Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

The Nouveau Poor Have Reached Numbers Too Large to Ignore

By Barbara Ehrenreich, Barbaraehrenreich.com. Posted January 13, 2009.


As the poor and the formerly middle-class become the new American majority, will they finally have enough status to get their needs met?
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Ever on the lookout for the bright side of hard times, I am tempted to delete “class inequality” from my worry list. Less than a year ago, it was the one of the biggest economic threats on the horizon, with even hard line conservative pundits grousing that wealth was flowing uphill at an alarming rate, leaving the middle class stuck with stagnating incomes while the new super-rich ascended to the heavens in their personal jets. Then the whole top-heavy structure of American capitalism began to totter, and –poof!—inequality all but vanished from the public discourse. A financial columnist in the Chicago Sun Times has just announced that the recession is a “great leveler,” serving to “democratize[d] the agony,” as we all tumble into “the Nouveau Poor…”

The media have been pelting us with heart-wrenching stories about the neo-suffering of the Nouveau Poor, or at least the Formerly Super-rich among them: Foreclosures in Greenwich CT! A collapsing market for cosmetic surgery! Sales of Gulfstream jets declining! Niemen Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue on the ropes! We read of desperate measures, like having to cut back the personal trainer to two hours a week. Parties have been canceled; dinner guests have been offered, gasp, baked potatoes and chili. The New York Times relates the story of a New Jersey teenager whose parents were forced to cut her $100 a week allowance and private Pilates classes. In one of the most pathetic tales of all, New Yorker Alexandra Penney relates how she lost her life savings to Bernie Madoff and is now faced with having to lay off her three-day- a-week maid, Yolanda. “I wear a classic clean white shirt every day of the week. I have about 40 white shirts. They make me feel fresh and ready to face whatever battles I may be fighting …” she wrote, but without Yolanda, “How am I going to iron those shirts so I can still feel like a poor civilized person?”

But hard times are no more likely to abolish class inequality than Obama’s inauguration is likely to eradicate racism. No one actually knows yet whether inequality has increased or decreased during the last year of recession, but the historical precedents are not promising. The economists I’ve talked to -- like Biden’s top economic advisor, Jared Bernstein -- insist that recessions are particularly unkind to the poor and the middle class. Canadian economist Armine Yalnizyan says, “Income polarization always gets worse during recessions.” It makes sense. If the stock market has shrunk your assets of $500 million to a mere $250 million, you may have to pass on a third or fourth vacation home. But if you’ve just lost an $8 an hour job, you’re looking at no home at all.

Alright, I’m a journalist and I understand how the media work. When a millionaire cuts back on his crème fraiche and caviar consumption, you have a touching human interest story. But pitch a story about a laid-off roofer who loses his trailer home and you’re likely to get a big editorial yawn. “Poor Get Poorer” is just not an eye-grabbing headline, even when the evidence is overwhelming. Food stamp applications, for example, are rising toward a historic record; calls to one DC-area hunger hotline have jumped 248 percent in the last six months, most of them from people who have never needed food aid before. And for the first time since 1996, there’s been a marked upswing in the number of people seeking cash assistance from TANF (Temporary Aid to Needy Families), the exsanguinated version of welfare left by welfare “reform.” Too bad for them that TANF is essentially a wage-supplement program based on the assumption that the poor would always be able to find jobs, and that it pays, at most, less than half the federal poverty level.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: protests, poor people

Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of thirteen books, including the New York Times bestseller Nickel and Dimed. A frequent contributor to the New York Times, Harpers, and the Progressive, she is a contributing writer to Time magazine. She lives in Florida.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
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:
Say it long, say it loud,
Posted by: Artkansas on Jan 13, 2009 1:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm Nouveau Poor and I'm proud.

Last year a Creative Director... This year unemployed.

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

Interesting Times
Posted by: MJ Fields on Jan 13, 2009 1:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the poor and the formerly middle class Nouveau Poor become the American majority, they will finally have the clout to get their needs met.

And if clout doesn't work, there's always the Greek model. I have actually heard the possibility of civil unrest being discussed in the mainstream media.

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

» RE: Interesting Times Posted by: Dboy
» RE: Interesting Times Posted by: Cybershaman
» Ted Kaczynski was way ahead of his time. Posted by: and_abottleofrum
» RE: Zager and Evans? Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Zager and Evans? Posted by: Landbaron
» RE: Interesting Times Posted by: Drume
RE: WHAT LIES DEAD AHEAD?
Posted by: Sushi on Jan 13, 2009 4:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...not paranoid and afraid ..."

But that's exactly what Bush has taught us for the past 8 years. And only he can keep us safe from attack, even though our worst attacks came either due to his negligence or directly through his policies. (Although he dismisses and deflects responsibility at every turn.)

Bush (following Reagan's mantra) has broken up any semblance of American working as a team. (Unions, teamsters, etc.) We briefly joined together after WTC disaster, but then were immediately fractioned into us-and-them groups. We have had a steady diet of people pitted against each other; divided along ethnic lines, pro-life/choice, Christian against "other", gay/straight, "with us" or "against us" patriot/hate-America. No in between.

Meanwhile, they were robbing us blind.

You are exactly right however, about putting our backs into this. Really, I hope Obama just ASKS us to make sacrifices, offers Peace Bonds, Environmental Bonds, Education Bonds, Health Bonds, Energy Innovation Bonds to the public. I would like him to try that before imposing too much "sacrifice" on us on a grand scale. I am sure we don't yet know the depths of the stinking shit-hole Bush has left us standing in, so it might take desperate measures.

I never imagined that I would be spending my golden years struggling to survive.

Sushi
"I never thought life's little luxuries would now include butter, eggs and bread."

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

The Democrats 'Shock Doctrine'- a Silver Lining
Posted by: Purple Girl on Jan 13, 2009 5:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We Liberal Dems have been screaming for healthcare reform, Green Jobs and the end of the Feudalistic 'Trickle Down' for decades.
Klein wrote about the Shock of 9/11 opening the door for numerous elements of the Repug wish list. Able to invade 2 countries without resistence, undermine the Regulations which gave our economy some stablity and destroy our Constitutional rights.
Now Dems have been given an opportunity to reset the Priorities. We may finally get to wage war on Poverty, stregnthen entitlement Programs (SS, Medicare/caid..), Get healthcare out of the hands of the Profiteering Insurance corps, reduce Wall Streets overall effect on commodity prices,Break the blood for Oil contract with the Oil 'royals', Make Israel stand on it's own two feet, Become Environementally Consciencous, destroy the Caste system which has arisen over the last 30 yrs and not only reinstitute but fortify our Constitutional rights for Citizens instead of 'incs'.
If thing had not hit the bottom, I doubt seriously that the 'elites' would give a shit about these Problems, but now that their 'wealth' has been undermined, they are beginning to see what the other 95% have suffered under during their Reign of Terror and Treason. It would have taken decades for US to reverse this course of destruction, but now that change could happen at a much faster rate. Maybe even the Term 'socialism' will be used Correctly, instead of a 'Cold War' propaganda tool.Seems they are all talking about the 'common good' now, Guess they've realized they too are 'common' just like the rest of US.

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

» RE: If that were only true. Posted by: Cybershaman
Great Piece
Posted by: Drume on Jan 13, 2009 4:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Incisive as always. Loved the column. Keep it up.

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

The Real Unemployment Rate
Posted by: highfeather on Jan 13, 2009 6:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Part of this story about the new poor is that the unemployment rate is much higher than simply the people collecting unemployment. I lost my work in the last downturn in 2001 and have merely survived by doing odd jobs. No savings, heavy credit card debt and unable to pay into Social Security. I know so many people that are in financial trouble it is simply scary. So, there are people that have fallen off the unemployment roles who are still either unemployed or under-employed. So much for the American dream, it seems the only people in my location who are achieving it are the highly educated coming in from overseas.

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

» RE: The Real Unemployment Rate Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» RE: The Real Unemployment Rate Posted by: badkitty
» RE: The Real Unemployment Rate Posted by: marykane
For those who still have a home
Posted by: FAITHCARR on Jan 13, 2009 6:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you have a lawn, tear it out and plant some food.
If you have an apartment/condo, buy some cheap containers, stick 'em by a window and plant some food.

If you have an acre, add some chickens, if you have two acres add some milk goats.

If you have a roof, start storing rainwater in old (but washed) garbage cans.

If you have neighbors, it's past time to make friends with them. We're going to need each other. And sooner than you think.

www.faithccarr.com

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

Sorry, Folks...
Posted by: rwshea on Jan 13, 2009 6:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...but here's a cold slap to your faces for not being realistic about how things have been continually working in this country since day one.

Do you actually think, for one moment, that the rich will actually be made to pay their "fair" share? They never have - and they never will without bloodshed. What do you think forced the wealthy to give up more of their income during the first depression and WWII? The spectre of violence from the general population on themselves. That's it. Game over.

Pontificate all you want, banter on about fine policy point tweaking all you want. Nothing will happen to alleviate this situation without driving home the reality that we have never had a democracy, and never will without forcing (that mean's physical violence, people - or an actually credible threat thereof) the issue.

On a human level, of course, all physical violence is terrible. But violence is the only language our "handlers" understand. It's the only way to control them. Hell, that's how they control the rest of us, for crying out loud. Use your brains, please! It's really very simple.

So, while I do agree with the vast majority of posters who desire policy changes that will address the imbalances and injustices of our society and economic structure, no amount of wonkish blogging will do anything other than keep you occupied while the rich do what they have always done: taking (stealing if necessary) from others and givng nothing in return (if at all possible).

So, who's up for a little revolution? Oh, I see you're busy ordering a $7.00 coffee concoction. You're no revolutionary!

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

» RE: Sorry, Folks... Posted by: BST
» I understand BST... Posted by: rwshea
» RE: I understand BST... Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: I understand BST... Posted by: rwshea
» AN AMERICAN INSURRECTION Posted by: sherman
» Thank you so much! Posted by: and_abottleofrum
CASSE
Posted by: CASSE on Jan 13, 2009 7:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hopefully we’ve learned that a "rising tide" won't lift all boats, because there is only so much water (and oil, land, etc.). It’s time to get serious about the steady state economy as an economic policy goal, along with the thousands of signatories and organizations endorsing the CASSE position on economic growth:

http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html

Brian Czech, Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy

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

two realities
Posted by: WyrdSister on Jan 13, 2009 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i dont pretend to know 'economics', but i like what this guy says; albeit a little scary. I do believe that some radical changes are going to be necessary going into the future.

"There are two realities "out there" now competing for verification among those who think about national affairs and make things happen. The dominant one (let's call it the Status Quo) is that our problems of finance and economy will self-correct and allow the project of a "consumer" economy to resume in "growth" mode. This view includes the idea that technology will rescue us from our fossil fuel predicament -- through "innovation," through the discovery of new techno rescue remedy fuels, and via "drill, baby, drill" policy. This view assumes an orderly transition through the current "rough patch" into a vibrant re-energized era of "green" Happy Motoring and resumed Blue Light Special shopping.

The minority reality (let's call it The Long Emergency) says that it is necessary to make radically new arrangements for daily life and rather soon. It says that a campaign to sustain the unsustainable will amount to a tragic squandering of our dwindling resources. It says that the "consumer" era of economics is over, that suburbia will lose its value, that the automobile will be a diminishing presence in daily life, that the major systems we've come to rely on will founder, and that the transition between where we are now and where we are going is apt to be tumultuous.

My own view is obviously the one called The Long Emergency.

Since the change it proposes is so severe, it naturally generates exactly the kind of cognitive dissonance that paradoxically reinforces the Status Quo view, especially the deep wishes associated with saving all the familiar, comfortable trappings of life as we have known it. The dialectic between the two realities can't be sorted out between the stupid and the bright, or even the altruistic and the selfish. The various tech industries are full of MIT-certified, high-achiever Status Quo techno-triumphalists who are convinced that electric cars or diesel-flavored algae excreta will save suburbia, the three thousand mile Caesar salad, and the theme park vacation. The environmental movement, especially at the elite levels found in places like Aspen, is full of Harvard graduates who believe that all the drive-in espresso stations in America can be run on a combination of solar and wind power. I quarrel with these people incessantly. It seems especially tragic to me that some of the brightest people I meet are bent on mounting the tragic campaign to sustain the unsustainable in one way or another. But I have long maintained that life is essentially tragic in the sense that history won't care if we succeed or fail at carrying on the project of civilization.

While the public supposedly voted for "change" this fall, I maintain that they underestimate the changes really at hand. I voted for "change" myself in pulling the lever for Barack Obama. I regard him as a figure of intelligence and sensibility, but I'm far from convinced that he really sees the kind of change we are in for, and I fret about the measures he'll promote to rescue the Status Quo when he moves into the White House a few weeks from now."

from:James Howard Kunstler's Forecast for 2009

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

» RE: two realities Posted by: WyrdSister
Since you live in Florida...
Posted by: ctuck622 on Jan 13, 2009 7:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Ehrenreich: Since you live in FL, then you must be aware of the depth of corruption in FL govt., if not perhaps, the depth of corruption in higher ed. Why, oh why, is this STILL not being covered nationally? We've got a House Speaker embroiled in a Blago-like scandal, who like Blago, claims innocence in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, a Governor & "slawmaker" cronies who would rather continue robbing from the poor, raiding the Lawton Chiles Endowment Fund, which is earmarked for social services, raise already-exorbitant court fees, & no one (but ME it seems) wants to even TALK about FL's embarrassing 2004 unconstitutional legislation charging court fees to the indigent--the only state in the union to do so--(under JEB BUSH's "watch") & for WHAT?? To avoid raising cigarette taxes in FL, which are one of the cheapest in the nation?? I don't know about anyone else, but I smell a HUGE rat, in the form of tobacco company KICKBACKS!

I really wish, Ms. Ehrenreich, that SOMEONE would convince natl media to finally focus on FL's shenanigans, as nothing here is likely to change until that happens.

We need to do two things, for starters:

1. Inundate criminal.division@usdoj.gov with e-mails demanding Federal investigation into FL corruption, particularly in higher ed, AND

Support this petition:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/equaljusticeforall

which demands a Constitutional Amendment which will prevent ANY state from EVER again passing unconstitutional legislation such as FL did in 2004, which denies millions of citizens of their basic Constitutional right to have grievances & injustices redressed in a court of law.

THAT'S what that legislation was all about--not just money from court fees--oh no, that legislation was designed to keep as many citizens as possible from ever seeing the inside of a courtroom--from holding greedy, negligent corporations & unethical, lackadaisical govt. agencies accountable in a court of law.

We need court reform in this country--NOW!

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

You've forgotten someone else
Posted by: BST on Jan 13, 2009 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The story that never gets covered by the media is this one, my own, one that is reflected in the lives of so many people cut from the same cloth.

I am 65, socked away money in a 401k over a lifetime of work -- often working two or three jobs when I was a single parent (a status not of my choice).

I never asked for a hand-out from anyone, parents, government, friends. I showed up for work, did extra, paid my taxes, helped friends and family when they were in need on occasion and kept an optimistic outlook even at times when there seemed to be little reason for it.

Two years ago I quit my job, a job I had loved working with people I loved. Frankly, I was so burned out I was no good to anyone, including myself and certainly not to my fine co-workers.

But after I quit full-time work, I took on three part-time jobs (including work from home, on invitation from my former employer), even eschewing SS because I wanted to retain that lifelong feeling of being self-reliant.

I looked forward not to an elegant, glitzy later life, but perhaps a car to replace the 13-year-old one, maybe a few trips, even a first manicure (imagine). In these two years I've bought one item of clothing, a mother-of-the-bride dress for an amazingly lavish $120.

The retirement money I had socked away was overnight halved by the stock market crash, despite my hawk eye on diversifying, despite the fact I had some in bonds, some in cash (Banks don't pay enough interest to make it worthwhile placing everything away there). But now I wish I had done so.

Alan Greenspan, I trusted you.

This was money I took out of my paychecks over the years for the time when I would continue to support myself rather than ever become a burden or worry to family.

Now I'm on SS, which has limits for any income I can scrape together, jobs are tight -- especially for someone my age (a terrifically bright, lively, engaged woman), the industry I worked in (newspapers)has tanked, and I am kicking myself for not simply spending my lifetime up to my ears in credit, but wildly extravagant with cars, home updates, fashion, new shoes, good wine ... whatever.

I'm totally discouraged and disheartened, each of these new feelings for me, who once believed (foolishly) that "doing the right thing" would matter. it doesn't. Trust me.

Ask Bernie Madoff, if you can reach him in his penthouse. Ask the corporate geniuses who are begging for bailouts to cover their sorry management missions of the past 15 years.

There are many stories out there. All of them have merit ... we should view this time in our country's history not by class division but by betrayal of trust ... for the honest people among the wealthy, many of them philanthropists, for those among the poor who have tried valiantly to stay afloat, but also for the people in the middle who are generally invisible because we just keep on, keeping on.

We ask nothing, we give much. This member of that crowd is completely disillusioned.

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

» VOLUNTARY SIMPLICITY Posted by: sherman
POVERTY IS A GREAT EQUALIZER
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jan 13, 2009 8:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Poverty is also relative. For some it's doing their own laundry, for others it's waiting in line for lunch. It is however, a common unifying thread and creates discontent across the board. It does no good to alienate those who appear to be more fortunate. They still have clout and we would be wise to join forces. It's bad enough that almost everyone has less than they did 8 yrs' ago, but dividing ourselves against each other is not the cure. The woman who had to fire the maid will one day need a new one and some woman will get her job back. We shouldn't burn bridges. If we allow ourselves to be divided into countless classes and groups we'll end up like a middle-east country. Fighting with each other forever and not even knowing why. This is a 'make or break' time in our history and we should decide our future or someone else will. Thanks, ANNA

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

Maybe
Posted by: JSquercia on Jan 13, 2009 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love the renaming of welfare to the "RIGHT To LIFE " , perhaps THAT will get the attention of the Relegious leaders who focus on the Fetus but IGNORE the child .
These are the people who forget that the Lord said Whatever you did to the LEAST of my brothers so you have done unto ME

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

When enough of us become poor enough, the real Revolution will begin
Posted by: DCostello2 on Jan 13, 2009 9:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know if I'll see it in my lifetime or not but eventually there will be a true Revolution in America. The masses will rise up to overthrow the masters. Washington will burn. The Revolution will not be peaceful, it will be bloody. Just as history has shown again and again and again, you can only repress people and ignore them for so long. Eventually, the masses will MAKE you listen to them - and you won't like it when they do.

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

Do the starving really have to make nice with yuppies?
Posted by: Blue Heron on Jan 13, 2009 10:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Personally, I think that's a little too much to ask, even in these dark times when unity is called for. Surely there is a difference between the lady who has to let the maid go, and the individual who has to put him or herself in physical danger to put food on the table? Surely the more needy ones will experience a great deal more shame and risk than those who are merely inconvenienced. One of the consequences of my own unemployed status is that I have involuntarily lost quite a bit of weight. Is that a good thing? Most would agree that it is, but most would also agree that it is hardly desirable to lose some of your earthly mass due to poverty or sickness. That I'm sure of. Please, don't feel sorry for the rich lady who chips her nail or can't afford Pilates classes. Don't feel sorry for me either, but realize that the argument presented here is about as weak as I and unfortunately many others are feeling on a restricted, rationed diet.

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

Have to Admit
Posted by: JSquercia on Jan 13, 2009 11:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have to admit that it GLADDEN my heart see Nieman Marcus (aka Needless Markup) Holliday Sales were off by 25% .

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

ba
Posted by: mnstra on Jan 13, 2009 11:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why did they vote a major candidate into office?

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

The French knew whom to shoot
Posted by: billwald on Jan 13, 2009 12:10 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
During the French and Russian Revolutions the working poor knew who needed shooting. We just had another revolution in the US. Who are the working poor going to shoot? The people we just elected?

My point, our owners have gotten much smarter since the Russian Revolution. We don't (even) know who our owners are. Bush and Obama? They are so far down the food chain that they don't matter.

Our owners who conducted the 2nd American Revolution and gave us the United States Constitution were smart folk. They gave us a revolution every 4 years but nothing changes. They let us own guns, chose our religion, jobs, residences, political parties, and vote for new tax collectors every 2 years so we think we are "free." But nothing slows the transfer of assets from the working class to our owners.

They created an unbeatable system. They just stole another trillion dollars and bragged about it . . . nothing happened. No need to worry about the government collecting the guns as long as there are more trillions to steal.

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

No One Cares
Posted by: cherylholmes on Jan 13, 2009 12:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one cares about the poor, disabled. elderly...I'm disabled and very poor, living way below the federal poverty level....and we're not eligible for food stamps or any assistance in Texas thanks to Bush and Perry. Rethugs will see that the poor just die off.

Some will be destroyed and killed off in so called natural disasters, hurricanes, fires, floods, etc...none of the communities are being rebuilt either from these disasters...they served the purpose of getting rid of us "useless eaters" as the Rethugs call us. They want us to just die....and I think they rather like the process of seeing us suffer as they continually cutting benefits to us.

I wasn't always so poor. In the 80's I held a great job at a professional level with a Fortune 500 company that went belly up during the semiconductor crash Reagan helped usher in. Many of us lost everything in that crash too and never recovered.

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

Crisis
Posted by: willymack on Jan 13, 2009 12:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Chinese ideogram for crisis is a combination of danger and opportunity. In this ying/yang world, things often co-exist alongside one another. It seems clearly evident that our monetary system is fatally deficient, and unless replaced with something new, will rise again, only to collapse in a pattern which when graphed looks like a sine wave-much like the representation of 60 hertz alternating electrical current. It starts at zero, rises to maximum positive, falls to zero, then to maximun negative, then back to zero,and starts all over again. In the world of economics, this SUCKS for the vast majority of humanity, for whom there's no net gain, and more often, loss. I'm no Paul Krugman, but I think a new system with NO Money or elevated social status attached to the accumulation of wealth at the expense of others, should be tried. The old system only favors crooks, and is wasteful and destructive.

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

Let them eat cake
Posted by: Karina on Jan 13, 2009 12:18 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps the time has come to storm the proverbial Bastille. How hungry do we have to get for that to happen?

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

Thinking INSIDE the box
Posted by: themagi on Jan 13, 2009 1:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree heartily with Ehrenreich's observations. "The poor are always with us," Louisa May Alcott wrote. Both she and Ehrenreich are onto something--thinking INSIDE the box of existing poverty, by accepting what is. The only difference between their observations is the size of the population to which they are referring.

Heretofore, the poor have been penalized for getting work, via a commensurate drop in their welfare checks. Why not pay them for staying employed? It's not as crazy as it sounds. Think about it for a minute. Think about what we clearly know of positive reinforcment--of any variety: it tends to build confidence and higher self-expectations. Any businessperson will tell you that people will invest in what they know will bring a return, and the higher the return, the greater the investment will become. So in a pay-for-work model we'd be paying for what WORKS, and not for what doesn't. Develop a plan to pay for those falling below a certain income to get and keep employment. Offer more money for more responsible jobs, until it hits a certain level of sustainability--which of course would have to be regularly adjusted for inflation, etc. Build into the system a checks-and-balances for recitivism, as people WILL figure out that their income could get supplemented again if they just lose a job and get another one. And for those averse to the implication that this is socializing the career market, let us not forget that our current administration has thought NOTHING of socializing financial institutions, transportation companies...and possibly even Larry Flynt's pornography empire, if his bid for a $5 billion dollar bail-out is taken up for discussion. (By the way, he may be petitioning for money just to stir up some really interesting philosophical discourse.) On top of that, their oversight of such a hand-out has been deplorable, big surprise. And we...you and I...are paying for it. Why not pay for something we believe in, rather than something we don't, that being opportunity of the people, by the people and for the people.

If we're in a box that says, "growing poverty", let's see how we can turn the existing support system on its head--which might just end up liberating all those trapped within.

Comments, anyone?

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

Ehrenreich Blind to Reality of Class-struggle
Posted by: lorenbliss on Jan 13, 2009 3:16 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barbara Ehrenreich is an excellent reporter, probably the best in mainstream media at describing what is being done to the working class in the United States. But -- schooled as she was in a U.S. education system in which objective analysis is utterly taboo (even at the posh private schools she was privileged to attend) -- her grasp of class-struggle is nonexistent. That she could write the PollyAnna nonsense she offers us via the above piece -- “As the poor and the formerly middle class Nouveau Poor become the American majority, they will finally have the clout to get their needs met” -- proves she has no conception of what is being done to the working class: those of us, at least 90 percent of the population, whose lives are controlled by the plutocracy that owns the nation’s wealth.

Ms. Ehrenreich is oblivious to five vital points:

(1)-That the so-called “two party system” is a hoax, a monolith the sole purpose of which is the preservation and expansion of capitalism by any means necessary. That it has two factions -- the Republicans who make no secret of their impassioned commitment to fascism and theocracy (think “R” for “revealers”); and the Democrats whose sole purpose is to preserve the charade of humanitarian concern and Constitutional governance (think “D” for “deceivers”) -- is merely (more) evidence of the despotic brilliance of the ruling class.

(2)-That the sole function of government under this system is to serve as facilitator -- and, when deemed necessary, the goon squad -- for the ruling class.

(3)-That it does not matter who occupies the White House, a truth vividly illustrated by the issue of reproductive rights. Under the Revealers, women of all classes are officially denied reproductive freedom (which of course is no obstruction to ruling-class women, whose money literally lifts them -- via flights to the free world -- above the law). Under the Deceivers, while there is the pretense of reproductive freedom, the practices of capitalism -- specifically the outsourcing, downsizing, inescapable unemployment and permanent loss of health insurance imposed by so-called Free Trade -- again limit reproductive freedom. For the working class, no job means no insurance, and no insurance means no reproductive freedom -- or health care in general. (I am astonished that Ehrenreich and indeed virtually all other U.S. feminists are so bourgeois blind -- that is, they identify so completely with the ruling class -- they fail to see this terrible truth.)

(4)- That the U.S. economic and foreign policies of the past 64 years (dating from the death of President Roosevelt and the purges that began shortly thereafter) have all had as their underlying motive the recognition of various impending crises. Their ultimate purpose -- the monopolization of the world’s wealth -- is thus to ensure the post-crisis survival of the ruling class and the preservation of capitalism.

(5)- That the wealth-monopolization process was radically accelerated by the events of 22 November 1963 and has continued apace ever since.

In this context, any notion we in the working class “will finally have the clout to get (our) needs met” is patently absurd. What is happening as capitalism follows its logical and indeed intrinsic progression toward fascism and theocracy is implicit in the term “human capital”: we are being reduced to indentured servitude (if not outright slavery) even as the policy of euthanasia by abandonment and neglect terrifies us to submission, thins our ranks and eradicates our collective memory of better times. Under capitalism, the only “clout” we will ever get is the clout in the face delivered with characteristic brutality by the overseer -- which Ehrenreich actually facilitates by her refusal to recognize what obtains.

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

Et tu, Barbara?
Posted by: DaBear on Jan 13, 2009 3:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I read the conclusion, "As the poor and the formerly middle class Nouveau Poor become the American majority, they will finally have the clout to get their needs met," I too had the shudder reaction... Barbara, listen to what you're saying... and then re-read your own books, girl, the owning class ain't gonna let that happen, sista!

1789... just 1789. That's what's comin... as the rent goes up... again.

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

"I hope they (the jobs) aren't all for young men with strong backs."
Posted by: gradioc on Jan 13, 2009 5:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barbara wrote that, even as she said the recovery must come from the bottom. I think she misses the same point the rich always do. You create jobs and wealth by creating customers. The "Investment Class" can invest all they want. Without customers no business can survive. When "young men with strong backs" are gainfully employed they create jobs everywhere. They eat lunch out instead of brownbagging and tip the waitress who is able to buy that new dress from the shopkeeper who opens a new store on the other side of town and hires the carpenter to build walls who now needs a new truck because he's going to hire some more "young men with strong backs."

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

Equalizer my ass.
Posted by: wolfgangmo on Jan 13, 2009 7:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Poverty is slavery.

Ask any other the billions of poor in Africa, India, or Asia just how equal they feel.

Your entire post is based on a lie. The rich do not feel equal to us. They feel superior and the fact that they lost some value in their portfolios and holding is immaterial. What matters is the percentage of the economy they own and that percentage is increasing.

Many of us are worrying about where our next meal is coming from. The uber rich are considering which neighborhood or company to take over next now that the prices have come down.

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

Perhaps now we have the numbers to insist on our rights - Part 1
Posted by: recklessron on Jan 13, 2009 9:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We should all have been taught - by agreed international law - this in school and we need to start enforcing it. Pay close attention to Articles 22 - 25, especially 25. For those against socialism you need to know these are rights your grandparents believed in, some fought and died for, and your country has signed international agreements to uphold!

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948


Preamble

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedoms,

Whereas member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now therefore,

The General Assembly

Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2

1. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

2. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

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

This economy is getting scary..
Posted by: Landbaron on Jan 14, 2009 12:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
www.lahomelessblog.org/2008/12/guide-for-nouveau-poor.html

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

It was less than ideal to begin with...
Posted by: freelyb on Jan 14, 2009 1:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is precisely the time when we should challenge the idea that unlimited growth of the economy and of the populace itself is unworkable.

From one who was hit hard in the market crash of 2000 and survived, life is still good. I learned a lot about what really matters. I got familiar with my personal soul during this process, not necessarily in the religious sense, either. Pain is the touchstone of progress, if we face it honestly. Things can actually be BETTER than they were before.

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

Socialism 2.0?
Posted by: SkeeterVT1 on Jan 14, 2009 4:16 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the middle class continues to collapse into the ranks of the growing poor, how long do you think it will be before we hear of Karl Marx and socialism becoming fashionable again?

It's no accident that as the global economy grows worse, more and more countries are moving leftward politically. What makes anyone think that the same thing isn't happening in the U.S.?

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

travelergtoo
Posted by: travelertoo on Jan 14, 2009 5:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
GEORGIE, YOU'VE DONE ONE HECK OF A JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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

  • 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.

Advertisement
Advertisement