Class and family in the US and A.

[meus_ovatio]

I've been musing about something. Beware, for I have mused and you are now subject to its consequences! Something came up with got me thinking about family and how class continuity can effect politics. For instance, anecdote-wise, about 3/4ths of those I know are worse off than their parents than their parents were at their age. The rest are either

Comments

[politikitty]

How would your reasoning change if you knew that mobility hasn't actually decreased in America?

And controlling for household size, 80% of Americans are better off than their parents before them.

Is that enough? No. And I don't think we should stop our commitment to helping the disadvantaged. But the doom-mongering actually causes harm. As the link says: "In this case bad evidence discourages people struggling to escape poverty. It unnecessarily increases Americans’ anxiety levels and adds to the general sense of gloom that has sapped consumer confidence, thereby increasing the agonizing slowness of the recovery."

[enders_shadow]

[politikitty]

And yet, mobility has not decreased in America.

Did I say that we should throw a party and consider the status quo to be acceptable, poverty to be ignored and the economy is stellar for people who count? Because I'm pretty sure I didn't.

But it is completely plausible that graph looks that way because of high levels of immigration and globalization which has greatly reduced world-wide poverty while reaping impressive returns for fat cats who don't need the extra money, but wouldn't have reduced poverty without the incentive. If that's the case, we should be a little slower to say that we want to turn back time and make America rich again by putting China back at subsistence wages.

It's not a tidy story with evil wizards and valliant princes. That's one small exhibit of a whole mess of data that you never actually care about discussing.

[enders_shadow]

The graph pertains to the US and you know what? You're right. Fuck them immigrants. they don't need a decent wage. they shouldn't be payed relative to how much they produce! fuck em!

Damn you are so smart.

[paedraggaidin]

I think it means that the totally polarized politics of today aren't likely to mellow out anytime soon. It's not just a matter of entitlement; the Baby Boomers, logically to an extent, want what they paid into the system for (i.e. Medicare and Social Security), don't want those things "taken away," and want to keep them to the exclusion of anyone else, if necessary.

Today's generation says "that's not fair" in one of two ways: the left says that's not fair because everyone deserves proper healthcare and the system we have now can't support that, and needs change; the right says that's not fair because why should we have to pay for the healthcare of others through massive government programs? That's what the free market is for.

[meus_ovatio]

I'm not even worried about fairness. Me and my wife are literally fucked until 2014 when it comes to health care coverage. It's like, here's the game, play the game, but nope, fuck you, you're out of luck, go to hell.

Ok, that's fine, whatever. But what are we supposed to do?

[telemann]

What's the cut off age for being allowed to get on your parent's insurance policies?

[meus_ovatio]

26, I think.

[allhatnocattle]

What a strange post about Political Utopia. I don't have your rose coloured specs to see what you're on about.

[peristaltor]

An excellent point. I've been mulling that one for a few years, too.

What I fear is that the participants in this conflict will turn off the boob tube. Why fear? "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." I'm no Chomsky fan, but the quote has merit.

If the debate expands beyond the dictated spectrum of librul v. GAWP, we could see the kind of unrest faced just at and before the turn of the last century, like the attempted coup in '33 (avoided when Smedley Butler blew the whistle), the Wall St. bombings and the real labor unrest that killed dozens at a time.

In fact, what if the recent spate of noted legislation (like the open ended detentions) and cross-border agreements (like the US and Canada agreeing to swap troops if they're needed to protect infrastructure or restore order) are the result of policy speculators seeing the need to keep order after a breakdown they anticipate

[allhatnocattle]

Wall Streeters and gov't had to have seen the writing on the wall long before the housing mortgage bubble collapsed in 2008. I mean they saw worthless deeds, bundled them and resold them as a brand new investment product. They compounded the debt and then recompounded it again. They knew this couldn't go on for infinity. They might not have known how it would burst, or how they would get out of it, but they knew damned well

[peristaltor]

I worry that rather than not caring, they can't see an alternative.

If you saw a slow tsunami on its way and noted that the village had neither the appropriate high ground or the ability to build more lifeboats, what would you do as a leader? It appears they're arming the lifeboats to prevent them from being swamped by panicked swimmers later in the game.

[oportet]

I was about to type out a comment about how the older generation didn't have the uncertainty about their future that the younger generation does now. Then I remembered something about the constant thought of nukes raining down...

So there is that uncertainty, probably a bit more serious (or just in a different level altogether) than me worrying about if I'll have a big bank account in 15 years, or if what's in it will be worth anything at that point anyway.

I assumed the 'disgusted with church' phase was just that - a late teen/college years thing that I'd get over and fade back out of around 35 or so. We'll see.