a break. With luck we might be able to undo most of the evil perpetrated by Republicans in a couple generations, but until then anyone with less money than a multi-millionaire is going to suffer. We will be earning less money and paying higher taxes for a long time, assuming of course the country doesn’t go bankrupt before we can rebuild our economic base.

The owners of the Military Industrial Complex must accept the fact that they won’t be able to double their earning every year, but even so they won’t have to worry about having enough money to pay rent and buy groceries. Plutocrats already have enough money to insure their heirs live like gods until the twelfth of never.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Had a dream one day
Posted by: talkville on Sep 8, 2006 4:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"But it wasn't always like this, as Hartmann makes sure we remember. With the creation of post-Depression initiatives which benefited everyone, such as Social Security, antitrust laws and the minimum wage, America's most forward-thinking politicians helped revitalize the economy and make the country a more unified whole."

Well, not so sure it benefited everyone, but nevertheless...

I dozed off after reading and had a dream.

A large, large, piece of worn out denim and a very tiny piece of very expensive silk. Put together, they formed a triangular, a pyramidal shape. Once, we are told, the stitching that held them together was a high-quality thread -sturdy and long-lasting. Time went by, and the thread began to show signs of needing replacement; but the manufacturer of that thread was out of business by now, so a cheaper thread was sought and found - and at a great price! Reagan/Thatcher began the project; it's still continuing. It's a cheap thread, what can one expect? Worn out denim and very expensive silk. Then I woke up kinda wondering.

Reagan/Thatcher launched the offensive to take back ALL, and more if possible, from those "concessions" relinquished by the rulers after the Depression. As we are speaking and reading about it, we are living it.

The 'war' is a war on class - not 'middle' or 'lower'; just a stark, blatant and unbelievably arrogant war on class.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Elaine
Posted by: hellkat on Sep 10, 2006 12:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Our" government wants to eliminate the middle class. It will ultimately be only the rich who shape, litigate, and run things, it is almost there now. When you are poor, you have no way of fighting back, you are so busy trying to survive, you do not have time, resources to complain, or try to change things. This country is run by facist neocons, out for themselves, and their "war" is the "tool" they have implemented to put us peons in a police state. It is happening, with every new "law", every new "tool", every elitist who steals an office, we are doomed, and all we do is post thoughts, and no one is willing to act. We deserve what we are getting. Period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]