
Is the U.S. Ready for Post-Middle-Class Politics? - noamhendrix
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/magazine/is-the-us-ready-for-post-middle-class-politics.html
======
djyaz1200
The Fed economic policies of strict inflation control have had a big part in
holding down wages for working people. We all know when there is very strong
job growth the Fed increases interest rates to slow the economy. This is done
to limit inflation but it's executed at the very point when the "working
person" would otherwise have the chance to get ahead. If interest rates were
held lower longer strong job growth would elevate competition for labor...
thereby increasing wages. This strategy caries with it a more pronounced risk
of a spike in inflation but I would suggest that risk is worth it. If you look
at the stagnation in real wages it starts around 1980, not coincidentally 1
year into Paul Volcker's term as fed chairman (whose clear mandate and legacy
was controlling inflation at any cost).

~~~
poof131
Totally disagree. We’re sitting at almost zero percent interest rates because
the fed can’t take their foot off the pedal. More isn’t going to help bring
back the middle class. Volker broke the stagflation of the 70s and is probably
the only decent chairman. Bad trade deals, runaway education and health costs,
regressive taxes, foreign wars, etc. have done more to decimate the middle
class than interest rates being too high. If anything, the fed has helped
accelerate / fund much of this mess with ridiculously low interest rates for
decades. Certainly it will hurt when rates go up, but it hurts to pay off your
credit cards too. Cheap money funds malinvestment, flows to the politically
connected, and aggravates income inequality. It’s just tough to notice. You
may get a raise at work but don’t realize the bosses mansion/stock just
appreciated 100 times more than your raise. You feel good but your ability to
purchase things decreased.

------
mc32
It's probably a victim of over thinking and too much marketing. The forces
which shape this allergic reaction to these phrases are the ones also turning
voters away and towards the Sanderses and Trumps who are less afraid of plain
populist/democratic speech.

It should be of little surprise to establishment showrunners this is
happening, after all the blue collar middle class are an afterthought when it
comes to economic policy -- quite the opposite of say China, who cater to the
blue collar middle class.

Yes, on the whole we have benefitted from trade deals but we've made very few
accommodations for the part of the middle class which loses out --be I
outsourcing yesterday and today or automation tomorrow.

~~~
ffnewfkjewf
>on the whole we have benefited from trade deals

Despite the amount of rhetoric I see claiming this, I have yet to see any
empirical evidence.

~~~
oldmanjay
Well the fact that the global population has begun the climb out of poverty is
a pretttttttty good indicator. You may be approaching from the protectionist
side, of course, but I'm not and so the happy truth is plain to see.

~~~
ffnewfkjewf
That's a result of technology, not trade policy. Not only that, but I can't
think of rising, developing countries that have free trade policies. Brazil,
China, and the rest are all protectionist. Further, the the notion is that
_we_ in the US have benefited from free trade.

So the answer is none of the above.

~~~
astronautjones
I agree with you, but would dispute that Brasil is rising at the moment

------
acconrad
> _the campaign planned to “shy away from the characterization ‘middle class’
> — because, her advisers say, the term no longer connotes a stable life_

This should infuriate everyone who reads this. Somehow being an average, in
the _middle_ of the income scale, means that the _majority of Americans_
should expect an unstable life. That seems so wrong on so many levels.

~~~
WildUtah
I don't think you understand. It's better for the billionaires, Wall Street
bankers, and venture capitalists this way. Therefore sacrificing a middle
class country and way of life is worth it.

There are still lots of options for the former middle class: we could have
autocracy like China or grinding poverty like Bolivia. But broad prosperity
just wasn't working out for the big money donors and had to be abandoned.

~~~
gnu8
That's missing the point. Everyone knows the middle class has been gutted to
benefit the one percent. The problem now is: how does a national political
campaign appeal to the vast population without referring to them as the middle
class, or as something realistic but depressing, or with some sort of hollow
and transparent euphemism like "everyday Americans"?

~~~
oldmanjay
Whenever "everyone knows" something so complicated, you can be certain it's a
religious belief, not a fact

~~~
auntyJemima
Are you crazy or in denial? Are you not aware of the many publications
released about how we are no longer even close to the prosperity of the
1940s-1970s as regular Americans?

~~~
refurb
Properity measured how? On average Americans are _far_ better off now than in
the 1970's if you think about income.

~~~
hanoz
Measured by the amount of labour required to live a comfortable life? You say
we're better off now but can a typical skilled or semi skilled worker today
support a family in a secure home as was the case in previous generations?

~~~
refurb
_Measured by the amount of labour required to live a comfortable life?_

How do you define a "comfortable life"? I'm thinking the goal posts are
constantly moving and that's why people think things were better back in the
1970's. Not blaming anyone for it, it's the human condition to always want
things to be better.

Let's see: 1940's - WW2, America is _just_ coming out of a 15 year recession
1950's - Constant threat of nuclear war, Korean War, economically things are
looking up 1960's - Numerous race riots, economy is still doing relatively
well 1970's - Rampant inflation, rather stagflation, gas shortages

I've asked my family (older generations) and they agree things are way better
now. And they aren't what you'd even call middle class.

