Except for periods in the 1950s and 1960s and possibly the 1990’s when tax rates on the rich just happened to be high enough to prevent overinvestment, the economy has generally suffered from periodic overinvestment cycles.
It is not just a coincidence that tax cuts for the rich have preceded both the 1929 and 2007 depressions. The Revenue acts of 1926 and 1928 worked exactly as the Republican Congresses that pushed them through promised. The dramatic reductions in taxes on the upper income brackets and estates of the wealthy did indeed result in increases in savings and investment. However, overinvestment (by 1929 there were over 600 automobile manufacturing companies in the USA) caused the depression that made the rich, and most everyone else, ultimately much poorer.
Since 1969 there has been a tremendous shift in the tax burdens away from the rich on onto the middle class. Corporate income tax receipts, whose incidence falls entirely on the owners of corporations, were 4% of GDP then and are now less than 1%. During that same period, payroll tax rates as percent of GDP have increased dramatically. The overinvestment problem caused by the reduction in taxes on the wealthy is exacerbated by the increased tax burden on the middle class. While overinvestment creates more factories, housing and shopping centers; higher payroll taxes reduces the purchasing power of middle-class consumers. ..."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1543642
14
A sobering review of a sobering book which raises any number of baffling questions. Why are the millions who lead economically tenuous lives so accepting of the status quo? Why don't we see social unrest on a massive scale, as has happened repeatedly in the past when wealth becomes so inequitable? While I understand that billionaires are nakedly greedy, I don't understand why they don't recognize the dangers to them of being increasingly isolated in a society that goes more unstable every year. Why aren't there more politicians who recognize that there is a majority of voters who will support candidates who speak to the economic concerns raised in this book independently of testing parties, and offer solutions rather than demagoguery? Sanders talks about much of this, but we need younger, pragmatic politicians who represent the future.
20
I'd really like to have a better sense of how everyone else out there is doing! I'm a teacher at a public university, where I teach literature and writing to between 70/100 students a semester. I earn about $1400 a month. My rent is $1000. Not exactly a living wage. And at 64, I'm not kidding myself that I could make a change. Still working because the 2008 crash wiped out our savings, just after my husband's death. And for the health insurance.
24
The middle class in America has been devastated by the greed of the 1%. If TARP taught us anything, it taught us that our current system is rigged for the benefit of the uber rich. The fact that financial institutions were bailed out due to their own gross financial negligience and the rest of us were left to default on our mortgages, tells you all you need to know. What truly amazes me is the lack of any response to this gross inequality. Yes, there was Occupy Wall Street but big business managed to quash that movement quickly enough. Where is the anger & frustration? Where is the grass roots movement to bring down the 1%?
24
This suggestion might constitute a mere drop in the bucket for people struggling to make ends meet in the low-wage, high-cost society we live in, but here goes: Buy used. It takes some patience, some delayed gratification, some treasure hunting, but if you can buy a set of bar stools for $50 instead of $400, or a pizza cutter for $.25 instead of $4.50, or a lamp for $10 instead of $75, or a picture for your wall for $20 instead of $100, or a gardening tool for $2 instead of $20, or a pair of jeans for $12 instead of $60, why not? I started shopping yard sales and consignment about 40 years ago and practically every thing in my house and on my person was bought pennies on the dollar. It greatly enhanced our quality of life without adding consumer debt to all the other kinds of expenses we had.
15
Ebay is good for bargains, also.
2
I know a lot of people are struggling to make it in this new world economy, but I know a lot of young people who are working hard making smart decisions and are doing just fine. To survive we must adapt. Railing against change will not stop the coming storm. We must prepare for the future with investments in education and infrastructure so we can compete in the world marketplace.
2
The steps to a retirement with liquid assets of $1 million on a salary of no more than $50K are simple:
1. Do not have kids (finally, many women are realizing how great a child free life can be.)
2. Go to college after high school, go locally (live with parents) go publicly and graduate in 4 years.
3. Buy a new or slightly used car and purchase the 10 year MANUFACTURER'S extended warranty and keep the car for 10 years minimum.
4. Vacation locally and never fly.
5. Do not buy a house over 1500 sq. ft. and buy one in a city with low housing costs.
6. Contribute to employer retirement plan only up to company match. No match? Invest the money yourself in 4% to 6% dividend yield stocks and reinvest the dividends for 40 years.
For the 99% of us, you don't get to a $ million on the earnings end; you get there on the spending end.
16
I would just make one small adjustment: go to a COMMUNITY COLLEGE for two years and then go to either a local public or local private institution.
10
Two items that need to be mentioned: how many people will be supplementing income shortfalls with the sale of cannabis and its products, as well as with other Schedule I-IV substances? From my own Federal law enforcement perspective, quite a few. How soon before a specific group is demonized for this class polarization, as did occur in Germany during the 1920s and 1930s because of the government's disastrous currency maniplations? A society without a meaningful labor movement or political parties may easily run aground on the shoals of ranting populism.
6
A complex issue. In my gut, I am glad I am in my 50s and not starting out in my 20s. So overall I do lean to the author's perspective. But there is hope. We can't go back to simpler times pre-dating the global economy of today. We have to change today.
1. We do need to rethink and refocus governmental spending in light of today's needs. For example, instead of over 9 billion to the UN each year; Let's make it 4 billion and redirect to social services and Medicaid support based on today's needs. Let's insist on similar drug prices as the rest of the world ( 200 billion instant infusion to our economy overall). Let's take a very close look at our military budget. Do we need 50,000 troops in Japan? Or can we do it with 25,000? ( 1 billion overall savings per year)
2. On social services however, do we need to pay for every child that is born into poverty? Or can we limit to the first two children? Should we support the idea of individual responsibility at any level?
3. On healthcare, we really should have a Medicare for all single payor OPTION - not as the only alternative, but as an option so everyone has a shot at healthcare without completely breaking the bank. We should also bring back true catastrophic insurance so people don't have to sell their houses to pay medical bills. And - we really should consider truly basic healthcare via universal coverage -just basic care - not every service under the sun.
Just a few ideas - but we do need to change our thinking!
17
Public universities are more expensive now bc state legislatures have cut funding repeatedly. The legislature also demands that more and more students be admitted (“our economic analyses show that our state needs more college grads”). Per capita funding is way, way down.
6
We know very different families. The "middle class" families I know are struggling to play for college, mortgage on smallish houses, and certainly can't afford Safari vacation. On the other hand, as very middle class when growing up, my parents were able to pay for college for me and my siblings, live in a large old house, and travel. I know what their salaries were. Those same salaries today, in todays's dollars, would barely pay for mortgage.
3
Agreed that we should absolutely reduce spending on the military. But the idea of not “paying for every child born into poverty” misses the point that we pay very little to poor folks anymore. Cash welfare payments are time-limited (5 years over your life) and require you to work or be in school generally. Paying for long-acting birth control would be fabulous though. Colorado did something similar and saw their unintended pregnancies drop substantially.
7
The cost of a quality tertiary education and the cost of quality health care are completely incompatible with a low wage, no job benefits economy.
What is causing university to be so expensive that students have to take out large loans to pay for it?
Large loans extending past the child bearing years for what the state used to provide for a nominal fee have a direct negative effect on the housing market and the size of families that determine the tax base 20 years later. Less children, less taxpayers. The politicians who are wilfully blind to this need to get out of the way.
In a society where the health care delivery system is dependent on employer provided health insurance, why are employers allowed to opt out?
Every day people eat food prepared by other people who can not take time off work when they are sick because they can not afford to pay a doctor. The heath care system makes more people sick.
It’s not just the political system that is failing the American people, it is the failure of 99% of the American people to get off the couch and find the political will to fix the political system that keeps failing them.
The freedom NOT to vote has been slowly destroying the 99%.
20
We Americans have no one to blame but ourselves. We’re the ones who elected Ronald Reagan. As long as 40% (or whatever huge percentage it is) don’t vote, we can expect more of the same.
31
No one plans to be a single parent. No one plan to be the parent of a kid with special needs. D.V., cheating, widowhood all could account for her being a single mother. Why are you so interested in judging her? Also being an adjunct professor likely is more flexible than other careers- which might make it easier to meet the daughter's medical needs. I work with parents of special needs kids- the life and career sacrifices they make are not minor.
5
I'm 32. I didn't elect Reagan, but I and others my age and younger got the short end of the stick. Personally, I blame boomers for getting theirs and pulling the ladder up after them.
10
Part of the problem is that two-income families have inflated the cost of housing (whose supply cannot easily increase).
Another contributor is rising expectations. No one needs to travel on vacations, or eat in restaurants, and only the truly rich used to have nannies.
And then there is the idea that unmarried women should have children. That used to be considered immoral, for good reason. Children need a father and a mother.
8
amazing that ms. quart needs to write a book of this sort, presumably to explain what is happening out here to the elites in the gentrified urban areas and gated communities...everyone that works for an hourly wage has know all this for years...debt penury and misery is capital's ultimate goal for the majority...the Trumpists and their allies in congress are pushing forward an Orwellian agenda, not in the sense of 1984, but rather by denying us material well being that might "make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent." if we're worried about eating we won't be questioning what they are up to all that closely.
9
If a person is a single mother with no job but adjunct professor, then they have certainly made multiple bad choices along the way that are their fault.
If you have the intelligence to get an education it is not that difficult to:
1) Choose a viable career path
2) Limit your childbearing and delay it until marriage
Do these two things and your chances of living at the financial edge are sharply diminished. Add to that 3) make affordable choices about education (such as state school or doing the first two years at community college) and housing (avoid expensive metros unless you work in a high paying field that compensates you for the local cost of living) and one has even further reduced their chance of financial instability.
Too many millennials and gen xers snub their nose at going to State U, being an accountant, and living in the suburbs of Cleveland, and then shake their fists at society when they can't afford to live in Brooklyn with their Literature degree and 90k in loans from NYU.
The Great Recession was almost a decade ago. Unemployment is less than 4%.
10
Unemployment had fallen, but wages haven't risen. In my state, there are lots of people looking for summer staff for restaurants and hotels --- ie temporary minimum wage jobs with no future.
Finding a job that pays a middle-class salary is harder, even with a degree and experience.
As an adjunct professor, the author probably has more opportunities for a flexible schedule, which does a lot to bring down child-care costs.
5
The middle class is doing quite well, thank you. Just look around - airplanes, resorts, theme parks, national parks and cruise ships crammed full; record numbers of new cars sold; hotels struggling to expand fast enough to meet demand, broadway tickets and tourist records in one of the most expensive cities to visit in the world, McMansions sprawling like weeds, Amazon, UPS and FedEx can’t keep up with deliveries of trinkets purchased, thousands of boats clogging marinas and on and on. Individuals struggle with survivalkeeping up, as they have throughout human existence, but as a society no one on earth has ever had it so good.
9
The author and the reviewer are both Ivy educated and live in the rarefied atmosphere of NYC. The same type who authored books in the 30's proclaiming the failure of capitalism and condemning class privilege. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
3
Will someone write a book from the perspectives of the caretakers, often single mothers, who not only have to use part of their low income to care for their children and elderly relatives and younger siblings. What kind of entitlements can they ever expect?
8
Self-employed=unemployed.
I never did less well financially than when I owned my own business.
3
It's a feeling of sinking and overwheming to the point it's hard to catch your breath. I feel like i have to squeeze every bit of value out a dollar and if I don't the guilt is overwhelming.
4
Self employed = un employed.
The worst financial condition of my life was when I owned my own business.
1
My wife and I have been raising a grandson, now 11 since he was 2. We get no help from the alcoholic father and our anxiety drug ridden daughter. We have the means. I watched the beginning of the destruction starting with Reagan. Clinton's signing of Graham-Rodman and NAFTA sealed your fate. You must fight the 1%! Or you will not even have Social Security and Medicare!
12
Enough already with the incessant complaining and sense of entitlement.
Having one child is not a tragedy nor a form of victimization at the hands of society. Larger economic forces and personal finances (recession, unemployment, reduced income, older parents, insurance cost) played a role in our decision to have one child. So did our commitment to our One and Only which meant parent caring for our child at home until school age with minimal part-time employment for the at-home parent (me, the mother).
Please, New York Times, please no more articles with parents bellyaching about being forced to put their children in crappy daycare and complaining about the cost of paying someone else to raise their child. Will you ever tell the stories of the many parents who make it work on one salary, and I'm not talking about 1%ers, so they can care for their own child or children?
11
The American Dream is dead. You cannot wish it back to life. Here in Israel, our dream died when the Socialist (agrarian) system was replaced by massive privatization. Your dream died when Reagan was elected. Nationalization of everything is the only solution and, friends, the ship sailed decades ago.
28
".....data suggesting that women were having fewer children than at any point since 1978 — 1.76 over their lifetimes, down from 2.1 in 2007 — even as the number of children they report wanting to have (around 2.2) has remained more or less the same for two decades."
How to lie with statistics. Have marriage rates fallen? YES. Those who want children, but do not do so, may have not married. Until adjusted for marriage rates--and age at marriage when/if it occurs--this comparison means nothing.
4
At the same time that the numbers of single mothers increase?
I do believe that Russian "meddling" is worse than any internal wrangling within either party.
The numbers (absolute) of unwed mothers not increasing--though the number of unwed birts as a percentage of all births has increased greatly since the 1970s. You have confounded variables. Moreover, I am not stating a conclusion, per se. Only that the inference drawn in the article is not justified by the statistics cited.
In what non-capitalist country are things better?
Europe and Scandinavia are capitalist, by the way. They have higher taxes and benefits, but their wealth comes from a vigorous private sector.
8
The Scandinavian countries are mixed economies with large publicly owned sectors, like socialist health care, socialist education systems, socialist energy energy sector, socialist research etc.
Their wealth comes from a vigorous public sector.
See how, say, Norway is described in Wikipedia:
"Norway maintains Nordic welfare model with universal health care and a comprehensive social security system, and Norwegian Society's values are rooted in egalitarian ideals.[13] Defined as a 21st century socialism,[14] the Norwegian state owns key industrial sectors such as oil (Equinor) or hydropower (Statkraft), having extensive reserves of petroleum, natural gas, minerals, lumber, seafood, and fresh water. The petroleum industry accounts for around a quarter of the country's gross domestic product (GDP).[15]"
The CEO of Novo Nordisk, the definitely vigorous, Danish world class pharmaceutical company, has said, that they depend heavily on the government funded research activities and the government run education system for their success. This capitalist company would question the assertion that wealth comes from capitalist activity alone.
7
My parents had five kids, lived in a big house, went on vacations, all funded by Dad's 5 day a week 9-5 job. He went to night school to get a college degree at the cheapest local place so he could get a decent job with good benefits.
Me? I can barely afford to pay for my own expenses as a single person, have to work 7 days a week to break even, cannot afford a car or a house, no vacations, no fancy nothing. Have to spend all my money on self-employed healthcare and graduate school loan paybacks.
Middle class? I think that term has lost its meaning. I know I am considered middle class simply because of my background, my education and where I live, but my day to day life is working class close to the bone living from month to month as a renter. If my apartment was not rent-controlled, I'd be homeless....
35
Most Americans who grew up comfortably middle class are doing much, much worse financially today. Struggling is more like it and it is only going to become harder.
8
We chose not to have children because the planet is already overpopulated, natural resources insufficient and simply because my wife and I did not buy into the social- religious convention that we had to. For us it was about making an intelligent choice.
Evolutionary psychology has shown that animal instincts can and should be controlled if we are to succeed as a species and as individuals. We are not breeeders. We spay and neuter animals that can’t control these drives.
The economy that should be carefully planned before bringing another child into this world is one’s own. If you can’t afford a child, what makes you think you deserve one?
Citizens that responsibly don’t have kids see the lion’s share of our property taxes go to pay for school and services geared to be free for parents.
State taxes already pay for Medicaid, food programs and other family and children services. A huge chunk of our federal taxes are used for the same purposes.
Then there’s the dependent deductions we don’t get.
I say if you want to have a child you should be a financially and emotionally capable adult able to make logical choices. Think about planning a family. Have one when you can afford to have one.
Tough for you, and sadly your kids if you don’t.
Use birth control. Think, don’t whine.
26
The book review here is excellent -- informative, both critical and
sympathetic, and addressing an important subject. Apparently
both book and reviewer do not connect the subject with voters
or voting.
The reviewer's personal experiences are less interesting, as they
are not used to throw light on the value or the character of the book
under review.
Still, the "condition our condition is in" really is the way it is. I am no
fan of DJ Trump, but he was not the one who gave us repeal of
Glass-Steagall and pie-in-the-sky NAFTA . Trump hasn't yet wasted
$4 Trillion destroying the centuries-old balance of power in the
Fertile Crescent, and Trump did not ignore the human devastation
of the Financial Crisis of 2007-12 and allow it to fester unchecked.
Do we really think voting for the status quo in 2016 was the only sane,
responsible decision ? Do we really believe "Russian meddling" was
worse than Hillary trying to rig the nomination. starting with her takeover of
DNC finances in 2015 ? See Donna Brazile's 'Hacks.'
I admire Ms Cooke's writing, but this condition is not something that happened
to us. We voted for it 6 times in 24 years. Trump wasn't even on the radar when
we did that.
15
Today I am going to help another person in my community because there is economic and emotional need for support everywhere. Just a little thing can make a difference. There is a lady at the local thrift shop that I frequent who's husband has advanced dementia. She needs encouragement. This NYT discussion of life's current economic realities makes me want to make small, meaningful differences in people's lives; not to be squashed by the weight of the disaster. That would be surrendering. My best wishes to all who are in a struggle to carve out meaningful lives for our selves, families and communities.
23
I identify with this author 100%!
Like her, I too have an expensive post-graduate degree not too dissimilar from an MFA. And like her, I have spent my working life in pursuit of truth and beauty in a field that like hers, isn't always compensated as well as it should be.
Meanwhile, I've been gouged repeatedly by landlords, healthcare providers, institutes of higher learning, health insurance providers, and even the people who sell organic and high quality groceries.
It's all so UNFAIR!!!
This is why we need socialism, and a planned economy. It's not fair that people with STEM degrees make more money! It's not fair that people in leadership positions make more money!
With a planned and socialist economy, people like this author, with her MFA from Columbia, could get the pay that she DESERVES! And so could teachers, janitors, bus drivers, food servers, and non-profit workers. This might mean less money for STEM college professors, medical doctors, business owners, management consultants and others - but their greed is what will have brought this on! Why should they get to have all of the good things in life! The big house, the nice car, the multiple kids, all of the leisure time. It makes my blood boil!
And while socialism and a planned economy that shares the wealth is inevitable, we also need to think about teaching the children how to share. Because unfairness hits their world too. Right now, the smart ones are the only ones allowed to get good grades. NOT FAIR!
11
Life isn’t fair? Why, that is surprising...
10
For all those who think that the Capitalism Haves and Have not scenario is sustainable, you need to pay attention to this post. It does not matter what you believe is right or wrong, what matters is that if the Haves get to much, the have nots will rise up. This is Capitalism's down fall. Once the have nots become so large and their disenfranchisement so pronounced, they will no longer allow the status quo. Ironically Trump is the first warning shot of this and unless Democratic balance is restored, chaos will ensue. Democracy is not a synonym for Capitalism, it is actually the only weapon against it own demise.
11
Every vote to a candidate who promises to reduce taxes is a vote to endanger social security, Medicare, Medicaid, education and infrastructure spending. Since the Reagan promise for smaller government we no longer invest in America, we siphon. It is criminal how the greatest generation who benefitted the most want to make sure they take it all with them. But my wrath really belongs with those that do not vote as it is their future they are giving away.
43
"Every vote to a candidate who promises to reduce taxes is a vote to endanger social security, Medicare, Medicaid, education and infrastructure spending."
And...
Every sit-on-their-hands-voter who refuses to participate because "lesser of two evils is still evil" is contributing to that candidate.
12
We are currently a second world country on our way to being the wealthiest third world one, in a matter of a couple of decades. You either have servants or are a servant, nothing in between. Just like Brazil!
40
No one in my age group can afford to have children. A child costs an average two hundred thousand dollars to raise. A "raised child" is a healthy eighteen year old with a high school diploma as their terminal degree. As you can imagine, the real figure is probably double that figure if you're lucky. If you have special needs or live in an expensive area, you might double the average again and still come up short.
This is the cruel millennial math we face. That's more money than the house you can't afford. Worse: The costs come in lurching increments. There's no 30-year fixed mortgage on a child. Providing for a child is more like self-funded insurance. What could go wrong?
Some people choose to pull the trigger anyway. The biological clock is ticking. I know couples can successfully have children much older. Generally speaking though, 35 is at the top end of the normal age range. Beginning a family at 40 is not exactly normal. We didn't evolve to have children that late in life. Adoption is always an option but many people use altruism as a last resort.
I don't think anyone I know feels guilt about their predicament. Not guilt they would ever share anyway. They sometimes show resentment and anger. Mostly though, they feel disappointment and remorse. The "system," whatever that means, has in fact failed them. Their economic contribution should provide the security to raise a family. It doesn't. People yearning for a family mostly raise dogs instead.
28
My children, son and daughter, postgrad, successful, with loving partners, already 30, do not want to bring children into this world because of the climate and the dystopia. They run with an elite intellectual caring conscious group of friends who feel the same. As parents we've discussed it with them. They have thought it out to a degree that cannot be dismissed as idealistic or juvenile or based on personal finances.
28
They and their caring, conscious friends sound like ideal adoptive parents for children already brought into this world; might they consider it?
19
The U.S. government’s shift in focus from the middle class to the wealthy capitalist class and corporations as the American economy’s most reliable engine for broad prosperity is what triggered the middle class squeeze. Specifically, our government’s fascination with supply-side economics and its true promise of enhanced wealth for the well-off and its false promise of prosperity for everyone else. At one time, our government invested in the preservation and expansion of the middle class as America’s best insurance policy against the risk of expanding socialism. Our government actually created agencies to develop the middle class by facilitating home ownership and labor union participation, for example. And remember, this liberal philosophy led to the largest and most prosperous middle class the world has ever known and superpower status.
46
The closer I get to grasping the American Dream, the more it eludes me as a middle class worker. When I moved to a higher paying job, the cost of living in the new area also rose, and I was taxed at a higher rate, so even though my new income sounded a lot better on paper, it wasn't the big "win" I had thought. I have tried to make my resume bullet-proof in training and in professional experience, yet I still find myself looking at leadership roles from the outside, and I have recently jumped through hoop after hoop after hoop to satisfy document demands to buy a home. And I am closer but not firmly ensconced in the American Dream: I have a small--not big--home; I have an okay but not a leadership job; I have cats but not children; I take occasional weekend trips but not grand international travel. I mentioned to a student that I have a full-time and a part-time job, and my statement met his look of pity: I see his point, but he should recognize that having any job is an accomplishment.
23
It sure is an accomplishment, especially if you need your employer
to offer a health insurance plan in order to avoid the completely
unaffordable plans you have to buy under the ACA if you make just a little more than the poverty line level.
A decent employer-sponsored plan can save about $15,000 /year
out of pocket. That's without deductibles, which really are a part
of the cost of getting health care services.
Welcome to the community garden party. Don't sell your accomplishments short. This is a hard time. We might call it Economic Disintermediation --
a tag for the rich getting richer, the poor more numerous, and everyone in the middle chasing the exact same crumbs from off the table.
10
There are many personal choices that effect the underlying situations being highlighted in this article regarding the book.
Instead, the articles positions the book as more of a "feel bad together" narrative rather than any actual investigative research. If that's the case, why would I read this book versus just going to Buzzfeed?
Perhaps in general it's better to acknowledge a confluence of factors - that personal responsibility, in addition to cultural and political mores, can all be responsible for the average millennials' predicament.
4
Personal responsibility has its role But I know most of my friends who graduated college, got married, and still aren’t having children because due to the recession they had to push back their careers due to the recession and unemployment. I myself graduated with a degree in engineering but then spent two years working as a security guard full time nights and retail part time days. I guess I could have moved back to my parents house, but I felt my own welfare was now my responsibility.
This ridiculous “personal responsibility” mantra does not apply to wages controlled by big corporations, job availability, circumstances of family, or the set of skills people are taught in public school that never seems includes salary negotiation.
We don’t blame members of the generations who lived through the Great Depression for be massive economic circumstances that they were thrust into, why do people insist on blaming millennials?
38
Welcome to my world - upper lower class. Americans blame people for being poor. In Egypt and other countries, I saw poor people live with personal dignity, unlike the angst, bewilderment and self-disgust I experienced. Even a BA and an MFA didn't help me rise above my inherited family income. Only going overseas did. Now, having contributed to my pension plan, which produces a lovely, low-level income for 10 years, I've retired to Portugal. America is too expensive, too violent and too Trumpish.
I chose not to have children to avoid poverty, possible divorce, and harming children with my probable bitterness.
Back in '69, political friends said this is what the Republicans wanted: A Mexican Rich-Poor reality. They're fulfilling their plans.
2
Many of the anti-immigration rhetoric is stoked by white people who fear that they will be a minority in the future since much of the immigration (legal and illegal) comes from people of color. Yet these same people are opposed to a safety net that includes health care coverage, subsidized childcare, guaranteed maternity benefits etc. Many young people who are white in my community are putting off marriage, children etc because they can't afford housing close to their jobs in good school districts and/or they are paying off student loans. The safety net would certainly help these young people but the Right would rather stand by their principles of smaller government. Plus many rural populations are seeing very high rates of drug and alcohol addiction - because of lack of well paying jobs and good education.
Sure some of the 20 and 30 year olds are getting a Starbucks coffee every day and spend too much on social life but most are too worried about student debt and saving for a home to live a lavish lifestyle.
19
But how much of this is really about squeezed finances, and how much of it is about keeping up with the Joneses? Summer camp, multiple sports and music lessons, vacations that require flying somewhere. And going to your "dream school." The 1970s middle class family did not do all these things. A vacation was a cross-country road trip to see the relatives -- not a quick trip to Paris (only rich people went to Europe... how and when did globetrotting vacations become "middle class"?). My sister wanted horseback riding lessons; she got them only as long as she showed a burning interest. College? Mom got a job at the local university where you could get remitted tuition (or exchange it with a very limited list of other schools); that's where you're going to college, kid. And if you graduated school, you were to get a job within a few months -- even if it wasn't your dream job, or even in your field. The fact is that the society of today is highly oriented toward "keeping up" and everyone following the same narrow path. In the 1970s there wasn't this highly structured, ritualistic path (complete with "play dates" where everything had to be arranged by adults).
54
I partially agree - but may I point out a few obstacles we in the older generation did not face? For example, any parent stuffing their entire family into the station wagon without car seats would promptly be pulled over and jailed for child abuse.
Same goes for allowing your children to play unsupervised. So a lot of these planned activities are a way to keep the kids from fat pale screen-addicted zombies.
Also, the price of day care, college, medical expenses and housing have outstripped the rate of inflation. The cozy bungalow my folks started out in would be unaffordable for them today.
17
As a working, single, father of four children - I find the pervasive examples and commentary in this article which strongly suggests that caring for children is exclusively women’s work, disappointing.
19
All that is needed to make most Americans feel more secure is free nationalized health care and free college education.
37
The problem is not that there are too many poor people, but that there are too many rich people. I quote from the article, "Over the past 20 years, the cost of housing has risen dramatically. The price of health care and college has almost doubled."
Housing, and particularly land prices, more than anything else, are a function of demand. There are many people with a lot of money pushing up housing prices (sometimes by subsidising their children). Same thing for health care - health care prices are propped up by health insurance payments while college costs are propped up by huge loans, huge grants and rich parents.
Much the same way that work expands to fill the time allocated to it, many prices rise to reflect the spending power of the richest in society.
Trump's tax cuts, which disproportionately help the owners of pass-through entities - Sub S corps, LLCs and LLPs help not the top 1%, but the top .1%. I am one of those individuals. I already have more money than I know what to do with (grew up in a trailer but was smart, went to a university frequently considered number 1 in the world, worked hard and was lucky), and will save millions as a result. His ridiculous tax cuts make a bad situation even worse. He needed to increase taxes for people like me rather than the reverse. For every person like me (and those in his family), 999 people will suffer with higher inflation that is sure to come with increased deficits. Donald, you are killing the U.S.
57
In a nutshell, my rent went up by $100 a month and my standard 3% pay increase will net me an extra $60 a month.
$20 (income) - $19 (expenses) = Happiness
$20 (income) - $21 (expenses) = Misery
If only Dickens were around today ......
37
Just wait until your new health insurance premium rate is announced. Bet it’ll be a total loss then.
9
ask an american how much it costs in real dollars to drive their car to work everyday...they have no idea.
ask someone with insurance how much a dental filling or innoculation costs...no idea.
ask them how much their supervisor earns...no idea.
isnt part of our problem today willful ignorance. we dont eant to pay attention until it is too late.
19
I'm a single guy with no kids and a few million bucks, and I feel poor!
Everything is relative. We have a government right now that works for folks with at least $100 million. Anyone with less is a total loser in their eyes.
We HAVE been brainwashed and divided. (You really think the so called "Green Party" isn't funded by billionaires and perhaps Russia to siphon the progressive vote? I've got a bridge for you!)
Think. Get it together. Vote. And vote rationally.
31
It's good to recognize that the rich have been capturing all productivity gains over the last forty years, while also acknowledging that it's possible to live on much less. Fifty or a hundred years ago, people lived without much of what we (in the middle class) consider standard: frequent dining out, Starbucks every morning, ever larger homes, smart phones, elaborate entertainment systems and a limitless amount of entertainment at our fingertips.
The middle and working classes should reap the gains in productivity, but people should also know that little things add up, and they can make their lives easier. Spending $5 a day five days a week on coffee will cost you $18000 (assuming 7% interest rate) every ten years. You start saving $5 a day here on coffee, $8 a day there on lunch, $40 a month on a cheaper cell phone plan, hundreds on a cheaper car and driving less, and things add up to tens and hundreds of thousands.
One final note: some US cities have outrageous housing prices that the local salaries don't justify. People should recognize the tremendous sacrifice to their finances they're making by living in New York or Boston instead of Philadelphia, or DC instead of Baltimore, or Denver instead of Chicago.
13
A child may be a choice (or not if abortion is not available). Housing is not a choice. Neither is food, or an education for economic mobility. If you work 40 hours a week, is it right as a society to say that you should only be able to pick two out of housing, food and a child?
The laboring middle class is disadvantaged in every one of those areas compared to the wealthy investor class and the poorer welfare class. That's the point of the book.
10
But what do you do when you already eschew Starbucks, brown-bag lunch (and dinner when you're forced to work into the night), own a high-efficiency car (not so easy to walk or bike 30 miles to work in Maine winters), and have been buying all your clothes at Goodwill for 20 years?
I sometimes wonder why I still regard myself as middle class, despite my doctorate and professional career.
31
Something has certainly failed when the middle class is struggling more and more to have a decent life, despite modest objectives (their own place and a family) and a country that has grown richer and richer over the last decades. But why accusing capitalism?
The housing issue is not an issue of capitalism, but a political issue: society has either failed to acknowledge that not building enough housing would necessarily make housing unaffordable for many, or it has very well acknowledged it and one generation has in effect decided to get more money at the expense of the next one (rising housing prices make the buyers and renters poorer, but they also make the landlords and the sellers richer).
When people come in numbers to a new area, the local community NEVER asks to approve more housing, to use more land for new construction or to build higher (for more housing on the same space). Usually the discourse is more about the invasion of the “hipsters” (which does not mean much, but when you need a scapegoat you have to give it a name), and how people shouldn’t sacrifice meadows, farmland, or the low-rise “character” of the area for the newcomers. And from the working class to the 1%, everyone is happy to have their property prices going up; everyone wants a piece of the cake of the new middle class, so in the end the new generation earns more, but pays more, to everyone.
The problem is either people's selfishness, or political institutions that let selfishness decide.
1
It's capitalism, actually.
12
I don't think it's that simple.
We both have graduate degrees and are in the top 20% of the income distribution. We have three kids, and the majority of our income goes to daycare and before/after care at the local public school. I'm the majority breadwinner, so my husband would have to stay home with the kids to avoid this expense. He doesn't want to do that.
The next big chunk goes to housing. We're currently renting a 2-bedroom house with no A/C. The housing prices in our area are such that when we do buy, our housing costs will shoot up at least 25%. Unless we want to sacrifice time for money and suffer a longer commute. We have deferred spending on clothes and household items. Our vacation this year is a road trip to grandpa's.
We're earning a lot more than our parents in real terms, but it doesn't feel like we're living any better than they did. We're in the top quintile of incomes and yet I feel guilty for spending $100 a month on a family membership to the YMCA.
Tell me, what part of this is about keeping up with the Joneses? What can I possibly give up (other than the aforementioned YMCA membership) to feel less of a squeeze financially? I feel like we're living pretty barebones as it is.
15
If the problem is political, then the problem is not capitalism. In a communist system you could have the exact same problem, only instead of young people not being able to afford housing or childcare, they would have to queue for years for it instead, and would end not getting any either.
When my children were young there were always "those women" who asked me how can I work when my husband was successful - I should tighten my belt and stay home. I ran the numbers a billion times and my conclusion was always the same - we couldn't afford for me to stay home and save for college and retirement - so off to work I went. For at least 20 years we spent $25,000 per year on daycare or camp or college savings. Every year. We vacation every other year and save where we can.
And those women? Some are working dead end retail jobs or gig jobs and all worry about their retirement. And all of their kids have loans.
The majority of my take home went to funding the kids or our retirement - his income covered the monthly bills. I wouldn't change that decision for anything but that is what it cost.
51
If they sell at retirement and go and live in a cheaper area, they will be millionaires. If they own a couple of these properties (not unreasonable for many who purchased some as retirement assets a couple of decades ago), they will be more than comfortable. Many people have seen rising property prices as a boon, not as a drag for society (more precisely, they just didn’t care about society), and might have actually fought for it by pushing local authorities to limit new developments or implementing even less honorable policies (keeping the poor out notably).
3
This is not a wealthy country because we've racked up the credit card. We have wealthy people but this nation is $21 trillion in debt and all economists say the result is much lower standards of living than otherwise and it gets worse as the debt increases, just like the individual with students loans who's debt is causing hardship. A country is no different. It prevents the country from doing anything meaningful that costs money. In fact cuts are coming no matter because the promises made by the politicians are no affordable.
5
I often wonder if it's that things have become so expensive, or that we believe we're "supposed" to have so much. The 1950's nuclear family we idealize probably had both sets of grandparents nearby for free child care. They probably lived in a suburb or rural small town where housing was cheaper (and in a much smaller house, with kids sharing rooms.) They probably died younger (all that smoking, drinking, and lard!) and didn't have much of a retirement to plan for. We have so many more options now and believe we can all strive towards so much greater... but the "we can have it all" myth usually sets you up for disappointment. Life today just isn't as simple or as easy.
27
The 50's-70's middle class life style was a short aberration in economic terms for the US. We were coming out of a war and were a very white cohesive society. Our population is much larger and diverse which creates less stability.
The larger issue though is the debt. It is not so much that things have gone up in price but the value of the US dollar has gone down so Americans buying power is decreasing. This is a direct result of the country's $21 trillion dollars of debt. This prevents any new social programs from being funded and as economists have been saying for 30 years it will and does have a huge impact on standards of living for working and middle class people who don't make their money globally.
8
I am the worst of that bad generation, a Baby Boomer; yeah, I hear you. But I don't think you'll like what I have to say. I'm retired now, comfortable and secure but not smug. I have a high school diploma; my retirement vanity is returning to college to earn the degree I didn't get out of high school. What my wife and I did to get here is the real story. I did work that gives most people the chills to think about doing. I was gone from my family for 8 and often 9 months a year. My wife and I had the advantage of both having grown up poor, so we lived with that constant, background, nagging fear that guided our decisions.
I made this sound oh so terrible, but our lot was nothing compared to the certain knowledge of uncertainty that drove our parents, who grew up during The Depression. It's not my place to judge or tell others what to do, but I'll point out that a journeyman union electrician makes a living wage with full benefits. And you have spare time in which to write a book, if you choose.
27
Remember how Rick Santorum was mocked for saying college wasn't a great idea for some? Remember how that was viewed as the most insulting remark, to suggest that all Americans should not go to college?
This endless insulting tone form the left is why Trump won, and I don't frankly see any shift in regard for working class people.
12
John,
Amen. For a group (liberals) who value education, intelligence, and knowledge so highly it is perplexing that they seem to not comprehend that insulting and demeaning those who go out and do a day's unglamorous, often uncomfortable, and sometime dangerous work drives those potential supporters away in droves.
How did you miss that Rick Santorum is not a lefty? He ran as a Republican, and has the standard right wing opinions of his party.
1
I worry for the next generation, especially under the new SCOTUS. Workers will have less protections and so will consumers and women. Healthcare and college will likely continue to strap them with unbearable debts. They will have less jobs and no pensions whatsoever. Frank Bruni may write about the Dems cleaving to the middle, but the middle is not going to hold. I hope the under 30s will have the power to structure their world radically differently than we did. I am rooting for them.
15
there are only 2 solutions to the inequality that is destroying our country. Either tax the wealthy enough to redistribute the wealth, or conversely provide such a strong safety net that the middle class is worried about luxuries only and not basics.
Unfortunately the right of this country is against both.
wonder why? Could it be the wealthy exerting their power to the detriment of our nation?
27
A bit of advice to the hard put-upon individuals of the future cited in this article. Get serious advice on post-high school education costs and realism about career plans. You are probably not an acting star or will not be performing at Lincoln Center. Ignore this and plan on honing your waiting and service skills. Do not have children unless you plan to get married and stay married and then stay married. This provides both economic and social benefits and better adjusted children . Don't spend a small or large fortune on your wedding if you plan to marry. Curtailing eight hours of fun can go a long way to start off a marriage on a good financial footing. You may want or need to live at home with parents when you first start out (UGH!). Can make later life much easier if you save instead of spend. A vehicle is probably your biggest purchase choice after school. It should be a mode of transportation and not an extension of your ego. Otherwise you better marry well.
21
Easier said than done.
3
We are talking about people who are the bedrock of this country. Instead of focusing so much energy on fringe groups, issues and interests, the 2 political parties and NYT should devote more time, resources and ideological capital to helping the people squeezed by neoliberalism.
And the middle class should start to vote for someone - anyone - who champions their economic interests. It's not the Democrats. It's not the Republicans.
11
Dear Emily Cooke:
Please take note that the issue is NOT "...overwhelmingly structural and social, ...individual or moral." It is political.
Period. End of story.
A whole book about the dying middle-class and not a word about political causes and remedies. I just don't get it.
I wonder what happens to the problem when the middle-class stops voting for politicians with zero empathy for the middle-class?
16
I have said this on many occasions. If one can not afford what one wants then one doesn't get it. The very idea of complaining about these costs is akin to compliant that a car needs tires. A child is a choice. It is a responsibility. If you choose this responsibility then quit your job. Trim your extravagant lifestyle and raise your child or don't. However if you choose not to do so. That is a choice as well. Grow up.
13
Human beings have always wanted families. It should not be so impossible. Medicare for All and free college education would help most Americans.
11
For those too young to remember, before the late 70s, a family could be supported by one average income and live very well. After Reagan was in office housing prices doubled or tripled in five years, car prices went up, utilities went up (thanks to deregulation) and it seemed that overnight two incomes were needed instead of one. If you watch the documentary "The Heist-Who Stole the American Dream?" by Donald Goldmacher and Frances Causey, you will understand and you will be angry. It was not only Republicans who wrecked everything, some Democrats played a part too. You can also read the book "Who Stole the American Dream" by Hedrick Smith. The answer is to vote for a Democrat in every election and be a vocal citizen.
36
With all the incredible poverty in the world I'm having a hard time relating.
7
Should the richest nation the world has ever known be compared with third world nations?
5
There will be violent revolution in the streets & an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in every government seat if something is not done. I'm poor & disabled, literally at the bottom of the totem pole in this country and even I see it coming- I don't need Bernie Sanders to tell me. The key is to not just fix capitalism but to change peoples minds, because that's where a more compassionate America starts: convince those Trump voters that Koch is their enemy, not an immigrant named Jose or a black person like me. Capitalism is destroying every living thing.
46
Everything in this world is overvalued at this time.....they should have let it correct in 2007....
7
A lot more people than we care to admit are struggling, working hard, worrying and struggling.
Right after the financial crisis (2008) there was a spike in family murder suicides. I believe there was just one in the news this week after the father lost his job. I've never seen this phenomenon examined, let alone discussed.
18
36 years ago I was a college graduate, married and we had our first child. We were broke, living in a barely heated, no AC railroad flat I'm a crappy part of NJ. I was working full time, he was in school. We managed by not having childcare. When I gave birth, he took a full time job at night and I had the day job. Lousy for a relationship but we couldn't afford nor did we want childcare.
3 1/2 years later, baby 2 and we kept to the routine. It was tough bit we eventually bought a house, then 7 years later had a McManus ion built.
Granted, I had no student loans. That is huge. Neither of my son's did either and the eldest one married a woman with no student loans. I have faith they too will get what they want out of life.
Tip: sacrifice, NO or very little debt to start off. And, live in a part of the country with good paying jobs and get some sort of post secondary education. Then breathe and work hard, one step at a time. No debt...that is a noose.
23
I fear this may be a case where old wisdom is no longer applicable. 70% of students graduate with at least some debt. Many of the best jobs (the kind you need a degree to get) are in NY, DC, SF, or LA-- places where rents are exorbitant even when living with a roommate. By the time all is said and done...that person can probably save for retirement OR the down payment on a house but not both and not much else, no matter how hard s/he works. I'd love to buy my own place one day (despite what multitudes of articles say about this generation no longer being interested in home ownership), because at least I'd be building some equity while keeping a roof over my head. Having kids? Forget about it.
12
Amanda, you are 100% correct. Have the children any way. Why do I say that...it was so difficult being a working Mom, children need so much attention, I was exhausted...so I hesitated to have the 3rd I always wanted...and hesitated and hesitated until the bells were clanging in my ears at 39. It didn't work out, unfortunately, but I have NEVER regretted having the 2 sons I have. Blessings. Women have a pretty narrow reproductive window. If you really want children, go for it and figure out the rest as you go. I know that sounds cavalier. Not meant to be but not going for it, you may regret it is my fear.
3
The individual issues, challenges and potential mistakes of the author are, as you said it yourself, completely uninteresting. So why delve on them?
But to take your point a bit more globally, there are two issues: 1) Not everyone has the capacity to be a high-earner, not everyone wants to work incredibly long hours, and not everyone can work in the sectors that pay a lot (we still need middle-class jobs, as well obviously as lower-paying jobs). And because as a society we are actually able to afford to have these people living a decent life, it is perfectly legitimate for these people to feel like they are getting screwed. That does not contradict the fact that indeed, many could have played their cards differently and be better off, which is a fair point.
2) Housing is a competition, where only the highest bidders win. That means that when there is a housing shortage, some people will necessarily get the short straw and get screwed. As an individual you can put yourself ahead of the pack and win the competition, but if everyone were doing the same effort, no one would actually benefit (except obviously the sellers and landlords because prices would rise) and you would still have the same number of people getting the short straw. You can tell your kids to work harder, but at society’s level this is not a solution.
15
I used to wonder how so many people with similar careers to my spouse and myself seemed to afford homes, vacations, etc. well beyond our means. Now I know the answer is usually some combination of having taken on far more debt than we are comfortable with, receiving financial assistance from wealthy relatives, or not reporting a lot of off the books income (and thus paying little in taxes and/or claiming means-tested benefits for which they should not qualify).
68
I have no doubt that it is much more precarious now than it has been in the past 70 years for the middle class and that fact alone drives so many decisions. The part I have less empathy for is that somehow the idea of one wage earner 30 or 40 years ago was sufficient for the middle class is a bit of a myth. And society has never looked past it. My Dad was a public school teacher in a small Midwest community who worked every extra job he could find during the school year and the summers. Yes, he had health care and a pension. But it was not enough to pay the mortgage and care for three children and a wife. My mother worked sparingly part time because the opportunities weren't available to her even though she had a college education. Our home was in a working class/middle class district. College and travel (limited) were subsidized by my grandparents for awhile. Used cars were the norm. For others divorce began an uptick but was uncommon and we had few resources to cope with it. Things are different now. There are more opportunities for more people...people of color, women. But I only ask that we don't romanticize the past. Not everyone shared equally then and not everything was secure.
100
My parents were highly-educated immigrants who couldn't find jobs in their STEM field because they held foreign degrees. They worked all kinds of jobs until my father decided to open a construction business in which he worked on site alongside his employees. My mother eventually found a civil-service job in her field which paid well and came with union benefits, but she passed up promotion after promotion (and attendant pay raises) because by then she was a single mom and promotion would have made her "management" and booted her out of the union. We lived in a one-bedroom apartment in an immigrant neighborhood in Queens. I was a latch-key kid from age 7 because child care cost too much.
My in-laws were middle-Americans with master's degrees who couldn't find permanent work as academics. They moved frequently to work low-paid adjunct jobs around the American Midwest--this was in the 60s and 70s. My husband tells stories of living in houses without heat, not having health insurance, and never being able to go to the dentist. My mother-in-law was sent home from the hospital 24 hours after the births of each of her two children because she had no insurance and the hospitals knew she wouldn't pay.
I, too, wonder who these stable, fat and happy "middle class" families of the past were. I suspect they weren't actually middle class. All the people in my story happen to be white, if that matters (I don't think it does).
8
My mother never worked. My father had a mid-level government job. When my mother did get a job as a school crossing guard, we felt the little extra money she brought in.
1
My husband and I are childless. We started trying late, well into my 30s and his early 40s, and stopped after two miscarriages. We decided we cannot afford fertility treatment. We are both first generation immigrants and have graduate degrees. We both work and at this point in life, we are economically comfortable. While not having a child still hurts, as time goes by I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that our decision to remain childless just makes so much economic sense in our situation. We spent five years after attaining our degrees in low-paying jobs because we needed work visas and so started saving for retirement only in our 30s, and the too not much. Each time I hear about the cost of childcare from our friends with children, I feel a sense of relief that that is one bill we don't have to deal with. We now have the time and resources to pay attention to the health of our aging parents and visit them every year spending about $3000 on air tickets. This would've been unthinkable had we had a child.
62
As someone with a graduate school education who has worked all her life for nonprofits, I relate to this all too well - including to the part about feeling guilty. It's my own fault, right? Should've gotten an MBA and gone to work selling widgets!
My work is tremendously rewarding; my retirement savings are scant and I should be socking more away. I'm 52; some of my older friends are retiring and traveling around taking cruises and such. It's disheartening.
I recall reading an interview some years ago with a researcher on class in the U.S. The two factors that most influence one's economic class are 1) the education level of one's parents (neither of mine went to college) and 2) the wealth/assets (not income) of one's parents. That pretty much explains it, I thought. What will become of folks like me in our old age? I'm hoping the Baby Boomers have it all figured out by the time I get there.
39
you are only 52;don't give up!
1
We will likely wear sandwich boards while holding tin cups with pencils for sale.
Unfortunately, Flaneuse, we baby boomers have not figured it out (and we will not figure it out). The amounts that the great majority of us have managed to put away for our retirements (and lots of us are already retired) are pathetically inadequate. Social Security helps, but for those of us who live in the costlier towns and cities, SocSec won't keep us in hamburgers and beer. Even with Medicare (which is a LOT better than without Medicare) health care is a major expense. But we are better off than you and those coming up behind you. The Republicans want to "privatize" Social Security (thereby enabling financial firms to take a significant cut for themselves) and cut back on or eliminate Medicare. The post baby boom generations are going to need a revolution or the great majority will die in the streets.
14
While I am sympathetic to the economic plight of the author, I am not opposed to the reduction in birthrate, whatever the motivation. The planet has far too many humans as it is, and one less child produced, especially in the industrialized West, is generally a positive societal/environmental development.
91
The only solution that will work is universal basic benefits like health care, child care, housing and food. We already provide most of these to the indigent; Section 8 housing assistance, food stamps, Medicaid and other benefits.
Universal basic income will not work. The recent hospitalization of a family member shows why this is so. They had excellent health insurance and significant assets. Sharing the room was a patient obviously on Medicaid, with much more significant and complicated health problems. While my relative worried about the cost of deductibles and co-pays, the roommate with no assets still got the same excellent care with no worry about costs. Obviously this seems unfair to anyone who works hard and saves diligently. But cutting benefits to the poor will not help those like the woman whose child has cerebral palsy mentioned in this review.
What is the solution? The answer is not to deprive the poor of basic needs like healthcare, food and housing. This might satisfy some sense of fairness, but it will not help the working and financially healthy in our society from being faced with unaffordable medical bills. Nor is it to give everyone a universal basic income. This will not make a medical emergency affordable for the middle class. Only meeting basic needs for all citizens can make things equitable. The middle class will not resent the poor who are getting the same basic services as everyone else, and the wealthy can still buy better goods and services.
30
The assistance you claim is provided to the poor varies greatly by state. Many provide no medical assistance to most adults who are poor. The fact one has a Section 8 voucher in hand does not in any way guarantee finding a landlord who accepts it. Food stamps are inadequate to get many families through the end of the month.
Much of the resentment toward the poor is based on an imagined understanding of the assistance they receive.
We need a universal health care coverage system, whether it is single payer or highly regulated insurance like in Switzerland and Germany. I don't know how places like Denmark house their poor -- but they appear to be doing a better job with their homeless citizens than we are. Do poor French children go to bed hungry?
I agree with your assessment of meeting the most basic needs.
8
You state in so many words that your relative who shared the hospital room with a Medicaid patient worked hard and saved diligently. Good for him or her.
However, your comment also implies that the Medicaid patient was making off with an undeserved bonus. You have no idea of the circumstances of this person's life and no idea why this person ended up on Medicaid. This person may also have worked hard and saved diligently but then encountered some misfortune that threw him or her into poverty. I know this happens because this is the story of my life.
Even after your relative pays off all the co-pays and deductibles, he or she will still have much, much more money to live on than the Medicaid patient. So your hardworking relative will, in the end, be much better off than the Medicaid patient.
3
Being middle class used to often mean one primary breadwinner who could support a spouse and children while also buying a home and owning two cars.
Now some people live the illusion of a middle class life (although usually two full-time working spouses) who may have a house and possibly two cars and probably a kid or two but who are living paycheck to paycheck with little savings and a lot of debt, much of it probably student loans.
The middle class illusion really is all that separates the working poor (or working-and-almost-poor) from the 'haves."
I wonder what will happen when--as pensions are stolen, debt increases, housing costs increase, healthcare skyrockets. and childcare increases--the illusion of a middle class even existing is shattered?
72
It isn't just the economic imbalance, it's the uncertainty. A job may evaporate overnight, or the pay may be decreased, or the benefits cut. There seems to be no safe harbor.
Communitarian solutions make sense but may be hard to make work.
53
The safety net is supposed to be our safeguard against uncertainty. Gutting the safety net is what has put us here. Public health, public education, and a living minimum wage can take us out (just like it did before we gutted it).
6
It is just not in USA. In most countries the same argument holds. Day care may be cheaper but health, education and marriage are expensive. Bear in mind that in countries like
India parents foot the bill for their child's education (even at Master's or Doctoral level) and marriage.
The countries where birth rates are healthy are the ones where patriarchy rules and women are second class citizens. That shows the flip side of women empowerment.
5
Those high birth rates are not "healthy", as you put it. They are a disaster in the making. For many people, such as Africans and at least half of the people living in South Asia, the disaster of famine, eroded topsoil, floods, and deadly heatwaves, is already here.
15
In every other first world nation health care is free. Often college is free. That makes a big difference.
7
Like so much writing on this topic, this article draws a line between the 1% and the 99%, implying that the financial issues of, say, a well-educated technologist are comparable to, say, those of a bank clerk. They aren't.
Those myths of "personal responsibility" perpetuate because for the upper 10-20% of this country, financial security is a matter of frugality and career management. If you are born into that lucky demographic, one can smugly point at equally lucky friends and family, less frugal or clever about career choice, and buy into the myth of personal responsibility for social ills.
But that's not reality for much of our country, and it is time to stop pretending it is just the top 1% who are lucky.
(Signed, a lucky 10%er.)
68
I look at all the million-dollar houses near where I live and say to myself not a single one of these people is a legitimate millionaire,
so what's up?
32
... so what's up with this?
2
I look at the million-dollar house that the bank owns while we pay off the mortgage, and I think: we took on a huge amount of debt.
4
I was fortunate. My sons were born 41 and 38 years ago. I was then making a good living, working for a TV network in a union job. My wife got an MA in early childhood at Columbia Teachers College. She was able to stay home with the boys, hear their first words, see their first steps, etc. When I called home, and asked how things were, she'd reply "fine" and I could believe her. Not a nanny, who might have replied, "Everything's fine Mr. Watt, but we're runnin' a little low on the gin." Those days are gone forever; it should not be so difficult, as it is now, to have and raise children.
36
Yes, you got in under the wire. Folks ten years younger have had to struggle more.
8
And, I regret to say, you are absolutely right. What I had should be possible for everyone.
And yet, we continue to elect individuals whose interests aren't even remotely aligned with our own. This is why our collective mental health continues to decline: because the definition of insanity is, in fact, doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
133
No, we continue to have no candidates to vote for who have any demonstrable intention of doing anything but continue to serve those whose interests are not even remotely aligned with ours, in fact, are directly against ours. The slow elimination of America's middle class over the last 30 or 40 years has has been a thoroughly bipartisan effort imposed by a corrupt two-party system funded and maintained by increasingly wealthy donors and opportunistic Beltway careerists. That's the insanity we need to escape.
10
This is the group squeezed on all ends, with higher marginal taxes and none of the lower income benefits such as earned income child tax credit or Medicaid. They also don't get any need based assistance for colleges etc. It's even worse if they live in a coastal city.
This is the group that Democrats have in recent years struggled to win or lost as the focus of the Democratic Party shifts to the more marginalized and identity politics.
24
Medicare for All and free college education would benefit most Americans.
4
I don't really get the point of this review -- which reads more like a compendium of the reviewer's financial anxieties than a description of the book being reviewed. The reviewer asserts that middle class professionals feel guilty about not earning more money only because they are so "inculcated by neoliberal ideology," and that "the issue is overwhelmingly structural not social." But nowhere does she explain what structural issues prevented her from earning more money; e.g., by choosing a profession that is better paid. I don't dispute that there are structural inequalities -- and blatant discrimination -- built into our capitalist system, that child care is too expensive for many two-income families to afford, and that some people are disadvantaged from birth. But as someone who worked very hard and sacrificed a lot to achieve a higher income than either of my parents ever dreamed of having, I don't have sympathy for someone who chose to enter a low paid profession and now whines that she cannot afford to have more than one child. Presumably, Emily Cooke had exactly the same options I had, and she just made a different choice.
38
The problem with this tired old argument is that not everyone can simply choose a higher paying career. Two people who have the exact same backgrounds don’t necessarily have the same inherent skills. If you’re good at STEM, you’ll make money. If you’re good at prettt much everything else, you’ll be broke. And that just not the social order that is good for any civilized country. Someone has to create content, or do social work, or non-profit work. Sorry, but the “hey, you could have just become a lawyer/doctor/engineer/financial whatever” argument is tantamount to an approval of exactly the structural issues that are killing the middle class. In fact, it’s tantamount to saying, “hey, you could have chosen to be born lucky.”
21
I’d just add that sympathy for an adjunct instructor is misplaced. Everyone knows those are dead end low paying jobs. Time to get retrained to do something else, especially with a disabled kid.
Life’s hard. And unfair. But America still offers more opportunity than any other country in the world.
3
So who is going to teach your children at school? Why should some professions, such as teaching, be paid so poorly? If everyone becomes a software engineer/lawyer/doctor, how will we function as a society?
6
Don't their husbands have jobs? It is unfortunate that often two incomes are required, but two incomes are better than one.
8
Any comments from middle class, 55+ year old people? We are the group much of corporate America loves to purge from their ranks at a time when health care expenses are probably increasing, retirement - either voluntary or forced- is right around the corner and there is no pension?
66
nailed it
7
we've only had consumerism blasted in our faces for 25 years in tv, online, movies, and in the media
gee, i wonder how these people got these ideas?
1
the retirement myth created by financial management companies that tell you you'll live until 95, hoping they scare you into giving them every last coin you own, knowing you'll die much sooner? Which has resulted in the neurotic, single, 60 yr old worrying they won't have enough to retire.
6
The digital edition blurb on this article says:
"Alissa Quart’s 'Squeezed' examines the problem of families at the upper edge of the middle class, struggling to survive financially in America."
I found nothing in the review that indicated that the book is about or mainly about "the upper edge of the middle class."
Imagine the problems of families just below the upper edge of the middle class - or way below the upper edge of the middle class - or "the thousands of women who must live away from their own children in order to care for those of other people.
But then the reviewer (and maybe the book author) fall for the biggest red herring in our world -- inequality. "...inequality is as bad as it has been in a century." The problem is not inequality; it is inadequate income. Would it be better if "every sector of the population" including "the richest is treading water"?
6
There is a massive imbalance of income in the US and it started in 1980 with Reagan. Statistics prove this fact. The 99% have had declining wage growth when all facts are considered. Children are expensive and compared to the costs in 1980 much more expensive, almost unaffordable. Look at the student loan debt. A nation cannot prosper when the middle class has so much debt. Debt is the modern day version of slavery and student loan debt, which the banks convinced Congress to consider as not forgivable in bankruptcy, puts a noose around the neck of many people. Women and men will decide that they can live without children, it is their choice. A civilization is only as good as it treats the least of it's brethren. From my perspective a nation as wealthy as the US has abdicated that social responsibility. Why would anyone choose to have children if they can't provide for them. If they live in fear of financial ruin due to a disease, if they can't afford health insurance because rates are so high, student loan debt is a 30 year repayment plan, if they are lucky and the average job doesn't pay very well, these are all factors that will drive down the birth rate. People will have sex, they will make sure they don't have children.
55
Let's not get carried away. Debt is not slavery. College loans are in no way similar to lynching.
6
chas: Maybe not slavery. More like an indentured serf system.
1
Spot on article and book. Americans have been sold the story of exceptionalism; now combined with the "if you're poor, it's your fault" leaves so many guilty ridden when, in fact, it is the economic order, unregulated capitalism, that we live under.
Our culture has taught us oh so well never,ever to complain about not having enough money - for fear we'll be deemed 'slackers' or worse. But there must be something wrong with you, or the classic "blame the victim" so prevalent today where the rich (simply because of the amount of money they have 'accumulated' or their inherited wealth) are deemed the arbiters of society - those who we should emulate.
I am at the other end of the life continuum. Due to a seriously, genetic illness I find myself with barely enough to survive on - despite having a strong work ethic, excellent academic credentials, a sense of giving back. Crippled at 55, unable to work, I, too, am barely surviving and live in high level anxiety.
38
I'm not so sure I would reduce the argument here to "capitalism has failed us." I think it's more a question of "entitlement has failed us." The families I know are all aiming at lives that would have been called "luxurious" when I was a child - no more modest homes, now it's McMansions with a pool, central A/C, a TV in every room and a smart phone for every child. No more simple vacations (drive to a campground? That's for peasants!) - now we fly the entire family to NYC, Disney World, Cancun, Europe, a 10-day cruise, a safari in Africa!
When material possessions that were once for the rich become "necessities" for the middle class - that may be where the problem begins. Our materialistic, consumer culture is what did us in.
90
No more pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey/musical chairs birthday parties in the home with a cup of candy favor. Must rent a place and send each child home with the equivalent of a Hollywood swag bag!
My favorite sign of excess is 40 year old men who work desk jobs but drive 45K Ford F-150 trucks that one could live in. I just don't get it.
25
I don't think you are associating with middle class people at all. The lifestyle you describe - McMansion with a pool? Flights to Europe and Cancun and Africa for the whole family? That's the top 5% of the wealth distribution or higher. I wouldn't even know where to find someone like this.
Where do the people in the stories live? Middle class professionals in Dallas enjoy all the things cited in the article as out of reach. Move!
We have plenty of jobs. Turn up your nose at flyover country, but you will live the results of your decision.
37
Actually, capitalism is working perfectly: open borders are very popular with Free Market advocates who enjoy the subsidy cheap labor provides, not to mention H1-B visas. And what of outsourcing? Thank goodness we've overcome nationalism and exported millions of manufacturing jobs to the Third World!
The social contract is broken: Americans have no real national identity, nor geographical loyalty, so they don't fight when the private sector turns them into wage slaves, or import millions of new future welfare recipients.
The only difference is that what happened to the working classes (Deplorables!) four decades ago is now happening to the Upper Middle Class. Because globalism.
So enjoy.
16
Good reason to live life within your means. This is always true but perhaps never more than in times of economic precariousness. I think that this can and should be done without self-pitying theatrics. All times and situations provide limitations and challenges and this time is no different.
17
Living within your means should be a goal for everyone. For many, many people, this means there is no money to set aside for healthcare or retirement. What happens when these hardworking people get sick? What will happen to them should they too old and feeble to work?
13
And yet, more than a few voted for Trump and the millionaires tax break. Don't they want their children to have a college education, good jobs, health care, and pensions? Don't they want clear air and water? Don't they want affordable child care? I still don't understand why they threw in with the Republican grifters.
17
I got sick and lost my job. Cobra at the time was $800 a month. Eventually I got disability but my retirement funds took a hit. So at the age of 73 I am still working.
4
Not only must U.S. mothers (primarily) birth and raise the next generation (that will support everyone in the current in their old age), we must also do so largely on our own without government, employer, or even, sometimes, our own families.'
6
We can import all the future workers and consumers we ever will need. I don't want even MORE of my hard-earned wages appropriated by force of law and turned over to domestic breeders. Their output is generally mediocre and we don't need it.
5
...ummm, tax the rich; end gerrymandering; reinstate the fairness doctrine. This problem is pretty simple to solve. Glad to see it's the "comfortable" who are being afflicted, as it's their inattention that has brought us here.
34
A) If "everyone" is feeling squeezed, perhaps expectations of lifestyle standards and perks are inflated?
I know an unskilled couple (credit union clerk + warehouse worker) who pulled opposite shifts for six years so they wouldn't have to pay for day care. He watched the boys by day and worked by night, she did the reverse. I've heard of single moms teaming up to do similar sharing of resources. The universe doesn't owe you a 9-5 job, personal dwelling and all the frills just because you decided you must breed.
B) Don't have a kid you haven't saved up for and then whine to the rest of us. My grandparents delayed and limited their family in the 1920s, my parents saved and delayed in the early 1960s until they had a cushion for new expenses. It's become even easier to control reproduction in the ensuing 50 years.
C) Women producing fewer offspring is a feature, not a bug. It's not something we need to fret about or fix; quite the reverse. On a planet teeming with 7.5 billion humans and other species going extinct by the day, we should reward childfreedom and penalize breeding.
43
SR Another conservative liar.
It takes a truth-free outlook or plain wilful stupidity to say "live within your means...in times of economic precariousness...this time is no different... [in its] limitations & challenges" in response to the review of a book the topic of which is the blazingly obvious fact that these days -- unlike in the 20th century -- for the vast majority of the population of the wealthiest & most technologically advanced democracy on earth, it is becoming literally impossible to do that!
UNLIKE in previous eras, when daily work & responsible budgeting DID allow almost everyone to pay basic expenses & also save for contingencies, the future, & Christmas presents for the kids.
Got that? Maybe you'd like to refresh your reading skills? I'm afraid self-honesty was dropped a long time ago, by the sound of it.
If you're 71 & working, you very likely soon won't be. Next round of cost-cutting'll take care of that. Don't come sniveling around here when it happens. That would be "self-pitying theatrics".
3
A. Stanton.
Well, A., this is how it works: most people even if they earn a couple hundred thou a year can't save up a million whole dollars for many years on top of their regular savings & their retirement savings to buy a house with outright, so instead they take out a bank loan for the million dollars.
The bank is supposed to make sure, not that they have a million dollars to buy the house, but that they earn enough to not have trouble making monthly payments on the loan.
Then they pay the bank some thousands of dollars a month, year after year till, after several years, they have paid off the million dollars plus interest.
That is what a mortgage is.
You could have asked your Daddy that. He would have told you that few people can afford to fork over the entire cost of a house all at once. That's why they take out multi-year loans instead.
That's what's up with that.
At heart I am an anarchist (late 19th century political philosophy variety, not black hooded teenager smashing windows), but in a world with so many billions of people and so many global problems, big government and democratic socialistic policies are a necessity. And all these upper middle class types "struggling" when the vast multitudes are so, so, so much worse off need to see the light and pick a side. They were duped by Bill Clinton's triangulation and "third way" calls and their self-interest (in the 80 and 90s and into the 2000s these folks temporarily prospered through neoliberal pro-corporate policies as they slowly at first and then at constantly greater rates of acceleration pushed wealth uphill at) to surrender to the end big government, kill unions, fray the social safety net crowd, as long as the highly educated middle class was along for the ride. Now they find themselves left behind as well. Tax the rich. Redistribute wealth (there is so much of it). Don't look to corporate democrats to do anything beyond slow down the rate of increase of wealth accumulation at the top. These oh so intelligent people look at "Kansans" with disdain for voting against their interests, but they've been voting all along themselves for corporate politicians that are responsible for capitulating to these wealth hoarding trends that push the pain further and further up (we're all poor now). And its NOT about JOBS. The machines will be doing the work. Its about all of us sharing the$
10
"While on assignment for this book review, I lost my job...The next day, my partner lost his."
Well if this doesn't illustrate the challeges outlined in this article, I'm not sure what would.
42
How does anyone have 2.2 children? As someone who has opted to have no children, this is a serious question. I am not sure why anyone would want to bring kids into this world now, especially under these economic conditions where even just getting sick could wipe you out financially. America runs on corporate greed and whims...we're all just ants. I wouldn't wish that on any child of mine. At least my dog can live a full and happy life on my salary!
24
@ atb - I agree with you. I don't have any children either. I can afford a cat. I picked him up off the street in Brooklyn 13 years ago. I also feed one outdoor cat. Strangely, I can afford to provide for myself as well as 1 full time indoor and 1 part time outdoor cat. But that's it. I would be so financially (and emotionally) stressed if I had children.
4
In an effort to preserve capitalism for the few who benefit from it, our society, our government, and our media reinforce shaming and punishment as reasonable responses to the poor. If you have money, any problem can be solved. If not, you can be blacklisted from jobs and apartments for poor credit, your electricity can be turned off so that your oxygen-dependent mother can suffocate to death, you can live with your children on a filthy sidewalk in winter even though you are working two jobs, and everyone will have reasons for why it's your fault, all the ways in which you are irresponsible and deserve your fate. It weighs people down, it saps energy and optimism, it ruins countless lives.
And yet, even your newspaper will report giddily that unemployment is down and GDP up -- while barely mentioning that in our system that does not translate to adequate salaries, that it means nothing at all to the average worker.
We are all complicit in this capitalistic lottery in which we all hope to reach the top that few actually do, and blame those on the bottom, no matter how hard they work, how hard they try, for their own miserable lives.
56
Squeezed indeed. People are not very politically aware. They do not stand up for themselves as a group.
Trump for example hoodwinked 27% of voters into thinking he cares about them. People have to ditch the great leader nonsense and do it for themselves.
A family at a time cannot afford America anymore. Our politics and finance system are a fraud. And that is that.
Never give a sucker an even break ...should be the national motto.
13
Sounds like a book based on the lived experience of any of us “millennials”.
2
Now, I want NYT to connect the dots between Squeezed and yesterday's NYT piece on "5 steps to plan retirement" (the piece with the single 60 yr old, with $1.5M in retirement savings, pension and $140K/year salarry) - and share a retirement plan for us Middle Precariats, because we Middle Precariats are the ones who REALLY need retirement planning help!
119
And don't forget the UberPrecariats, please.
1