The Trump family is awash in ignorance and have a grossly inflated sense of their own infallibility and understanding of all matters having to do with mostly anything.
The stupidity of Ivanka's remarks about jobs guarantees and a living wage boggles the mind and whatever else can be boggled. This is a woman who pretends at work and probably believes being flawlessly made-up, dressed and being able to slow-mo walk fulfills all that is needed to provide insights empty of experiences much less understanding.
These people, from the father down, are deplorable at the least - their ignorance prevents them from self-awareness or even the possibility of being shameful.
I will be glad when they are gone and preferably not to continued freedom.
53
Conservatives work hard and get ahead and say, see, I did that.
Liberals work hard and get ahead and look at where they came from and say, there but for the grace of God go I.
30
When a country doesn't allow equal opportunity, it will suffer from unfulfilled talent potential and will rely on upper class white male twits to run things.
Your current president serves as an example.
25
Oh boy - this column has really stirred an ant's nest of fear and loathing, mostly by folk who hate a"word" but haven't a clue what they're reacting to. Totally agree with the commenter who suggests a mass-market national billboard campaign to set the record straight.
Things like -- "Medicare is socialism - who wants to get rid of that ?".
19
To this day there are a lot of people who think Donald Trump is a "self-made man." They regard the fact Fred Trump was a Manhattan real estate tycoon is regarded as either "fake news. Or, they simply suppress the cognitive dissonance.
15
This is ridiculous. Of course the U.S. has more true mobility if you look behind the stats. It's just that it's done through work instead of through handouts. In Denmark, because taxes are so high at the upper end and you get a bunch of handouts at the lower end, the income distribution after taxes and transfers is compressed, so it's naturally easier to move from somewhere toward the low end of the middle to somewhere toward the high end without it meaning there is actually greater opportunity. The fact that there are a lot of wealthy and high income Americans at the upper end (which is self-evidently hard to attain for most people) doesn't mean that there is less opportunity to succeed. It just means that most people won't become Bill Gates, which is as true in the U.S. as it is in Denmark. But Denmark doesn't have anybody like Bill Gates , Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett, etc. so it's a lot easier to break into the top income percentiles because they aren't that high.
4
The original (and ongoing) premise of American “exceptionalism” is the exploitation of our natural resources, no matter the environmental cost. So the 1% get richer, and the 99% get poisoned...it’s the American way!
17
Good article Dr Krugman. Your reference to "a growing body of evidence" reminded of another recent NY Times article about Lindsey Graham where he said "This is a fight between the people who are *so smart* and the rest of us." (italics from the original). The GOP and their base are banding together for ignorance -- why? Are they protecting their self-interest behind a reliance on instincts and truthiness? Can their needs be reconciled with evidence-based policy? Do progressives simply try to leave behind all these "it feels right" people?
The Graham article is at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/25/magazine/lindsey-graham-what-happened-trump.html
8
Before trashing America, Paul, go to live in a foreign country.
Then you will have some personal empirical basis of comparison.
Everything else is pure theoretical ideology and not a well informed opinion.
Paul, despite the alleged lack of upward mobility in America, you did pretty well in America.
3
Ivanka probably truly believes that she 'earned' her achievements through her own 'hard work'. She's just one clueless person. She has four siblings, two of which mercifully, stay out of the public eye.
Meanwhile, the rest of us are being under-served by an MSM that can't distinguish between socialism (that meant state capitalism when I was in school) and social democracy, where, if I have it right, taxes are used to advance valid societal needs like healthcare, education and old age pensions. Not just paved roads and national defense.
Our nation has a minor crime boss as the president and his electoral college win was not achieved by dint of hard work or professional respect. It was by deceit, subterfuge and foreign interference. The logical complement of "She's got this..." hubris is the license to lie, cheat and steal emboldened by a "There's no way he can win..." attitude.
Please vote in 2020. It's the only path we have for ending this nightmare.
25
rabrophy rightly got a Times pick for his smart comment;
"Krugman left out racism. Racism is the glue that holds the Republican base together."
But it's even deeper than racism. The Elite Republicans cultivate hatred and anger directed at the opposing Democrats now calling them Socialists in such way as to infer a negative connotation.
The Republicans have always been a party in search of any enemies to fulfill their reason for being, ever since 1859.
12
So which of these agendas would lock lock our class system in place? The European model. You're just to smart to notice.
Ivanka is a classic example of a person who was born on third base and thought she hit a triple.
16
Somehow the 2% like Ms. Trump I find disingenuous. They don't give a hoot about upward mobility for the rest of us especially if it comes at the expense of their exorbitant life styles. Heaven forbid a janitor make enough to buy his child a new pair of Skeecher sneakers at the expense of Ms. Trump's Louis Vuitton's and Fendi's.
9
@ERIC You are right about Mobil Home parks. We had 23 "known child molesters" living there. I lived in fear for my kids every day. Wish life were different...
1
Yeah, the Republicans always say you have to "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" to get ahead but then they take the very people that message is supposed to be for--minorities and the poor--and do everything they can to prevent those people from getting boots in the first place.
16
People that go rags to riches are rare though they do exist. Take Harold Brown for instance.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/obituaries/2019/02/25/harold-brown-who-built-expansive-real-estate-empire-dies/FNRl0Lr31uj3lYWa3Ng4HN/story.html
People who do well enough, often better than their parents, are common enough. What they have in common is ambition, a willingness to work hard, intelligence, skill, and a little luck. You can deny this to the cows come home, but a good attitude, thoughtful intelligence, and a willingness to really try to do the best work you can, are very valuable skills that every employer looks for, recognizes, and rewards. Employers also recognize the opposite traits, which are also common, and are promoted here daily. If your staring point is believing the "system is rigged" and your employer's function to provide you with a paycheck I can guarantee you will never get ahead, at least in the private sector.
Oh, Ivanka, that is just a distraction.
2
Paul, how high to you want taxes to be? Without the SALT deduction, NY, Calif, and NJ, to name just three states, are over 50%. No province in Canada, a country you love to cite, is anywhere near 50%. As far as the Nordic countries you are so fond of, they have very small populations vis a vis the US and virtually no defense spending (not to mention homogeneous societies). The real issue is spending the money that already comes in. Your blue states, NY and Illinois,for example, have deficits despite high taxes.
1
people will accept a great deal of hardship if they believe that the future will bring some measure of improvement. the one thing that will surely bring about revolution is realization that things will never bet better and will probably be worse in the future. psychologically the US is not there yet, but the facts on the ground suggest that while people may not believe it their lives are not likely to improve with time.
8
Krugman, one day I hope that bubble you're in breaks. This really is, still, a wonderful country.
I know lots of people who are like me.... first generation American from poor immigrant parents. These parents sacrificed for their children so they could go to school and did, attaining a college degree (and for some, an advanced degree). Just that alone would have been unthinkable from the countries they were born in but were possible (and accomplished) in the US.
Fast forward and for so many, we've moved up the socio-economic ladder through hard work and an equal opportunity that would never been afforded to us because of our birth parents and class. Only in the US and it's free enterprise capitalist system was this possible.
I also have the advantage of many friends in other countries who take care to point out how lucky we Americans are (even as they tongue-in-cheek say their health care systems are better);
5
Ivanka's legendary long march from 3rd base to home plate will be an inspiration to all future generations.
29
No one at the Federal level of Government has affected or will affect MY life. Let alone Ivanka Trump. The nature of government is that, to paraphrase Tip O'Neill, the closest government is local. As Unlce Tip so famously said, "All politics is local."
As long as I remain a righteous upstanding citizen in my Precinct, my City, my County and my State I am in pretty good shape. I can go about my business and ti really does not matter WHO is President of the United States of America.
I have been able to ignore the Presidents for longer than I can remember. The last President I probably paid any attention to was probably Lyndon Baines Johnson. The Presidency of the United States is an overblown entity IN these so-called United States.
The heart of all of our matters is first, last and always, the individual average, common citizen.
2
The republicans are all about getting elected. They use gerrymandering , voter suppression, campaign finance laws so big business and organizations like the NRA can give money to sympathetic politicians willing to do their bidding and the most important thing that helps the republicans is the electoral college.
Socialism and the New Green deal will be talking points that will help republicans. Scare the people into socialism when there are already in a country with socialism. Billions of dollars is given to sports teams to build arenas. Billions given to farmers and Medicaid and social security and other programs and billions given to hundreds of districts for the military machine that is proving to be less and less cost effective. Yes I said the military is socialism. Russian spends 70 billion a year on the military and the united states spends over 700 billion and yet Russia is so more advanced in supersonic missiles and electronic warfare. A surface to ship missile cost 2.7 million and can take out a 13 billion dollar aircraft carrier because the new missile can't be stopped...it goes too fast.
3
Well, the easy yardstick for a healthy society was developed by Nilfredo Pareto in the 19th century. It is so useful in so many walks of life that people forget its original intent.
Pareto measured wealth in Italy and found that 80% of the wealth was in the hands of 20% of the people. He judged this a relatively healthy society. If you measure the successful countries you will find that rule tends to hold. In societies where the distribution is different, like Russiam there are not enough customers to keep the wealthy in opulence, which makes them worth a lot with nowhere to enjoy itm and very vulnerable to international sanctions. Unfotunately, America is among those out-of-balance countries.
We know what happens when say 95% of the wealth is in the hands of 1% of the people. History has shown us that in France in 1790s.
Pareto thinking and Pareto optimal are great ways to solve problems. When a problem appears to be too large or too expensive, sometimes one should ask, "What would it take to solve 80% of it?" Rinse and repeat.
So the folk who excoriate socialism are conflating the distribution of wealth with the distribution of opportunity. In the optimal, there is enough threat to wealth that folk have to work to keep it and others have to work to get it. Everyone works. That is a healthy distribution of opportunity.
I doubt if Ivanka can properly pronounce Pareto. Of course such factual things are way beyond a non-reader like Donald Trump.
4
We have never left a capitalistic, aristocracy society from the English Ruling Class. Kings, Queens, Fiefs, and the Serfs. Still well entrenched, especially when push comes to shove, the policy dictates remain the same, and we all continue to believe the dream that this somehow really does not exist, that we are all equal economically, and yet are made different(on all scales) and are not, repeatedly.
Welcome this new way of doing business in governing and policy that the new millennial's are ushering in, in this new democratic congress. If it takes a socialistic point of view to change it, it must be so much needed.
1
In all of history, a populace held great disdain for the elite class. Unfortunately, that always led to an unfortunate future. The elite merely fight any threats before them and now here in America, that means society that resents them and they simply imply that the act of social gathering of will is bad for all, but in reality, only for them. Hence, the insinuation that "Socialism" is bad because it infers a growing power in society. The Republicans know they lead the less learned and repeat the dog whistle of negative connotations of the name Socialism to generate unthinking hatred and anger in their base. As a result, the base actually fights against their own self interests just as they voted in Republicans that tried to take away their health care. The elite now rule the land.
3
Take note of the fact that the Republicans very effectively cultivated the hatred, anger, and following of the gun owners, military, and media. Unfortunately, we do live on the "Planet of the Apes."
3
I've read a lot about our inequality problem, but this is the first time I've seen it explained how certain aspects of Socialism can restore the American Dream that we used to have.
7
I lived in Flanders, Belgium. It is one of the only countries in the world that managed to slightly decrease inequality since the 2000s.
A few example of what social mobility looks like over there:
- Government subsidized/regulated daycare, based on income brackets. Everyone with a job can afford daycare and a side benefit is that kids from poor families start school with a relatively smaller skills gap than if they were at home.
- Excellent elementary schools in every village where children start at age 2.5, making friends with other kids before parents can imprint their prejudices. This is key.
There are barely any private schools, bar a few for English speaking expats around the cities.
- Tuition free colleges, mostly without admission limits. Children aged 16-18 have a less stressful life but college is harder, especially in the first years.
- A government funded professional mediation agency (VDAB) which helps to place unemployed people or re-educate them. Training can be in a highly desired skill e.g. welding or plumbing but also e.g. Microsoft Certified Professional or coding.
14
@Liz: Florida seems to have become a playground for charter schools.
@Liz
Are the numbers of minorities/immigrants similar to the French-speaking side or, say, to France? This is a major aspect of the story.
1
"Upward mobility" ? Upward from where? And why? If your parents already own a modest home in a safe and pleasant neighborhood, with two cars in the garage and maybe a recreational vehicle, take a vacations, eat out, can pay their medical bills, and have enough savings for a decent retirement, why would their children want to move "up"? Upward mobility is not necessary when you have enough. It's only about greed after that. The problem in America is not lack of upward mobility but the threat of downward mobility. Higher costs for everything parents obtained coupled with college debt, stagnant wages, increased job insecurity due to outsourcing and technology, and the disappearance of private pensions does not bode well for middle-class kids.
6
@abigail49: At some point, compiling more wealth becomes a pursuit of raw power for its own sake.
1
When we travelled to Scandinavia we were most struck by the fact that you could have a “regular” job and have a pretty nice life, because you could have kids as a young person and expect them to get decent care as children and a good education, no matter where you are live. You don’t have to worry about the cost of health care either. People don’t seem to view children as a drain on society there as they do here, and people just seem generally a lot less stressed. Imagine how much better life would be in the US if school systems were roughly the same quality across the land? And you didn’t have to save a dime for college or health care? And you didn’t have to worry about gun violence and racism? It seems like everyone lives in pretty decent housing, too. I’m sure it’s not perfect but the stress of the racism, the competitiveness of everything, the blatant greed, is literally killing us here in the US.
21
@Me myself i, It is easier to maintain higher average living standards at lower rates of population growth.
1
@Me myself i It is a different mentality. Here they are "your" kids. If you struggle, too bad for them.
In much of Europe however, they are also seen as the country's children.
In Belgium, like every parent does there, I received $250 per month to help me raise my 2 children. Not a tax break (which I also got), actual money.
There is an organization called Child and Family (Kind en Gezin) whose doctors provide free periodical health checks for all children. Everyone uses it, not just poor people.
7
and when people don't rate paying taxes to keep society afloat as one step below leprosy.
2
Upward mobility was more achievable a few decades ago , when the discrepancy in wealth between the various social classes was more contained.
Now with the advent of the predatory attitude of Wall Street , that is deciding every step of our lives from healthcare , cost of prescription drugs, education, control of government through lobbying, our own nutrition, infrastructures etc etc Americans have become puppets unable to manage their lives ,overloaded with loans and debt.
Americans have become slaves of the Big Corporations , controlling every aspect of their lives and making their lives unbearable and insecure .
The average American is not happy with the GOP political agendas undercutting their lives , trying to take away the minimum safety net that has been established after decades of political battles .
Ivanka has no saying in this diatribe, she is the daughter of privilege, she knows nothing about life .
9
@inter nos: Even US corporations are loaded up with debts incurred to pay their managements extravagantly.
"Democrats are calling for universal health care, increased aid to the poor, ... And they propose paying for these benefits with increased taxes on high incomes and large fortunes."
I would rather see these proposals as less "socialistic," less drastic. Though the top 1% household incomes paid about 70% in federal income tax until the Reagan era, 1981, somehow such a tax is unimaginable even for many in low income groups.
Why not keep the top rate at 50% on top 0.1% household incomes of on over about $5million. There could be another rate of about 45% on over say, $2.5million. And all incomes including capital gain incomes should be treated as regular wage-like incomes when it reaches $500K.
Annual wealth tax of 1% on over say $100million & 2% on over $5billion, which may replace inheritance tax and maybe easier on the wealthy but MAY bring even more revenue than the current estate tax, I think, but I could be wrong.
Sales taxes are real burden on the poor; bottom 20% pays seven times more as a share of their incomes in sales taxes than the top 1% does.
Payroll tax is hard on the working poor. It should be cut to 1% on the first $10K & to 2% on the second $10K. Lift the cap but cut again to 1-2% beyond say, $200K, which will extend SS solvency.
3
...maybe I am missing something in this argument, but it has been my experience that while "everyone" might dream of being wealthy (ability to fulfill any need?) most of us do not spend every waking hour strategizing on how to make more money and would be very content to work 40 ? hours a week to reach the often elusive "middle class?" station. We realize not everyone can be millionaires and don't resent those who ethically and fairly attain that station in life. Most of us know or know of individuals passionate for wealth acquisition and the efforts that they employ towards that goal but are not willing to sacrifice other objectives for its pursuit. The point is should we be judged inferior and denied services...quality health, education, welfare as promised in our constitution and consequently any reasonable pathway to middle class and beyond. We are a vast majority of America and decisions are rarely made for our benefit. We see it is better in many other countries today. Certainly there must be enough honorable people and mechanisms to ensure our "exceptional" myth has a chance for fruition.
4
@Gary: US states play all sorts of games to compete with each other via unequal protections of law.
1
We Democrats must not let the Republicans label common sense health care proposals as 'socialist' or even more ludicrously, 'communist'. Even the Fed Chair recently opined that our healthcare delivery system was wasteful.
I believe surveys show most people who have employer based health insurance want to keep it. So any proposal 'Medicare for all' ought to take this opinion into account. However, its time for some sensible ideas on this subject.
2
@Cal: It is downright predatory with respect to drug pricing that funds prescription drug ads that corrupt the media.
Krugman left out racism. Racism is the glue that holds the Republican base together.
108
@rabrophy
Racism is far more complex than it's popularly portrayed.
Racism and bigotry are universal. When I opined, as an Indian American, pure racism is all but absent in America, many attacked me. Racism/casteism is far more prevalent in India.
Something related to racism is prevalent in the US: Indifference on the plight of inner-city blacks. Better off blacks leave the Ghettos, usually & live in white areas.
The greatest scourge is black-on-black violence, which better off blacks don't want to talk about, as they fear it reflects them also. Whites are indifferent to it, as everybody else is, as long as it doesn't affect them.
Expensive pre-school education, starting at age 2 may help. Charter schools don't really help. Spend a lot more money in public school education, paying teachers far more, may be twice as more, with smaller classes, nutritious lunch, etc. etc. Consider this "Reparation."
Then beautify blighted inner city areas. Hire black youths to do the construction. Pay them far higher than prevailing wage. Minimum wage is too unattractive to black youths - they see too many of their peers engage in minor criminal activities to make more.
The money spent on such programs will be recouped in less penal spending. Far less tears of mothers of murdered youths are the real reward.
8
@rabrophy
Pitting white against black, women against men and humanity against nature is not a shortcut to utopia.
4
Probably most upward mobility comes from education.
You kind find the exception of Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg who both dropped out of college.
But most upward mobility means going from poor and working class to professional class.
And that is what a college education gives.
By the way, both Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg come from professional class parents who sent them to prep-school.
6
@Independent
Agree to an extent. And that being just that not everyone needs to or wants to go to college. There should be more paths to well-being professions that do not really need college - the trades and many manufacturing (yes we do still have some) jobs for example. And ultimately every job should pay a living wage.
1
@NJA
Absolutely agree.
We should have good trade schools as well.
A plumber, electrician, etc. will earn significantly more than minimum wage.
Also, important to both is the base education. I see is a huge difference in the quality grammar school and high school for poor and professional class.
2
when Americans today think about upward mobility, they think about previous generations, when millions managed to rise from the tenements of the Lower East Side or the quonset huts of Canarsie to the relative affluence of a $7500 tract house in Levittown on the GI bill. today, it's poor kids becoming multimillionaire sports stars or some smartypants striking it rich in an IPO or landing a job shuffling money on Wall St. the gains are far bigger now, but the participants far fewer, and it now has less to do with determination and hard work than with exceptional ability and dumb luck.
1
When Rick Scott was governor of Florida, he implemented a merit based scholarship.
Sounds good, who would argue with that?
But upper class kids go to better schools so they have a much better chance of getting those merit based scholarship.
5
I personally never believed in upper mobility in America. Despite having been born in the late 40's, as the youngest of six in a moderately successful family, I always sensed that financial ruin was always a possibility, but for my good fortune in having been born to a family with the opportunity to get a college education I believe I dodged financial ruin. But it is very easy for me to see how many others with slightly less opportunity were not so lucky. One thing I regret in not having been born to a family with significant means, is the freedom to take risks. Risk taking must be much less of a risk, when Daddy can bail you out.
7
@Kevin cummins
In some ways US society is a kind of casino. One bad roll of the dice and you are out of the game - for example, bankrupted by medical issues, or having to provide lifetime care for a child with special needs.
Laid off in mid career, or financially devastated by divorce.
A friend's son decided to spite his successful parents and deliberately turned in a low SAT score.
3
As much I like Mr. Krugman, he has this wrong. I was born and raised outside of US. I have been been for 40 years. I regularly travel for work to Europe and Asia. No country in the World beats the opportunities that are available here. Perhaps China, if you don't mind keeping your head down and saying nothing. Just look at all the people who risk their lives trying to get here.
8
Your private experience or perception can’t replace real public aggregate data that the article present. I also suggest you visit China sweat shops, the early days of the industrial revolution in Britain look like a picnic compared to the Chinese miracle.
17
A half-century of anti-communist, pro-capitalist Cold War propaganda solidified, in the American mind, that "freedom" can only be attained through capitalism. And the more capitalistic the capitalism the better.
So we gave our millionaires "liberal" free-market tax cuts because "GOVERNMENT MAKES US LESS FREE" (The commies showed us this!). And what we got was thousands of billionaires and millions of homeless Americans.
No more MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. The middle, in America, has been shoved way over to the right.
6
Correct. However it should be noted that the free market predatory capitalism of the 1800's with its abuse of labor and extreme income inequality was precisely the cause of the discontent that inspired Karl Marx to write Das Kapital in 1848. Which then lead to the widespread appeal of Communism, Russian Revolution, Vladimir Lenin, Castro, Viet Nam, et al.
So we find ourselves coming full circle since the world has been made safe for predatory capitalism once again. Heed the lessons of
past if you do not wish to repeat them.
It is time to reel in capitalism to keep it safe and redistribute some of that excessive wealth to quell the bitterness of discontent that leads to dire consequences. Capitalism needs to be tamed, not eliminated, and that means strong government with moral leadership, sane regulations, and recognition of the public welfare which serves the best interest of all people.
6
So many comments are echoes of the opponents of Social Security in the Thirties and Medicare in the Sixties. But its simple: a rich democracy can afford to take care of its less well off citizens. Programs to reduce the cost of health insurance while increasing access; access to affordable child care for a world where parents both work; access to affordable senior living; and, access to affordable nutrition are the minimum we should expect a wealthy society to support ALL of its citizens.
6
Social mobility means absolutely nothing to most Americans. Most want to go to work, take care of their families and be left alone. An additional few thousand dollars isn't going to make a big difference in their lives one way or another, but if some big mouthed politician is going to give them something for free, yeah they'll take it. Many Americans have made unfortunate life choices and are stuck with them, especially those involving money. No matter how much of it they have, they'll always be in need of more.
The Democrats know this and use their weakness as their platform. They'll roll out entitlement programs, take care of people and will make their lives the best they can be; all they need is their vote. When it comes time to deliver it's usually a mess, under funded and requires a tax hike. Now the party has the unfounded idea that the rich are the answer to the nations fiscal woes, so they're pitching that at those who pay taxes.
Most people are content with their lot in life. They're not out in the streets protesting, turning cars over and lighting them on fire. Sure things could be better, but turn on the TV and take a look at how most people live around the world and it's not so bad. The Democrats promise the world but never deliver.
3
@Kurt Pickard: Generally speaking, we agree to be governed to put a floor under the conditions we must live under. In the absence of enforced rules of conduct, the bad drive the good out of any human pursuit.
4
@Kurt Pickard: When was the last time a car was turned over and set on fire in Murfreesboro?
Social mobility involves people moving downward as well as upward. Otherwise it is a misleading way of talking about the society's becoming richer. If everybody moves up, then the poorly paid jobs they are moving from will disappear, either by being automated or by being better paid.
Moving up involves somebody else's getting stuck with your previous place. That someone might be someone entering the workforce, but he or she must move upward or be stuck in a job with poor pay and little or no career path out.
To get genuine social mobility, it must be possible and tolerable to move down as well as up. The lack of a robust safety net and concern for such things as housing opportunities for losers makes downward mobility something to be avoided at all costs, because it is a slippery slope that can end in bankruptcy and homelessness.
If everybody is struggling to move up, we have established a competitive society where not wanting to move up is a disadvantage and a moral defect. Those who drop out of the rat race are rejecting prevalent values and should sink to the bottom rather than maintaining their current position, since they are not running hard to stay in the same place. Those who do not compete deserve to lose. And those who compete and lose deserve to lose.
The presence of social mobility is not enhanced by making society ever more competitive, just its stress and general unpleasantness. Even the rich find their place uncertain and threatened.
4
moving downward is always easy. consider Fred Trump, Jr.
I am upper middle class. My parents paid for my undergrad degree. I live in an urban school district and have made sacrifices, as most parents would, to fund private school for grades 7-12 for my son. I have also fully funded his 529. No fancy house or car for me. I am lucky and I know it.
I love all the progressive ideas, but the devil lies in the execution. Just because taxpayers fund excellent schools or mass transit or whatever doesn’t mean we get what we pay for. Operational excellence is not necessarily a top priority from the government. Hence, the most expensive mile of train track in the world is the second avenue subway in nyc. And the subway system in general is in ruins because we overpaid for the 2nd Avenue subway and starved the system of necessary maintenance. Political corruption at its finest.
Figure out a way to minimize the corruption in government spending , much of it legal, and I will become a passionate progressive. Execution matters. Until then, I cannot buy into this vision. Taxpayers deserve a return on our investment.
7
Of course she's tone deaf! 30-40% of the rich are now established as permanent aristocracy thanks to Reagan's, Bush's and Trump's tax breaks. This aristocracy isn't even American anymore. They can go wherever they want, at least their money can. And, there are thousands of investment bankers to help them.
6
To Channa:
Does the public housing in Manhattan look better than the ones you saw in the Netherlands? The main element in upward mobility is an access to tolerable good education and universal healthcare. i am afraid, Europe has beaten us there.
8
@Gangulee
You obviously don't travel much to Europe. If you did you would see on your return flight their rich and brightest coming to America for University and their rich sick to America for treatment.
2
It's interesting that countries abroad who had rule by royalty and aristocrats not that long ago historically, now are ahead of the US in economic equality by intl rankings. Their former 'peasant masses' are ahead of Americans with health care, education, and family/child supports. They don't turn their elections over to the richest elites for financing. This gives more power to the people--once an American ideal.
The US, founded to rebel against royal rule, dukes and earls, was once a model for the world. Now is turning its working, salaried population into a modern 'peasant' class of inequality, immobility and insecurity. Then enters Tsar Trump and his corporate courtiers to turn group against group and grab power.
Now in the land of Freedom, the richest 1 percent call the shots in lawmaking, shutting out the voice of citizens on laws affecting their lives.
Stagnant wages, huge education debt, huge HC expense, a gig economy, jobs sent overseas, with little retraining for downsized Americans, with little protection of employee unions undermines the US.
Our campaign funding dominated by the richest 1% seals the deal, using the excuse of money as free speech and freedom from big govt. This transfers power to the top, and is actually anti American. Our media might start making this contrast.
10
There is absolutely no evidence that Ivanka Trump has any economic expertise. While I agree with Mr. Krugman, I don't know why he bothered with her comments, except perhaps as a jump-off point to discuss progressive safety net programs that Ms. Trump is unlikely to either need or support.
I could have sworn, though, that America had upward social mobility. I was the second in my extended family to attend college and the first to get a graduate degree. My siblings and my cousins also did well. Two generations from penniless immigrant to well-educated middle-class and upper middle class with children who are also well-educated and in professional careers. In fact, my parents made it to the millionaire level in one generation without high school diplomas. That seems pretty upwardly mobile to me. And I know many others in the same category who are not part of my family.
4
I'm not apologizing for working hard and giving my daughters a financial, emotional, educational and moral leg up. What's more, they are entitled to all of it. Any redistribution because your parents were delinquent is stealing.
I am proud of what I have accomplished. Proud of my daughters and I have contempt for the lazy and immoral who feel they have a right to steal it from me. The reason why my wife and I have sacrificed and worked hard, is for our children. They have inherited our acumen and drive.
Socialism has nothing to do with leveling the playing field. It disincentives hard work, and is a form of theft. Inevitably, the only ones who prosper are connected to the government. Ask anyone from the former Soviet Union or who grew up during the cultural revolution.
Charity and conscience are an individual thing. Governmental redistribution fails not only because it discourages achievement, but because it discourages the very human nature that most high achieving people have to help their communities and foster success. Every good manager or owner wants to develop those who work for her.
Hands off what I earned.
6
Why anyone pays attention to what comes out of the First Daughter's mouth remains a total mystery to me. Her spouse, her siblings, and she remind me of the quote once attributed to the former coach of the Dallas Cowboys, Barry Switzer: "Some people are born on third base and go through life thinking they hit a triple." That perfectly sums it up.
9
Republican President Eisenhower wrote in a 1954 letter to his more conservative brother:
“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.
There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”
That was the supreme commander of Allied forces in WW2 Europe.
The negligible and the stupid have grown to become the dominant party in America, at times dominating our 3 branches of govt. And crucially, setting norms for politics in accordance with right wing extremism, and wealthy mega donors. They have spread a virus through the the land, affecting voter opinion and the party opposite.
We're now seeing the faint hints of a backlash and assertion of American values of democracy. Can our media accurately explain our past, present and future? Contrast is the key.
8
@Meredith You have nailed it.
2
Since the time of Ronald Reagan, the lives of far more Americans have become desperate, a situation that has also divided us as a country.
Republican administrations since then have been funneling more and more to the richest people.
It is their message that more tax cuts for the rich can solve all problems.
They don’t care about the country.
They don’t care about the people.
They are getting rich, and they are willing to destroy the country to get there.
6
A bit off the track,, but I find it curious that conservatives are so offended by the "idle poor " but champion the "idle rich ".
Shouldn't we have laws to make the idle rich work?
Remember the Jamestown colony, where Smith had to require the rich noble mean... "No work no eat"( more or less as I remember the lesson).
5
I know a woman who blindly supports Trump and the far right and yet gets her healthcare from the ACA. She is trying to get on disability so she can have better healthcare and early Social Security. I can't convince her that this is a progressive platform and the conservatives want to take it away from her. How do you have a conversation with ardent Trump supporters? I'm clueless.
9
Realize that she’s getting old, she’s alone, and she’s terrified.
3
This impetuous belief that money is finite is at the root of the problem because we still think in terms of being on the gold standard used by both Republicans and Democrats in the belief that balancing the budget will bring prosperity limits us in how we can fix our problems in the future. I believe we should have full employment programs where the government funds jobs for anyone who wants to work just like we did back in the New Deal era. The private sector has proven it can't so we must do it with government spending. If the FED can waste $32 trillion bailing out the corporations and banks there is money to put America back to work. All that money has done nothing but raise asset values.
1
@Dan
And, really, what are "asset values"??? Mostly, just a few extra zeroes in ink on the end of a computer spreadsheet.
While Mr. Krugman addresses the obvious hypocrisy and disingenuousness of Ms. Trump-Kushner, some of his brethren in the media seem to struggle mightily with what "self-made" means. Witness the backlash over Forbes calling Kylie Jenner self-made, a declaration more fitting for The Onion. https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/12/entertainment/kylie-jenner-forbes-cover/index.html
A few years ago, I happened to pick up a copy of the Harvard Business Review. It was really shocking to see how strongly elitism and snobbery were evident in that publication, and how grossly out of touch it was with ordinary folks with ordinary incomes.
So it's not just little Ivanka that needs a few lessons in simple sociology or even basic economics.
4
Krugman's column is a breath of fresh air. Reinforcing it are these quotes in the Times by economists Piketty and Saez, in 2012 on tax proposals: “For Two Economists, the Buffett Rule Is Just a Start”.
Piketty--- “The United States is getting accustomed to a completely crazy level of inequality, People say that reducing inequality is radical. I think that tolerating the level of inequality the U.S. tolerates is radical.”
They say “ history is on their side: Many countries have higher tax rates — and the U.S. has had higher tax rates — without stifling growth or encouraging the concentration of income in the hands of the very rich.”
“In a way, the United States is becoming like Old Europe, which is very strange in historical perspective,” Mr. Piketty said.
“The U.S. used to be very egalitarian, not just in spirit but in actuality. Inequality of wealth and income used to be much larger in France. And very high taxes on the very rich — that was invented in the United States,” he said.”
Some new Democrats are just starting to finally grapple with this---and thus pushing the NYT to grapple with it. 2020 will be one of our most crucial elections.
5
I see a lot of commenters demanding "leave Ivanka out of this."
Ivanka is a civil servant. She owes her position to nepotism, but she is still bound by ethics and security rules that apply to ANY presidential advisor. What's that? You say she's not collecting a paycheck (because she's remunerating herself through the advantages of public office, such as the Chinese gift of instant trademark protection for her gray-market products and services)? That's irrelevant ("squirrel!") -- security and ethics rules don't hinge on salary.
More importantly, as an advisor to the president, her every statement *deserves* scrutiny, especially when she's putting them out there on a talking circuit.
So, sorry -- but Ivanka and her co-weasel Jared should be subject to much greater scrutiny than they have been thus far (particularly over certain real estate dealings).
8
Spot on, the American Dream is being lived nowhere on the scale it is being lived in the Scandinavian Welfare States. An aside: Why did the picture of IT make me think of Mitch McConnel?
4
I am a bit confused - where does this title come from? What "self made woman"? Is he referring to Ivanka or someone else?
As an immigrant to this country, my personal experience is this is indeed a land of opportunities and upward mobility - although I realize that may not be the experience of others. I came to the US as an international student, and was fortunate that my family was able to cover my undergrad tuition. But that's all - we had no relatives in the US, no place to go home for the holidays, no family connections or networks, no childhood friends or relatives, and no other financial assets in the US. Everything had to be developed from scartch - which is the same experience many immigrants have. I worked jobs throughout my college years to have my own savings, and have been financially independent since undergrad. Today I have a great job, an ivy league mba, several real estate investment properties, investments in tech startups, and so on - a far cry from my starting point in this country from 25 years ago. To me, that is upward mobility - it was a lot of work, but I am very grateful that it was even possible.
6
@Ash Your family could afford to pay for your college. You are about as far from "starting out poor" as can be. Horrible example.
3
All I can think of here is "let them eat cake". Time for a revolution, I say.
4
What happens to inequality when you break it down by race?
Socialism involves government ownership of the means of production. A social safety net is welfare not socialism. This distinction has been lost in the discussion, it is time to bring it back.
9
once, we had government at least overseeing the means of production. then we had massive deregulation. even though there are still regulations (usually called onerous or burdensome), today we basically have large businesses overseeing and controlling government.
i have already commented once but find the conversation so topical and at the heart of what will define the 2020 election i had to comment again. why are conservatives concerned about democratic socialism. Well lets look at Sweden as an example. No Doubt a high tax and spend government with a rich safety net. Some would say "See, high taxes, strong safety net more business development." There was an article in the Atlantic Magazine 9/2017 that explained all of this. kudos to Sweden. However, they also lowered corporate taxes, regulation, and created specific incentives to start small business. Both financial and political. while a strong safety net might enhance or encourage business development it is certainly not the only reason. All citizens in Sweden pay high taxes, both rich and poor. Now they do get healthcare for that. politicians here want to increase regulation (Think Elizabeth Warren...never met a regulation she didn't like, tax the rich excessively ...both her and AOC) why do democrats want to tax the rich ? they have the money and want money for excessive government spending programs. that is not what Swedes are doing but that is what the democrats want to do. I wil conclude with this as far as upward mobility, as cliche as it is your attitude will determine altitude. If don't think you can make it in America you know what; you are absolutely right. I hate to say it, most responses here seemed to be penned by pure cynics versus true believers and that is sad.
1
More important than criticizing the GOP are specific reminders, in real people terms, of what America once was. We once led the world, now we lag. How and why did it work? This will contradict today's GOP more than anything else.
Interview and quote the grandparents of today's youth for concrete evidence, on secure jobs, rising pay/benefits, higher education, home ownership, retirement. Use this contrast of a more successful and rising middle/working class to counter GOP propaganda today.
The evidence is there for the Democrats to use. We once had the strongest middle and working class, with govt effectively supporting this with regulations, taxes, subsidies to college education, unions and apprenticeships, and huge infrastructure programs.
See book, 'The Gifted Generation: When Government Was Good', by David Goldfield that describes our better past that's now ignored in our media.
Nobody could imagine a Trump competing in politics with FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy. Hey, NYT, how about an article on that?
9
Ms. Trump's comment about people wanting to work for what they get is something of a non sequitur as it relates to the comment that there should be guaranteed jobs, no?
Whether you go out and find a job yourself, or you go to a government listing and get a job, you are still working, no?
And if you make yourself a valuable employee of a government job, you are likely to be rewarded with a promotion and a raise, and perhaps your good employee status will help you get a job in the private sector -- i.e., there is no fundamental reason to assume a government job will not lead to social mobility.
So, Ivanka's comment seems to indicate she believes somebody was proposing a cash gift, instead of a job.
Given Ivanka's obvious comprehension and analytical deficits, can somebody please tell me why she has a government job?
3
Using Ivanka Trump (!) as your standard for privilege makes almost EVERYONE golden. Using HER guarantees that ZERO serious, economic reforms will occur... despite a lot of feel-good rhetoric. As long as news consumers keep reading and feeling good about themselves....
1
There is a glaring ommission: the role of race and ethnicity.
The median income of blacks and Hispanics who finished college declined between 1992 and 2013, while for whites and Asians, median income grew by double-digit percentages, respectively, according to a CNN report.
Pundits often point to discontent among poor whites as a key factor in Trump's election.
Well, Latino discontent is a permanent fixture in America. I am not referring to only immigrants, but many of us who are third and fourth generation American citizens.
Even after we get all the requisite tickets punched--good grades, a college degree, model behavior, military service--we still find ourselves falling behind.
Some might say, well you gotta work harder, or things are better than before.
In truth, we are renown for our hard work and perseverance.
For us, American capitalism is a long way from a panacea.
I feel secure in saying that Latinos simply want something approaching a level playing field.
2
@Ricardo Chavira
The stats for whites are skewed by the fact that elites and upper class members are dominated by (nearly exclusively) white, non-Hispanic people (*). Due to their connections they will tend to do well, particularly since they find work in lucrative sectors.
Once you control for family wealth and also for major, then you'll have a meaningful set of statistics. But the gross aggregates you present are only helpful from the perspective of a pre-existing conclusion.
* Within "white" there are numerous ways one can segment, including on ethnicity and religion.
3
Congrats to Krugman for writing on our lower ranking in socio economic mobility per the GINI Index and OECD, than many countries that are also capitalist democracies.
We need media to cover this huge issue in real-people terms for voters. If informed with positive role models, voters could put more pressure on politicans and start to compete with big money donors for influence.
The Times must start talking about the campaign finance reform, that most voters and many politicians want. It's related to all our dire political problems, yet avoided on the media
Other nations use more public funding, limit private donations, and ban the paid political ads that swamp Americans.
In a supremely bad decision, our Supreme Court legalized big money subsidized politics. Our middle and working class lack the means to influence govt for their interests---- a contradiction of our professed ideal of opportunity for all, not the elite few.
When the American colonies overthrew rule by the British king and aristocracy they demanded Representation for our Taxation. We the People eventualy got it in mid 20th C, with state college subsidized by taxes, powerful unions as a counterweight to big business, apprenticeship job training, high marginal tax rates for the rich, and jobs staying here, not offshored. Our M. Class was strong. What was once centrist, is now labeled 'left wing'.
Representation for our Taxation! Should be the main platform of the Democrats for 2020.
2
She IS extraordinary alright... but even giraffe have just seven cervical vertebrae.
3
Ivanka Trump defended herself by saying, 'I do not however believe in a minimum guarantee for people “unwilling to work” which was the question asked of me.' Needless to say, that was not the question asked of her, which was about the Green Deal's guarantee of a job. Hey, Ivanka, a JOB entails WORK. But she knows that. I guess the acorn doesn't fall far from the tree. Giving a straight answer isn't in her genes.
5
A class system is based on ownership of wealth, especially of property.
3
I live in Canada where my father was tradesman and my mother a part time bookkeeper. I rose to a general management position in a major chemical company. I graduated university with a few hundred dollars in debt and the university was 800 miles from where I grew up. We have never had to worry about any medical expenses, crime is very low likely because there are alternatives for people who need financial help and the minimum wage is $14 everywhere in Ontario. And we don't have religious wing nuts trying to pass laws to interfere with access to medical services when required. I pay more tax than I would have in the US however the freedom from worry is worth it. The people through work who lived in the US are not as well off as my family because of issues like insurance and health care costs. All three of my children have university education and all were debt free within a few years of graduation. A good friend of mine had a child diagnosed with diabetes at age 3, ten insulin amounts to a few hundred dollars per year.
To all the people who complain about taxes I shake my head, I live in a very civilized country, with good low cost education, low crime, and no worries about health care, the infrastructure of highways, public transit, water electricity is excellent, although transit is very crowded at rush hour.
So upward mobility is very available in Canada as stated by Dr. Krugman.
7
So glad Ivanka is helping Dad run the country. Nothing like earning your way to one of the highest positions in government.
2
Normally I'm not in favor of shooting fish in a barrel, but Ivanka did set herself up for this article. Thanks for following through.
5
Could American media ever compare how citizens abroad vs in US, at various income levels, pay for and use their HC?
Contrast---From True Cost Blog. Dates when countries started universal health care—partial list, with varied systems.
UK 1948 Single Payer
Switzerland 1994 Insurance Mandate
Japan 1938 Single Payer
Sweden 1955 Single Payer
Netherlands 1966 Two-Tier
Australia 1975 Two Tier
Netherlands 1966 Two-Tier
Germany 1941 Insurance Mandate
France 1974 Two-Tier
Norway 1912 Single Payer
Sweden 1955 Single Payer
Austria 1967 Insurance Mandate
Italy 1978 Single Payer
With insurance mandates, govts abroad regulate premium costs. That’s off the table here. How the modern world pays for HC has been labeled so 'left wing' our media stays safely away. Never mentioned on TV cable news. Taboo?
The pharma ads that daily inundate US TV aren't allowed in EU, where drugs are a matter between doctor/patient, not marketed like any consumer product for profit. Do Americans know this? Not if the media keeps it dark. Taboo?
Here, medical profits are funneled into donations to politicians. Both our health care and our elections are the world’s most expensive and profitable---- for the mega donor investors. It’s an obvious vicious cycle. The media avoids it. Taboo?
5
Hear! Hear!
There is no doubt that a child of even the poorest of the poor today can do better than their parent(s) if they take advantage of the support and opportunities Democrats of the past created for them. What is doubtful is that the children of the lower and middle ranks of the middle class can do better than their parents. These are the ones whose parents get no support raising them because they earn a dollar too much, with both parents working, whose wages are stagnant while the cost of everything goes up and up. who must sacrifice their own retirement security to send their kids to college for better-paying jobs and those kids still leave college with debt that holds them back for years. In short, when you're at the very bottom, you get help climbing up few rungs. When you're a few rungs higher on the economic ladder, you're on your own, sink or swim, in a stormy sea. I support the progressive agenda to help the working class swim.
2
My father was an illegal immigrant to the US, and I became a law professor. That says something about upward mobility 50 years ago. Something has changed but not sure what.
6
Speaking as a former long-time Republican, I have to laugh when the Rs call Medicare-For-All "socialized medicine." It is, in fact, socialized health insurance, and a way to rid us of parasitic private health insurers that add so much cost, in so many ways, to the cost of health care.
MFA is a fiscally conservative concept that, if properly implemented and managed, could save billions upon billions of dollars annually in net overall health care costs, and provide health insurance for all American citizens.
Why do the Rs howl to high heaven about MFA? Because health insurance and pharmaceutical companies who line their pockets with campaign contributions and PAC money coerce them into doing so.
To be sure, the Ds are also guilty of this, but to a far lesser degree. In any case there are a growing number of them who are willing to forego these bribes.
10
Post after post by right-wingers screaming that socialism will ruin the nation. America elected as president someone who these right-wingers would say was socialist, and elected him to that office FOUR TIMES. The GOP's response to FDR's Social Security plan was "no socialism for the U.S.". Same with their reaction to Medicare in the 1960's.
See, facts don't matter to the right wing in America. Krugman can post study after study and fact after fact, and they will continue with their minds utterly closed to the fact that the last Republican president who actually helped Americans was Nixon (EPA).
6
The Times, as an international paper, must inform US voters on:
1.How other democracies solve issues that polarize the US---funding HC, college, job training, election campaigns.
2. Use of independent commissions, not parties, to draw voting districts.
3. Other nations ban paid campaign ads & pharma ads on media. We're swamped by both. Why?
Our media must explain how the US lags other capitalist democracies on GINI Index & OECD rankings of economic mobility.
We need comparisons to:
1. The US in better past generations of middle class expansion, fair taxes, and govt regulations of business.
2. Compare states on better or worse policies---do Americans have ‘equal protection’ despite location?
This would fulfill the media’s function to inform voters on issues affecting their lives. Cable TV news hardly covers this.
Positive working role models, past and present, would arm the public against the constant political marketing that benefits private financial interests.
Send NYT reporters over the border and ask Canadians on the street how they pay for and use their HC for all, started in the 1960s. Report why Canada avoided our '08 crash by keeping bank regulations and not merging with US banks.
US media is protected from censorship by our 1st Amendment but is pressured by political norms that keep coverage within narrow limits.
Polls show voters want campaign finance reform—where are NYT op eds?
All the news fit to print?
3
Boom. Is any Republican listening?
6
"they have what Republicans denounce as “socialism” (it really isn’t, but never mind)". Please, please, please do not let the socialism scare become a rallying cry for the right. Social democracy and socialism have little to do with each other. Unfortunately, it's branded socialism when you try and correct for the problems brought on by pure capitalism (e.g. healthcare as a right, regulations on anything...) but maintaining capitalism when you support US coal and steel industries.
3
To be fair I don't think Paul Krugman admires foreign countries BECAUSE they are extremely intolerant of poor undocumented immigrants, compared to the USA.
But the fact is the foreign countries that Paul admires are ultra intolerant of poor unskilled undocumented immigrants, compared to the USA.
That is just an inconvenient fact that Paul systematically ignores in his analysis.
America is still the great land of opportunity for millions of people that the foreign countries Paul admires would not even let exist within their borders.
How do compare a country such as the USA with relatively open borders to the poor, with other countries which are ultra intolerant of poor undocumented immigrants?????
Paul's comparative analysis of countries is entirely bogus unless he takes into account the much greater tolerance of America for the millions of low income people who are not hear legally.
America still stands as the great fabulous land of opportunity to the world.
3
@David America is still the land of opportunity? Krugman proved that to be false. And you just parrot the same old right-wing talking points.
2
@KellyCox
DearKelly,
the USA is still, now more than ever, the VERY FIRST choice of those who would immigrate from foreign countries. We are and have always been a nation of immigrants, now more than ever.
Why? because America is still very much the land of freedom and opportunity.
After 20 years in Canada, my grown children and I returned to America and we love it here.
with all due respect to Canada.
1
I don't know why so many people care or are concerned about other people's wealth. Who cares what other people have or if their parents had money. Just go out and do the best you can for yourself and mind your own business.
3
Recently, some prominent progressive Democrats have gone from the vague advocacy of "making the very rich pay their fair share" to specific proposals to shifting the tax burden back on to the rich. Senator and announced presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is proposing an annual “wealth tax” on Americans with more than $50 million in assets. The tax would be 2% on the amount in excess of $50 million and 3% on amounts above $1 billion. Celebrity member of Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), is calling for a 70% top marginal tax rate on incomes above $10 million.
One of the main arguments against these proposals to tax the extremely rich, even among those who agree that wealth inequality is a serious problem, is that the very rich can evade tax authorities. The advocates of taxing the very rich might now reply to that by saying that "enough giant fines and penalties, such as those imposed by the French could make such evasion much less feasible." This possibly, could spur a wave of prosecutions against financial institutions.
Aside from any macroeconomic impact of enacting significant taxes on the very wealthy, one must at least consider the possibility, that in an attempt to punish banks for aiding tax evasion by the wealthy, populists might precipitate a Lehman like event. While $5.1 billion is only 10% of the capital of UBS, ten such penalties could wipe out UBS. Other banks could be even more vulnerable..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4243751
The argument that there should not be a law about something, because then only criminals would ignore the law, applies to every criminal law ever enacted. Pass the tax law, or the gun law, then enforce it. It's as simple as that.
4
I know you don't mean big, international banks are too crooked and complicit to fail, or that trying to reduce the looming wealth gap is just too dangerous for the overall economy. so, without resorting to calculus, can you explain what you do mean?
A critical factor missing from this conversation is religiosity. Among evangelicals in particular, there is a strong belief that god offers material rewards to the most virtuous and faithful. The poor, therefore, by definition must be morally inferior.
Nordic countries aren’t burdened by this dogmatic nonsense.
10
Ben Franklin stated a long long time ago that when the American electorate had become corrupted that the nation would die. That is what we are seeing now. 40% of its population for whatever reason; fear, hatred, racism, greed, and ignorance, have infected a country with dysfunctional democratic systems and the result is a mentally ill, authoritarian clown such as Trump being taken seriously. How and why did this happen? What is it in American culture that makes it so extreme?
5
@Barry Lane
Didn't Quebec come within a hair of succession not long ago? What's up with THAT? Cultural pride of those with French heritage? Were they resisting influences that would subsume their culture?
1
@tew
What about THAT? The best-educated people in the province were almost all separatist. Only the English and allophone elements, along with some of the business classes were against it. It was a move not only for cultural pride but also a progressive one to create a more modern and equal future for our people. Your analogy with the Trumpists is interesting in terms of cultural preservation, but I don't think it fits with that of Quebec. Trumpists are neither progressive or in the main run well educated. You will have to convince me!
1
Drum roll, french horns...."The United States of America", brought to you by...(insert list of major donors and sponsors). Climate change is important. Wealth inequity is important. But holding up any solution to these major threats is the big problem of corruption and the terrible truth that our democracy has been busy turning into an oligarchy since the death of FDR.
3
Does Ivanka recommend that people be schooled in tax evasion, insurance fraud and money laundering following her families example as ways to make money and rise in the social world of the swamp that she inhabits?
Ivanka will forever be known as the daughter of Don the Con and very well might have to change from her designer duds to an orange jumpsuit.
Ms. Trump fancies herself an expert on upward mobility. She might do best to prepare herself for her future downward mobility. The SDNY will thoroughly investigate Trump Inc. in which she has been an active participant and her next domicile could be one with a wall around it and bars on the windows.
5
The evil genius of propaganda once again on display. "American Exceptionalism". Americans believe they are something they are not. With very few exceptions:
They believe they can break out of poverty and work their way to the top. They can't.
They believe the wealthy deserve or have earned their wealth. They haven't.
The believe if America does it, no matter how horrible, it is for the right reasons (democracy, freedom, other trade marked words). It isn't.
They believe they, and they alone, have real "freedom". They don't.
And worst of all, Americans who are not part of the top 10% of incomes, blame themselves for their own poverty.
7
Ivanka Trump is basically the Gwyneth Paltrow of politics. She sells nonsense as fact, and is so far away from knowing the lives of average Americans as to say (as she did in her silly book) that women can live like her if only they would simply get organized and use their "team" (nannies, cooks, housekeepers, personal shoppers etc) to create the "lifestyle" they deserve.
That the media even prints Ivanka's drivel shows how badly people still want to imagine that Ivanka is smarter than the average hamster. But since she's rich, she must also be smart, right?
6
Twenty-twenty cannot come fast enough so that we can put ALL the Trump's in the rearview.
4
We are a land wallowing in mythology which Krugman so brilliantly highlights. All my life (and I’m pushing 80), we have assiduously preached to the middle-class that it is the poor and the welfare queens who have their hands in our pockets when in fact, we are fleeced by those above us. One of my favorite NYer cartoons from years back shows a man (employer) with his arm around a younger assumed new employee. They are on a palatial estate gazing out upon stables, tennis courts and immaculate lawns and sculpted hedges. The employer says to the new employer: “I promise you Jack, if you work really hard for the next five years, all of this will be MINE.” Multiply that by millions of Jacks and Jackie’s and you get the reality vs. the myth of America. If we hadn’t been brainwashed into conflating government welfare policy with socialism and then further conflating socialism with communism, we might come closer to the mobility we brag about but don’t have.
6
When I read the title, I assumed he was referring to AOC. There’s a real boot strapper- although not arrogant enough to call herself self-made. What a pretense...
1
The fear of "socialism" has several sources. Our poor education system confuses socialism and communism. Ask a recent high school graduate and he or she will be unable to tell you the difference. But according to a doctor--a specialist--I once saw, who took the time to explain, the fear of socialism was the fear of socialized medicine and this fear was created, intentionally, by the AMA out of concern that under socialized medicine the government would tell doctors how to practice medicine. The irony, said this good doctor, "...is that now the insurance companies are telling us how to practice medicine and the time has passed when we could, more easily, have put socialized medicine in place."
5
The USA is like a domestic abuse victim that has normalized the pathologies of their life: poverty is a fact of life and it's the person's fault; healthcare isn't a right, nor a living wage, etc.
Anything else is socialism or the "churches should be doing charity."
7
Dr Krugman understates the Tea Party platform. The true believers I hear want to eliminate all New Deal and Great Society programs. Not scaled back but gone daddy gone would be Social Security and Medicare, not to mention public schools. Reagan predicted Medicare would destroy America .....but he didn't say when. They always have an out.
1
"They want to work for what they can get..." says the woman who has had people in her sweatshop in China arrested for stating a legitimate grievance against working there piecemeal, filling an unrealistic quota before he or she can be paid a subhuman daily wage - often working for that wage until the a.m. hours of the next day.
Ivanka and her father's sweatshops of today ae the closest thing to what slavery was in the 1800s.
I couldn't care less what they think of their demonization of a term that is actually for better wages and working conditions and a united front for healthcare reform.
Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, and the electoral college is a sham, just like the Trumps, who have no dignity. They are filth-driven sellers - who themselves are a bargain basement special, on sale to the highest bidder.
No amount of plastic surgery is going to beautify that ugly person, her father, or her brothers.
They're obscene.
5
Now the problem is to get the 35% to understand facts.
3
in what democracy can you win a national election with support from only 35% of voters and a vote total about 3 million less than the loser? math majors: please explain. show your work and your proofs and then justify why this isn't still about preventing the abolition of slavery.
1
Since we know that the goal of the entire Trump family is to destroy America in order to make Russia more powerful, we know that anything Ivanka says is designed to hurt our country and help a hostile foreign nation.
3
Talk about a blast from the past. When the Republican Party actually stood for freedom (on the eve of the Civil War in 1858) Republican senator and later secretary of state William H. Seward put it this way in his “irrepressible conflict” speech:
"Did any propertied class ever reform itself? Did the patricians in old Rome, the noblesse or clergy in France? The landholders in Ireland? The landed aristocracy in England? Does the slaveholding class even seek to beguile you with such a hope? Has it not become more rapacious, arrogant, defiant?"
That's precisely the difference expressed in the conflict between AOC and the First Daughter. It's the difference between those who work for a living and those live upon the wealth created by those who work for a living.
3
Another good article that will never be read by the people who need to read it. I'm curious how The Times tries to reach the Fox crowd, cause speaking in the echo chamber is not converting anyone. Maybe they should start a billboard campaign in Red states with alarming statistics and truths from Krugman's articles, cause the data is usually quite a wakeup call.
3
Krugman nails it again. So sorry that he has to repeat the obvious.
1
Inasmuch as “the American Dream” ever represented an equality of opportunity, it’s obvious that, if not for its syntactical inelegance, we’d be calling it “the American Hallucination” now.
1
Ivanka’s attitude just reinforces the fact she is an ignorant woman. She believes her own press, that she is highly successful because she is talented
This is what happens to most entitled people. They forget that they were born wealthy. And advantaged. Or maybe they don’t forget because that is all they know.
She will never change her attitude because she has never been exposed to another life. And obviously she only reads the fashion section of the newspapers and magazines.
Poor little rich girl. Never did a days work for minimum wage in her life. She is not someone to emulate. She is what is wrong with this country. Greed and materialism.
4
The overwhelming hypocrisy of this lady is calling us 'socialists' for wanting the same universal health care and liberal abortion rights that Israel has.
Trump Family deceit includes nobody who "pulls themselves up by their own bootstraps and independence." Trumps insult Americans who want the same rights our ally Israel, Canada, Australia and Europe have.
4
Born on home plate, believing she hit a home run.
5
Maybe Ivanka speaks in Trumpian code? Every so often she seems compelled to utter some tone deaf trope. Maybe it signals she’s still onboard the Trump train instead of aligning herself with #MeToo. Something along those lines would explain the Faustian bargain.
1
Nice move to the hoop and dunk by Dr. K!
2
To quote George Carlin: It's called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.
4
Piketty “Capital” described the myth of American’s belief of “American Exceptionalism” in their “Social Mobility” which in reality is less than Europe or Canada. Statement on Visit to the USA, by Professor Philip Alston, United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights stated “The proposed (Trump/Republican) tax reform package stakes out America’s bid to become the most unequal society in the world, and will greatly increase the already high levels of wealth and income inequality between the richest 1% and the poorest 50% of Americans.--Americans can expect to live shorter and sicker lives, compared to people living in any other rich democracy, and the “health gap” between the U.S. and its peer countries continues to grow.--In the OECD the US ranks 35th out of 37 in terms of poverty and inequality.” Republicans from Reagan to Trump have created a criminal and corrupt Corporate State, a plutocracy masquerading as a democracy with a politically created gross inequality of social/economic opportunity, a downward spiral of decline of societal cynicism, demoralization and loss of communitarian identity. Plutarch (46 – 120 C.E.) stated: “The imbalance between the wealthy and those in poverty and despair is the most fatal disorder of any republic leading to its collapse!”
Someone needs to tell Krugman that 'income inequality' is a
natural consequence of our capitalist system. It's not 'supposed' to be equal, nor should anyone reading this column expect it to be so. I have what I've earned and hold no animosity to those wealthier than I, irrespective of how that wealth was accumulated, presumably legally of course.
As Krugman admits at the start of his piece, trashing Trump has become somewhat tiresome so he chooses to go after his daughter instead. In my opinion, #Pathetic.
4
@Steven Robinson It's the degree to which there is income and wealth inequality that is the concern, not the fact that it exists. Such inequality exists also in the Scandinavian countries that are referenced and which is a result of capitalism. And it's not a matter of animosity or jealousy, but of economics and improving the chances for everybody to have opportunity. It's hard to focus on starting a new business when you don't have enough to eat and you're battling illness or disease because you have no regular access to medical care.
4
@Steven Robinson
I agree Steven. The people commenting here have their nose in other people's business when they should be paying attention to their own lives.
@Steven Robinson
Right you are. But our capitalist system is not written in stone somewhere. Adam Smith based it on Malthus, Locke and the misguided views of Darwin, who saw evolution by natural selection driven ONLY by competition, and not cooperation (which frequency-independent selection responds to). Contrary to popular opinion, capitalism is not Natural Law.
1
Ivanka should get out of her fathers safety network move to a poor neighbourhood and start from scratch and see where she ends up in 5 years.
7
I don't think Ms $rump should be given any more free publicity unless its to investigate HER taxes.
3
Personally, I am not a big fan of Mitch McConnell. If I had my way, he'd be out of office.
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episode-430-snc-lavalin-in-court-revisionist-oscars-elliott-abrams-google-built-cities-rupaul-and-more-1.5027926/when-google-comes-to-town-louisville-s-word-of-caution-for-toronto-1.5027966
Ah yes, her "let them eat cake" moment.
3
What came out of Ivanka’s mouth is nothing more than propaganda. She had no other goal than to assist Republicans in their attempt to convince poor people that the jobs they have that give them criminally low wages are the great “American Dream” they have always been striving for.
4
'Paul Krugman did explanatory journalism before it was cool, moving from a career as a world-class economist". being a world class economist is about as valueless as being a world-class astrologer".
What Ivanka Trump doesn't know about needing to work for a living wage ended with her unearned and undeserved winning of the socioeconomic genetic lottery. No one ever worked harder and longer for less return than enslaved and separate and unequal black African Americans. America rests on their socialist labor.
See " The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery And The Making Of American Capitalism" Edward Baptist
5
Puts the lie to all the screeching and caterwauling of the far right about socialism!
2
"The rich are different from you and me. . ."
F. Scott Fitzgerald
"Yes, they have more money."
Ernest Hemingway
4
Yes to AOC Leadership-Fresh, Relevant, Listens, Present
No to Feinstein -- Entitled, Closed, Stale, Past Tense
Feinstein appalling in her arrogant attitude toward school children--Time Is Up! to all like her in Congress
1
TShere is one area in which the Unite States really stands very fare above the res of the world, and that is self-delusion.
1
Paul Krugman, your sheepish support of Hillary Clinton will never be forgotten. Not only was is politically dumb (your are one of the establishment Democrats who brought Trump to power) you also bet on someone who would have continued Obama’s economics - the same economics that you’ve criticized. Given your general intellectual abilities, I bet you did it because you were hoping for personal power. Please clear the stage for honest people.
3
Ivanka is just another spoiled brat, so far removed from knowing what the "ordinary people" want she should keep quiet and confine herself to planning what she will do when her husband and father end up in jail.
4
You start this column by sarcastically stating it would be “remarkable for any Republican” to say that they want to earn what they get and have opportunity for upward mobility. Why would that be so remarkable? Sounds like orthodox Republican ideology. Also sounds like the beliefs of those millions of Trump voters in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania who helped decide the 2016 election.
Mr. Krugman, you really ought to try to get out from behind your desk at the Old Gray Lady and talk to people.
1
those rustbelt voters that gave Trump an EC advantage numbered not in the millions, but in the tens of thousands, notwithstanding the various well-known election
" irregularities".
1
A small thing that this piece brings to mind is that we have come to a place where a Nobel laureate feels it necessary to comment in the NYT on what Ivanka Trump thinks. Dare I say "yikes"?
2
You should work for what you get, not inherit it.
2
While Mr. Krugman has a right to his opinion; aiming it towards Ms. Trump was pathetic. I wonder what Ms. Robin Krugman believes about social mobility. It's really none of our business....and we really don't care.
2
If Ivanka really thinks she is a power for good, then she doesn’t even need to go outside to get started. Just head down the hall and confront your father. Otherwise, please just go away with your advice and pathetic opinions. It is a travesty that you and Jared have any role in influencing this country’s destiny.
2
Ivanka Trump is nothing more than a self-made criminal. Complicit in every aspect of “Trump World”. Bring Ivanka to testify before Congress!
4
"Born on 3rd base and thinks she hit a triple"! She should be locked up for arrogance and stupidity; in addition, to her Trump Empire related crimes. Excellent reason to reinstate the Estate taxes.
4
Ivanka Trump is a Marilyn Monroe whisperer and lies just as easily as her father who has trained her well. Ivanka understands little about the real world since she, like her father, has never had to actually produce anything but think they are self made. She is clueless and hasn't bothered to learn anything along the way which is obvious from her book.
5
Excellent piece, Dr. K. You are the master distiller of issues to their essence.
Now, how do we educate the ignorant who still have the right to vote?
Good points Mr. Krugman. Why do we even care what Javanka thinks about anything. She is zero effective at everything she does unless her Daddy helps her. Period! They are greedy little people and we The People need to send them back to the gilded rock they crawled out from under.
3
Mr. Krugman,
You hi-light the “progressive left,” and their policies such as universal healthcare, free public college, and other basic services as methods to increase social mobility - rightfully so. But where the heck were you in 2015 and 2016 when Bernie was proposing these exact policies? Oh yeah, you were denouncing them as “pie in the sky,” shame on you for not admitting your past faults in this article.
1
Dr. Krugman, we don't need a lecture from a princesswho bites her tongue so she doesn't say out loud "Let them eat cake. " Lucky for them that that we have the option of waiting for the next election rather than following Robespierre.
Once again the good professor glides effortlessly past the phrase "quality child care."
There are bombs waiting to explode in those three anodyne (to the tenured mind) words.
Let us restate it thusly: children are a problem to be managed by the indifferent slab of the government in the interests of shielding careerists (and their business bosses) from the rigors of actually taking care of their kids.
"Stay-at-home" is now a three-word sneer; there is not a hint that the good professor might be interested in policies that would ease the burden, at least economically, for men and women who wish to keep their kiddies at home. None. Nada.
Instead, like a mantra, we get three little words that will lead
to the warehousing of coming generations in a system of over-regulated communal childhood--it will be quite the social experiment. There will be many, many "studies." They will "prove"...something. They will universally miss the point that, as the old saying goes, the nail that sticks up will be pounded down.
We are already seeing the results of the first wave of communal "child care." The progeny of two-"career" families are now popping up on campus, eager to be protected from any and all stressors, triggers, any disturbances of their various utopian, 19-year-old beliefs; their rush to surrender their individual identities to the tender mercies of the group, the tribe, the oppressed...
Welcome to the brave new world.
Mr. Krugman's assumptions do not explain what "average" parents are. If we measure the success of one generation based on measures of success of the current generation we fail to identify those who are likely to be successful in succeeding generations. Smart people are not always "successful"; poor people are not always least intelligent. intelligence measures change minute by minute & new challenges emerge with survival of the fittest as the basis of success. Against a number of odds, as a woman in science, with her share of glass ceiling issues, & as an educator at every level I ended up higher on the "success" ladder than my parents' history predicted. I attribute that to the fact that their mantra for me was that I could & should do anything I set my mind to. I learned: that being smart was not the only thing that was important; respect for others & self-confidence were more important than being clever & arrogant; that no matter what they would always love me to pieces. That & not just a few & often serendipitous interactions & associations with other highly successful & in fact world-class scientists & educators gave me the means to reach the level of satisfaction with & enjoyment of life that I now revel in. They smoothed the path ahead at the right moments in my life journey with choices that were always mine to make. I sense such opportunities collapsing around us & I cry bitter tears over the extremes that are impacting our people, our country & our planet.
1
Thanks to her day nanny, night nanny, housekeepers, chefs, chauffeurs, personal assistants, stylists & make-up artists, and general go-fers; Ivanka has lots of free time to fantasize about what regular folks want.
Silly Ivanka should have taken the silver spoon out of her mouth before trying to say she knows what working Americans want and need.
6
It is always hilarious for a person with inherited weath
and trust funds to lecture other s on "self reliance"
yadda yadda yadda
Ivanka has enough inherited wealth to buy a clue.
NAH
5
As far as Ms. Trump goes, I guess it’s tough being born with a silver foot; sorry I mean silver spoon in your mouth.
2
Every time she opens her mouth she just proves Samantha Bee's description of her correct time and again.
2
"Let them eat cake"
1
Donald Trump invented John Barron, master publicist whose voice so apes Trump's that you'd think ... naah. John Barron was a free agent, a man who told it like it was, at least inside a certain person's mind.
Citizens United did not invent the hologram that is the GOP Congress, but it upgraded that hologram to HD. Remember that the Republican Party is made up of two groups: The principled Centrists who identify the party as Dr. Jekyll gone just slightly wrong, while Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, and their brethren roam the corridors of Congress looking an awful lot like Mr. Hyde.
Finding such malleable stooges is one thing; making sure that they're financially secure is another. Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan have done remarkably well on a civil servant's pay. I conjure Walter Brennan as Grandpappy Amos sitting in his rocker on the porch, slapping his leg, chortling and saying, "Campaign contributions! Why you are dumber than the day you were born."
That part's easy. Here's the dilemma: How does one convince those who will be hurt by GOP policies to vote GOP? We all know the answer, but saying it out loud is considered demeaning to all the little people who work so hard to stay little by rejecting fact for religious fantasy, by rejecting gun statistics to argue for license over freedom, by arguing, as former Maine Governor Paul LePage did this week, that doing away with the Electoral College wouldn't be fair to white people because their votes wouldn't matter so much.
Oy.
4
Ivanka may trade off the Trump name but was smart enough to surgically alter the moon-faced genes inherited from Daddy.
1
How can you suggest that America is not the land of opportunity? I think you have lost your marbles to suggest there is less opportunity here than in the rest of the world. This is the epitome of fake news!
Pick your parents CAREFULLY.
Ivanka did.....
2
When she first appeared on the national media stage, I thought Ivanka Trump was beautiful, self-disciplined, and caring. Now I see a selfish, narrow-minded, protected, stupid woman who cares only about her family and her own children and her appearance (a careful blow drive by a hired hand each morning). We hear nothing from her about the children being separated from their parents at the border by her outrageous father.
I wish the media would quit giving her a national platform to speak. She has no qualifications, no special knowledge, no empathy, and a poor education in history, economic theory, finance (supposedly her specialty - but her real specialty is how to lie on financial forms to obtain loans for marginal projects sponsored by her corrupt family). We now know that Cyrus Vance, Jr. the law enforcement person responsible, let her off from criminal prosecution regarding her and her familyl's SoHo Hotel/Condo project in which she lied about sales and condo values to avoid bankruptcy. Such privilege deserves to be aired out and the grifters retired.
Now Ivanka Trump looks very ugly to me: always in a fixed uniform of sexy dress with high heels - the image of a high class sex worker. She uses her looks and family connections for progaganda. Quit giving in to her "charms." I'm sick of seeing the Trump Grifters and hearing their narrow, self-serving fantasies! To repeat their falsehoods about economic and tax policies is to widen their platform to reach the public!
5
Perfect!
Ivanka, her father's surrogate wife, is beyond clueless. This privileged mindless illiterate is so far removed from reality like her sicko daddy and slum landlord husband that they are in dire need of a psych evaluation before being committed or my preference, jailed.
4
Ivanka Trump is Marie Antoinette in the 21st century
5
“This makes sense. After all, huge disparities in parents’ income tend to translate into large disparities in children’s opportunities.”
Liberalism is a mental disorder. This is an economist???
Maybe, just maybe, Darwin was right, and the same genes that made the parents successful passed to the children? And maybe the genes that made other parents lack success passed to their kids? As with their poor decision making protocols?
Everyone is exactly where his or her talents and decisions earned; no less, no more. Don’t like your life? Change it by admitting honestly you are exactly where you earned.
American has always had a stratified society based on money.
The more money and opportunities it gets you, the more God deems you worthy as a human. (so it is told to me) When has it not be the case?
The Poors have never had a shot clawing out of the underclass pit.
The best control the money class has with The Poors is keep them stupid by not funding school, and feed the nonsense that anyone can be Trump. Don't tell the about Trump's Dad's money though..
3
The Princess now supports a “minimum wage”, eh? That is evident from the minimum wages she paid slave laborers abroad to make her “branded” products.
4
Why would any woman or any mother give two cents about anything Ivanka Trump says? She is an irrelevant person to the world of human beings in general, less important than the most fluff headed news presenter on Fox fake news. Surely you have more relevant women whose real concerns are worthy of space in this great paper.
2
Old southern saying, " Republicans think the poor got too much and the rich ain't got enough."
Some things never change, except today's brainwashed southerners.
5
More socialist bunk from the Nobel Prize winner in economics who openly predicted that a Trump presidency would result in an economic depression and a stock market collapse. Where is Krugman's apology for fear mongering? Don't hold your breath. Leftist Democrats never apologize, they just ratchet up their hateful rhetoric.
2
I am truly sorry that I have forgotten the name of the NYT commenter who, when Ivanka Trump’s clueless self-help book “Women Who Work” was published in 2017, posted that it would have been more aptly titled “Women Who Inherit.”
Ms.Trump will go to her grave insisting that she, unlike all those would be socialist “takers” out there asking for a minimum wage, worked incredibly hard for everything she’s got - and what’s more she did it while wearing five-inch “Louboutins.”
2
When I point to data that have a Pearson correlation coefficient of 70 or 80 percent, you Liberals tell me that such a low correlation is too low to consider but Paul Krugman can cite a study with correlations below 50% and you all gobble it up like pigs at the trough.
2
Ivanka Trump has no business pontificating or commenting on anything, let alone how Americans should attain ‘upward mobility’. She’s a vapid, over-privileged, ignorant and probably criminal, possibly traitorous grifter playing a role she has never earned, pretending to be a public servant. Public servant! What a laugh. Ivanka Trump serves herself, nothing more. I cannot wait for these creeps to get out office. Hopefully, the brand will really suffer.
4
I don't care what Ivanka Trump thinks.
2
The fact that America is reduced to discussing the opinions of a pampered, corrupt Barbie doll is depressing in itself.
4
Very well put argument. It is why the simplistic focus on race. gender and identity politics is a distraction from the real issues.. For example, on average people of Asian descent earn 13% more than their white people. Last time I checked Asians were minorities of color. There are very wealthy people of color for many years Oprah a black woman was the wealthiest media person. For many years the second wealthiest man in the world after Bill Gates was Carlos Slim a Mexican. The main issue is economic fairness and the second is class and the third is subculture behavior.
1
She's a toxic mix of Marie Antoinette and Leona Helmsley with a dash of Phyllis Schlafly all wrapped up in fashionable rags crafted by Asian moms working in substandard conditions and getting paid peanuts. "I have influence and power (because of my father), why don't others?"
6
Lets do a little experiment.
For the next ten years states get to keep ALL of the tax revenues they raise.
For instance, California which puts nearly $1/2 trillion each year into the federal coffers gets to keep every red cent.
California's pockets won't be picked clean by shiftless confederate states but will actually get to keep it all.
Same goes for New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts New England etc.
Blue states get to keep their money.
Red-states get to keep theirs.
I mean since rightists hate Sosherlizm[sic] so much let's remove ALL OF IT!
What condition do you think mississippi, alabammee[sic], kentucky etc. would be after 10 years of not leeching blue-state money?
Not great to say the least.
6
Americans!!! Wake up!!! People like the Trumps have ZERO in common with you. They don't care about you. They would never hang out with you unless they had to. They don't know anything about the way you live. They don't care to find anything out about the way you live. They are repulsed at the thought of living the way 98% of America lives. They are beyond out of touch and couldn't care less.
5
@Magan You forgot to tell them that the trumps use them as well.
2
I find it a given that Socialites like Trivana are almost anti-social in their perceptions on how normal people get ahead. I should give her a break, I mean she has been raised in an ongoing criminal con. Maybe thats why she finds grifting the office of the Presidency as normal.
2
Perhaps her views will change after she spends some long earned time in prison
3
At least Ivanka didn't schill for Hostess with some dizzy comment like, "Let them eat Twinkies," or some new wiz bang product made in China, with the Trump brand emblazened on its plastic cover. Thankfully, once again, reality based research, rather than ideologically driven myth (bad myth!) drives the professor's article. It's a miserable shame Ivanka believes a pile of lies about her weasal old man...
Conservative elites want us all to continue to compete on a playing field that safeguards their perpetual domination. The more we preserve that system, the greater the influence of luck as a factor. Is that what we want? By creating more opportunities for all, we spread the luck around. The result is a more fluid, dynamic and morally sound society.
1
Socialism inherently breeds downward mobility. Evening the playing field by taking away everything from everyone since 1850.
My hypothesis (retail price: $0.02) for the "strong negative correlation between inequality and mobility" is that highly inequality increases the motivation of elites to hold their place.
Typically, researchers will break things into quintiles (*). So consider a relatively affluent society in which the Bottom 20% have 30% less income and wealth than the Top 20%. The fear of someone born into the Top 20% of dropping a quintile or two would not be great, as the implications for material comfort and even status would be limited.
However, in a system where the difference are great, the incentive to hold position is great. Furthermore, with the exception of the huge outlier stories (driven largely by outlier personalities) like Bezos, most people who do move *up* will be very cautious not to "reach too far" and risk falling back down.
* ... and, of course 1%, 0.1%, 0.01%)
Ivanka: clueless is as clueless does.
3
Boy! This administration just can't stop the "Let Them Eat Cake!" moments, can they?
Spoiled rich girl, Ivanka, never REALLY had to sweat about anything more than how long it would take to recover from plastic surgery (can you say "nose job" and "augmentation"? Sure you can!). She got into an Ivy League university due to the oldest and most prevalent form of "Affirmative Action", called "Legacy Admissions". Yup, the rich kids get a LOT more admissions from Legacies than minorities do from Affirmative Action.
None of the Trumps have EVER done a real, honest day's work. When Ivana, wife #1, ACTUALLY became an effective business woman, "The Donald" divorced her--her success grated on HIS ego!
Rich people 99.99% of the time run governments to benefit themselves. (JFK was the last scion who took a different course, like FDR before him. ) That's why they shouldn't run governments. Remember Nelson Rockefeller said "Take your average family making $100,000 a year" when the average family was living on less then $10K? Or more recently Mitt Romney offering a $10,000 dollar bet?
Ivanka may be the smartest (Actually, I suspect Tiffany, staying AWAY from the WH and the news is the smartest!) but she's still a liar, in private acts like the spoiled brat, treating people like dirt, and her brothers are no better. Ironically, despite SNL, everyone who knows says Eric has a brain and Don is the real idiot!
When will they be gone????
4
Let them eat cake.
Say it, Ivanka.........you know you want to.
5
Thank You Paul, Love Ya Man !
republicKlan's Baptize themselves in Jesus' religion but that is all it is, ...a Hollow religion !
Jesus Fed the Poor, Healed the Lame and Upheld Humanitarianism, ...republicKlan's Hate all of that !
Jesus Proved Himself by His Works, ...republicKlan's love only Lies about themselves !
Do Well, Paul !
2
Speaking of upward mobility, you forgot to mention she wants to be the first woman President. You forgot to mention she is seeing how to do it from the inside. You forgot to mention that she has decades to soften the blow, and smooth over the image of her fathers's administration. Not to mention blocking any other woman from being President first.
1
Americans “want to work for what they get" - where did we hear that kind of talk before?
Today's equivalent of "let them eat cake" - complete (and I want to say willful) ignorance of the structural issues with our "grab them by the pussy" economy!
3
America is no longer a modern industrialized nation. What with trade wars and tariffs and monsterous ignorance in the WH stripped of experts, and decisions based on whim or self interest, normal economic rules can't be applied.
Why don't we call a spade a spade? The word is fascism, which is organized selfishness, the private ownership of government, by any person, group or party of co-conspirators.
Oligarchy is a form of fascism. Buying a political party to enact a private agenda is fascism. Trump is a fascist and the GOP (with few outliers) is the American Fascist party pretending to be the party of Lincoln.
Fascists are the enemy of the people and when members of Congress swear to protect and defend the nation and the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic that included Russia and fascists in Congress and government. Of course as we can see the loyalty of the fascists is to their Leader, whether be is called the Commander-in-Chief or the Fuhrer and it is to him, always and authoritarian strongman to whom loyalty is owed not the country, the Constitution, the law or any thing or one else.
Of course fascists have elections but they are always rigged and sometimes as in 2016 with the aid of a hostile foreign power and a monumental fraud on the American people a conman defrauds the American people and with the aid of the Kremlin stole into office.
After 2 years of Trump who acts like a mob boss the nation will clean out most of the fascist and Trump
3
@Sheldon Bunin
How do you explain China or India which can not be accused of as being fascist nations
The poor in these places are treated worse then slaves and the income disparity if anything is greater there than it is in the USA.
Help me to understand this because if you are right this shouldn't be.
Maybe it's because you are wrong.
1
I stopped reading this after the third paragraph. How much money did Ivanka's daddy give her to start her businesses? This woman is totally lacking in self-awareness. She is a dim bulb. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
3
Paul Soloman reported on the PBS Newshour a segment where 2 sets of researchers interviewed pointed out the countries where people are much better off at the same pay rate are again the Scandavian countries, where income inequality is minimal ( nothing like the US) and taxes are higher to support an incredible social system, including universal healthcare. What will it take to drill this into the electorate bathed in right-wing hatred through the media morons? 2/3 of all bankruptcies are as a result of unforeseen medical issues. 2/3rds! Is that how you want your life to end or the lives of your immediate family? Wake up!!!
3
Sorry but I don’t get it.
Here you are making perfect sense and David Brooks is over in that other cubicle-ette with some sort of pseudo-psych rant about the most messed up brain in the world. He has a nice Steinbeck quote there and what have you got.....boring facts and common sense. Yet he’s got nearly twice the comments you have here. I’m going to guess most people didn’t have Brooks’ reaction to the Cohen hearing and wanted to straighten things out a little. All we can do with yours is to go, “right, that makes sense, thanks”. How about some irrelevant quotes once in a while. “It was the best of times. . .” That’s a good one, plus long.
So what, exactly, do we have here? Voters who are so easily fooled they vote for a dictator. A dictator who promises to help the rich...so if you become rich, you will love it. And these voters tend to imagine themselves as potential kings of the hill. So, they vote for someone who will make life better for them once they succeed, but won't help them succeed. It's winner take all. That's the republican system.
Republicans are anti socialism because they are antisocial. It's everybody for themselves. Absolute good is absolute freeDUMB to do whatever you want and can get away with. If other people are hurt by your actions...sucks to be them.
Freedom to fail is a good thing. Providing no help for the poor and sick and homeless is cruel. We all do better when society supports the least of us. But Trump and his base are not interested in anyone else but themselves...society and the country be damned.
3
Neither skill nor intelligence is required to become a member of the Lucky Sperm Club. But one thing is certain: elimination of the estate tax will make it a whole lot easier to join. Bigly.
1
Ms. Trump is merely paraphrasing the American motto. I've got mine, screw you.
3
I think you should go live in a socialist country for a couple of years and educate yourself better. I lived in the Netherlands for almost 4 years, paid 65% taxes, bought a house and put my kids in their schools. We lived in a small Dutch village and I would say most of the people were lower middle class . They also had "projects" at the end of the village -tall columnar housings for the very poor which looked like projects from a ghetto". I saw very little upward mobility. I could not wait to get back to the US for all its warts.
67
@channa So we should trust your anecdotal experience over the data collected by experts (some of which was cited here in Krugman's column)? Well I know people from the Netherlands too, and they're quite happy in their Dutch villages and with the overall state of their country. Oh, and here in America there are ghettos right down the road from most neighborhoods. But instead of tall columnar buildings, our ghettos are trailer parks and tenements. I see no upward mobility in those areas, but I do see a lot of physical and emotional abuse, drug addiction, racism, malnutrition, etc. You may call these things 'warts,' but I call them actual existing problems that could be solved if our government implemented more social welfare programs.
203
@channa I wonder whether your social circle in the U.S. would be upper middle class, or higher, so I'm not sure that your basis for comparison would be helpful to many Americans.
I'd say our homeless wouldn't mind the Dutch housing for the poor. It's all relative.
95
@channa
And did you see homeless people?
68
I am tempted to say "leave Ivanka out of this." Really Krugman has no self-control. But just as important, Krugman should "leave Sweden out of this." Or even "leave socialism out of this."
It is grossly misleading to compare equality and mobility in small homogeneous countries with equality and mobility in large and diverse countries like the United States. It is obvious to the naked eye that, say, racial diversity is positively correlated with inequality. Only political correctness prevents us from saying so.
Indeed, the picture Krugman paints is already out of date -- and getting more so. The recent increase of inequality in Sweden has been pretty significant. It doesn’t make Sweden an unequal country, but while its level of inequality was significantly below the EU average, it has now converged towards inequality in other European countries.
What explains the change? Has Sweden become less "socialist" or more diverse? The latter is far more probable.
Krugman also seems to be unaware of the work of Gregory Clark which suggests that "modern" Swedish economic and social mobility has been overstated. Indeed, it was probably no higher than in the US or UK -- and maybe no higher than in preindustrial Sweden!
So much for the boast of evidence-based economics. I suggest that in future Krugman should resist the temptation to repeat the left's lazy "what about socialist Scandinavia?" debating point.
44
@Ian Maitland The OECD (Office of Economic Co-operation and Development) report has contradicted almost everything you said. Yes, there are some newly created problems in Sweden, due to immigration. But, overall, a country with a happy population, protective networks, and a good infrastructure. Socialism, or whatever system they have, is alive and working well.
Some corruption there, too. But, Sweden is made up of people, and along with people comes the good and the bad. Overall, this is a very good place to live.
113
@Gloria Utopia
This is what a recent OECD report says: "Sweden still belongs to the group of the 10 most equal OECD countries, despite a sharp rise in income inequality since the mid-1980s, the largest among all OECD countries...."
That is from 2015. SEE https://www.oecd.org/sweden/sweden-achieving-greater-equality-of-opportunities-and-outcomes.pdf
No criticism of Swedes was implied.
16
@Ian Maitland See the report of 2017. And,
the sharp rise, still takes it ahead of the US.
34
krugman isn't talking about upward mobility. He is talking about a safety net. Now that might be a conversation we need to talk about but this push to the hard left by the democrats to 100% socialism will ruin this country. I understand that what they call "democratic socialism" is where the state doesn't really take over production and ownership, but what will the politicians do when they realize that higher taxes on the rich won't cover all the programs. then what? Most people understand that big goals cost more, takes longer and harder to achieve than expected. Politicians not so much. Show me an example of a society that taxed themselves to prosperity in a global economy. I understand people want healthcare say like Canada. Great. Thing is though they have 36,000,000 people we have 310,000,000. Different price tag. Let us tax the rich say like Norway. their top bracket is 61% but they have a value added tax on everything , 25% to 15% depending on the product, I haven't heard anyone talk about that. Oh, and they have 5,500,000 as a population. As far upward mobility, its so common sense. If mom or dad never had the paradigms or skill sets to make six figures how are they going to teach it to their kids? People need to find mentors to get to the next level. They are out there. what we need is more Americans participating free enterprise and not in line to get their independence card. that is how people get to the next level, but they don't teach that in school do they
23
@sage43
"krugman isn't talking about upward mobility. He is talking about a safety net."
The two are linked. That's the point. Why do you think small business creation, to take one example, is so much higher in Scandinavian countries than here? Because people there have a much more solid safety net to catch them if their business fails, so they're more likely to take risks (and try again). They also find it easier to access the education that could lead them to a better paid professional career - because the safety net covers that. They're less likely to be held back by ruinous fees in health care which all people will experience at some point in their lives. And so on and so forth.
"I understand people want healthcare say like Canada. Great. Thing is though they have 36,000,000 people we have 310,000,000."
I will never understand why people think this is some kind of kryptonite.
Yes, the pool of people that American government services might have to support is ten times larger than for the Canadians... AND THE TAX BASE TO FINANCE THOSE SERVICES IS TEN TIMES LARGER. That's how populations work.
101
@CP: Thank you...well said.
20
@sage43
"--how are they going to teach it to their kids?"
They're not!. That's why quality public schools are so important, and the US is failing in that respect.
42
For those that read this opinion, the database Krugman uses to support his opinion is not significant. The study looked at a very small segment of the actual population in each country. Greece and Russia ranked higher on INCOME mobility than the U.S. Does that sound accurate to you? And Kazakhstan ranked higher than Sweden...
America rewards talent - which is why citizens of the world come here to work.
2
@Johnd
The United States also heavily rewards mediocrity. Exhibit A is Ivanka and Jared, high level administration officials with no experience, knowledge, training, ability, or expertise. America also awards crooks and con men. Exhibit B: the rest of the current administration and their adherents.
1
@aem
Thank you for your insightful response. I was just pointing out that the data Krugman sourced does not support his thesis. But I guess you hear what you want o hear and disregard thee rest.
Everytthing in this country seems to suit rich, including tax breaks for political donation, which in effect, maintain and expand tax laws increasingly skewed to their benefits. The last tax cut law is a comical proof of this influence. In reality we ended up nurturing plutocracy that keeps iron hand on our political system. It will take a real and hard fight to overcome this but we need to start ASAP.
First, enforce domocratic representation in Congress by eliminating politically driven gerrymandering. We need Congress that trully represents America.
Second, return to publicly funded political campaigns with individual donations not exceeding $500.
Third, overhaul our tax laws by eliminating corporate loopholes, set minimum corporate tax rate of 15% regardless of tax breaks, reform lobbying laws and eliminate tax loopholes for lobbying. Make any individual tax return claiming 1.0 million income and less than 25% effective tax rate automatically go into audit.
1
@CarolinaJoe
Giving a tax break doesn't help the rich if they do not give money to charity or to a politician.
I am sure you would agree they are doing good by giving money to charity and if you supported the politician you would say the same about that.
Why should they pay taxes on that money.
Donations to a political party by the way is not tax deductible.
Amazingly, Mr. Krugman fails to note that one great equalizer that is being eroded by Republican tax cuts favoring the private sector(including private schools and exclusionary "charter schools") is a quality public education and affordable public universities. American schools were the wonder of the world, and coupled with the GI bill, elevated a generation of Americans into the middle class. Unfortunately, since our public schools, especially in poor areas, are starved of resources, is it any wonder that this has played a major role in decreasing social mobility?
This omission is especially ironic because Mr. Krugman is himself the beneficiary of a quality childhood public education!
5
For 40 years, Americans have been told that tax cuts, especially for wealthy "job creators," are the key to economic growth. We have been told that wealth will "trickle down" to all of us.
Finally, more Americans are realizing that they've been sold a bill of goods, a patch of desert land, a fictitious bridge, however you want to call it.
Dr. Krugman is among those who is spreading the word. Word on!
2
This PK column is spot on. For anyone interested the Times did a very interesting series back in the mid 2000s on class in America which expounds on this idea. Highly recommended reading.
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/pages/national/class/index.html
It would probably interesting if they did a refresh on that.
Also, we need to keep hammering to dispel the incorrect use of the term socialism by all these Horatio Alger right wing individualist success fantasy types. People like Bernie and Ms. Cortez are not advocating for government control/ownership of the means of production.
2
Great column. “There’s a curious disconnect between reality and perception” – that’s the beating heart, the engine of America. America was founded on that very kind of illusion: “all men are created equal,” of the people, by the people…” - all lofty ideals presented as reality. At its core, America is and always has been a myth propelled by bright, distracting illusion.
From our founding, it has been the goal of elites to maintain the disconnect between reality and perception – it bolsters their wealth and keeps them in power. It’s the smoke and mirrors of religion, conservatism, meritocracy, self-reliance, capitalism, and of the national anthem and the Fourth of July. It’s the lie of the American Dream. It’s marketing, propaganda, and demagoguery engineered to make us think we’ve got it so good; that we are the greatest, the healthiest, the strongest, and the smartest in spite of overwhelming global evidence to the contrary.
Democratic socialism (don’t forget the “democratic”) strikes fear in the hearts of the rich and powerful because it cuts through the smoke and shatters the mirrors. It exposes in reality, and does not deal in distorted perception. It attempts to make democracy and capitalism play fair and to tell the truth, not fantasy.
America needs to stop running on illusion. Otherwise we get Ivanka Trump, poor healthcare, and vast inequality – all posing as, not just normal, but as our salvation: a shimmering mirage that sustains us.
Until it doesn’t.
1
Social mobility is achieved by one simple mantra: "we want to create a society which grows the value of labor as fast as possible".
At baseline the most efficient way to raise money is to Tax Labor and Capital equally. Everything else is incentives. So what incentives do we want to give:
Biggest incentive - activity that makes people more valuable; that's education and healthcare.
Next biggest incentive - Pay people what they are worth; give capital tax breaks for providing high quality jobs (benefits, predictable hours, decent wage).
Then we need to discourage individual profit taking by socializing risk; that's things like pollution and bailouts without loss of capital and generally not putting away enough today to cover tomorrows costs - this includes final salaries pensions.
I know the last is controversial, but look at final salaries pensions; long timelines and massive costs lead to inadequate funding and today's leaders refusing to honor the empty promises of their dead predecessors who socialized pension liability. After all they got their profit bonus or won their election off the back of that extra cash.
I would rather adequately support retirement and hand over cold hard $ at the time of service, as part of a framework where the raising fortunes of labor were at the center of tax strategy.
Excellent opinion piece Mr. Krugman. I tend to be more of centrist compared to most people on a lot of topics (moderate leftist?), but reading this makes me think I should move further left when it comes to economic/fiscal policy.
Keep the articles coming sir!
1
I love work. It's so fulfilling when my colleagues promote their ideas while dismissing mine. I enjoy it when that guy who's 20 years younger than me doesn't let me speak in meetings. It's great when colleagues ask me to work nights and weekends so I can make them look good, and then they get a raise. I love commuting to-and-fro for hours every day just so my boss doesn't have to deal with WebEx.
Seriously. I'll have what Ivanka has. I will happily take a trust fund, or a sugar daddy. I have a lot of ideas, anyone want to fund my startup? I only need $50,000,000.
8
Very good points. Of all the cynical (and sinister) deceptions peddled by the anti-liberal right, one that is especially dishonest and harmful is "redistribution," as if the rich are getting poorer and the poor are making out like bandits. The American system is certainly causing redistribution, but it is going up the economic ladder, not down. Does anyone really think today's rich are working much harder than yesterday's rich? And yet they get a much bigger portion of the benefits from economic activity than they used to.
4
America’s variety of antipoverty programs strung together with the help of the state government, the local government, private efforts and charitable funds are inadequate instead there needs to be a basic level of unconditional federal economic support along with universal health care.
2
The U.S. economy already has many socialist features. Democrats really must articulate that they’re really talking about turning a dial, not a whole new system. Laissez-faire & under-regulation leads to kleptocracy, fraud, dynastic wealth, theft of public assets, exploitation of workers until they resemble feudal serfs, crony-capitalism and off-shoring of businesses and assets. You have to control the fuel/air mixture right for the engine to run optimally.
4
Income inequality steps on upward mobility but Wealth inequality is worse.
Wealth works overtime to secure itself in perpetuity and will preempt all comers. It gangs up with other wealth to push it's special interests at the expense of everyone else and it commonly buys politicians and legislation to do so.
What most people don't realize is that Wealth is only secondarily about gaining more wealth; it's primary mission is to protect itself from risk and loss, so it can continue to amass more wealth. It never stops.
Wealth will take all your money, it will force you to go into debt as with their tax giveaway (workin' on 2.0 now), or consumer financing schemes, and it is entirely conscience-free - doesn't care if you live or die.
Also important to realize is that Wealth acts like a consciously evil entity because it's not an inert pile of money.
Instead it is complex and has emergent properties that learn and adapt and act all day and all night to secure it's interests at your expense.
Concentrated money is concentrated power and wealth, such as the Big Banks, Big Ag, Big Oil, Healthcare, Big Pharma, the corporate industrial groups, the War machine, and the government. Wealth naturally concentrates to leverage it's power. These concentrations often work together for mutual benefit.
We mistakenly believe these active interests are inert entities. That's a very big mistake.
7
@Fourteen
Very wise comment. It seems also that social structure eventually emulates economic structure. Reckless capitalism - money above people - begets a society obsessed with money: making it by any means necessary. In this view, President Donald Trump is a natural result of money worship.
What the Europeans (not just the Swedes have) is a social market economy. It trusts to a market economy, but recognizes that a market economy does not always result in social results and requires correction. That is one function of antitrust laws. But so too are social laws. There is no socialism.
2
Rising water lifts all boats. Pull up all people and we all do better...
3
@Holly
Yes, but currently 82% of newly created wealth goes into the offshore accounts of the 1%. If a rising tide lifted all the boats the 1% would get exactly 1%.
The rising tide of GDP lifts the yachts as it leaves everyone else high and dry.
3
As per the norm Krugman makes a point and backs it up with hard data. He writes simply, avoids jargon, so even a child could understand and follow his argument. No inflammatory rhetoric, name calling, just reasoned thought and respect for people. We could use a few politicians like that. Krugman for President!!
1
Morality has no place in the Trump presidency. Economic prosperity gilds all who believe in the trump brand, including Donald Trump's children by his first marriage to Ivana Trump.
There is very little upward mobility in Trump's America, and his daughter, Ivanka Trump Kushner, is a card-carrying member of trump's brand, to the extent that she doesn't know diddly about self-reliance or what it means to be an American citizen of low income.
Our 45th president is not a self-made man. He euchered his way into a huge real estate fortune with the teachings and moolah of his father, Fred Trump, a bigot, a racist and a cheat. Income inequality has no meaning to Donald Trump.
Has no meaning for his three children either. Republicans denounce all avenues of upward mobility in our society and culture. President Trump's daughter speaks with no authority except for the gold spoon in her mouth.
4
Samantha Bee should take back her apology. She is absolutely correct.
3
Good essay -- but please reconsider the notion of "advanced countries."
1
Always so spot on!
Trump is a wanna be dictator. The Republicans don't protest this, they accept it and defend Trump because they say he gets things done they want done. Like systematcally dismantling a functioning US government and making it more autocratic, like rebuffing democratic allies and telling murderous dictators they did nothing wrong, like lying to the US public virtually all of the time?
What kind of a country do the Republicans want to live in? It must be one where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the environment gets trashed and health care is unavailable for the poor, and schools are run only by the Christian religion, and science is squashed, climate change is ignored and fossil fuels are funded and racism and guns are rampant.
Maybe Canada would take the displaced Americans, they will desperately need a real and functioning future home.
3
Allowing millions of poor to enter the US illegally does more to stifle upward mobility and solidify the positions of rich than anything else. Leftist Democrats need a stratified society with many poor for their votes. They have us on a path to Venezuela not Scandinavia. Ivanka is not the problem,demonizing the rich/high achievers has never worked.
Looks like Ivanka is wresting the "Queen of Mean" title from Leona Helmsly.
At least the crown still remains in the New York City metropolitan area, with a temporary - hopefully 4 years or less - relocation to our nation's capitol.
4
The true believers in "mainstream economics," with their inexplicable twin shibboleths that our supply of money is limited, and we must tax or borrow to have money, are the chief culprits in locking our citizens in a permanent prison of financial deprivation. Without these two irrational, unjustifiable positions, we would be able to implement programs like giving each citizen a Social Security Lifetime Supplement (SSLS) of $36,000 per year from birth to death, and couple this income with equal access to the rights, resources, opportunities, and protections that will give all citizens a fair and honest chance to go as far in life as their talents and efforts can take them, thereby giving them a fair and honest chance to build long lives for worth living for themselves and their loved ones. But it is not to be. "Mainstream economists" assert that our current system is a force of nature and cannot be modified while offering no proof of their belief. It smacks of the gold standard which cruelly governed our nation for nearly two centuries, and which, overnight, disappeared when men of good sense finally said, "enough." We know that our system of government, with its corrupt system of parties and elections—which Washington, in his Farewell Address, warned would destroy us—is a fraud, and so is the low art of "mainstream economics." These systems are the reason we are not responding to the onrushing catastrophe of global warming. They are killing us.
1
Mr Trump is the last person to talk about self reliance. There is sufficient research and evidence (made available to the public by NYT) that Mr Trump was born wealthy and by age 3 he was worth $300,000. Each time he made a wealth related boo boo, his father pulled him out. His parents never disciplined nor taught him frugality or restraint, by his youth he became a flamboyant playboy splashed on tabloid and magazine covers as a real estate mogul. He has lived in the media eye for so long that the media failed to warn his followers ahead of time that he was lying to them about being a self made man who will drain the swamp in DC and show America how to make quick deals using his strongman tactics of fear intimidation awe and cultish fawning. His followers had never seen anything like him and they became saps. It just takes a few pokes to deflate a fantasy balloon like Mr Trump, who is just a composite of fabricated make belief material. We are watching the phenomenon..
3
Yes, this was a glaring lack of self awareness that is not unique to Ivanka Trump. Some years ago, a dead serious Nicky Hilton told Oprah Winfrey, who happens to be a black woman, born in the fifties into poverty in the south, that everyone is born with the same opportunities, it is simply a question of what we do with that. I genuinely think that heiress Hilton actually thought she and Oprah started in the same place.
2
Ivanka said people don't want handouts. Right. Sure. Look at "handout" synonym in Dictionary--whole Trump Clan pictured..
3
Brother, if Donald Trump is a self made man, then he definitely needs to sue himself for exceptionally shoddy workmanship. He sues everybody else, so why not?
1
This whole thing is a joke. What we really have is more like, socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest of us. Someone needs to show Ivanka how to pull herself up by the "Jimmy Choo" bootstraps.
4
She is not aging well. The stress of living a lie is showing.
3
Ivanka Trump as a knowledgeable opinion creator is a very poor choice. Her thinking capacity is as vacant as her look. She is only good for decorative trim.
5
As a member of the Political/News ruling class it is always entertaining to listen to the bashing of the rich. Welcome to America... Colin Kaepernick will stop his moral outrage now that he received an $80 million settlement. Gee Paul do you write this stuff for free ? Yes their rich so are you and all your cronies. Why are you a moral barometer for anything ?
@John
You're totally right concerning Dr. Krugman. But, I'm good and poor, so I should be able to bash the rich! The educated, professional class manage to find someone more rich than themselves to bash. like Ivanka Trump, rather than examine their own self-serving positions.
1
20 trillion plus dollars have been spent for anti poverty programs run by Washington and their underlings since 1964.
Nice job, Dr. K! Republican’t orthodoxy is grounded on Free Church Calvinism, whether they’re aware of it or not. It’s such an integral part of our American ontology that most people buy into it, without really knowing why. God loves the rich and lavishes riches upon them. Therefore, if one is poor, s/he deserves their sorry lot, is not favored of God, and should not expect any help from “Christians” who may occupy positions of government power...this fits right in with their “TULIP” theology where the “T” stands for “total depravity” of (hu)mankind. Miserable sinners in the hand of an angry God should not expect anything good in life. If you DO experience something good (like money, access to good schools, health care, etc) then it’s because you have found favor with God.
All the things we can't afford now -- from Donald's stupid wall to the exploration of Mars, from repairing our crumbling infrastructure to public health, from free college education to big government projects that employ millions of people -- all were affordable in living memory.
President Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System and had enough left over to punch up NASA's budget to put a man on the moon.
We had a fairer tax system then. The top marginal rate was 91%.
4
That Mr. Krugman would waste a column on an intellectual light-weight is enough to make one cry.
That Ms. Trump believes in "upward mobility" - coming from one born into wealth - is enough to make one laugh... or cry, or both.
1
Self made up perhaps, but no, she's not 'self-made'
"...Donald Trump is a self-made man."
Of course he is not; his father bankrolled him--and he was bankrolled by HIS father who made a fortune in the hotel and brothel business in the Yukon--during goldrush days--before returning to Germany--where he faced pressure for draft dodging. https://www.macleans.ca/news/donald-trumps-ancestral-brothel-gets-a-new-lease-on-life/
But "self made man" is always a delusion. We are not talking about berry pickers in the wilderness. Private wealth is ALWAYS a matter of public property, tax and labor law--so it is never purely "self made".
Furthermore, "private enterprise" is a matter of competition for market share. The government's job is to set the rules of the competitive game--otherwise they will be set by the mafia. Even when businesses play by the rules--they are always gaming the system--more or less--including tilting the playing field if they can.
Thus regarding import tariffs political/economies must be saved from themselves--for the public good. (Krugman).
The system should get its fair share--not as tax (though that might be convenient)--but as ownership.
When the Tea party (Freedom Caucus?) enacts the heartless agenda of gutting help to the most helpless, it is marketed and abetted by “serious people” as entitlement reform. It plays to the American idea that no one is ever entitled, unless you are wealthy. Sick.
Thinking that Donald Trump who has preyed upon the poor and middle class with his scams will give them upward mobility as his base does is like believing the big bad wolf won't eat your grand mother.
Democratic Socialism as practiced in much of Europe and Canada supports people economically as they seek to raise their standard of living. It is the wind beneath your wings while capitalism as practiced in this country is a hurricane slapping you down.
1
I Trump is the worst woman in the world right now. She has always had opportunities and extraordinary luck. She has never, ever done a thing for women. She's a plastic doll adorned in designer cloths, but there is absolutely nothing upstairs. Why would there be? She has never had to strive for anything and that continues to be her path. And she's also a world-class liar. Social programs are the only way that the poor and women are going to be able to thrive. I don't care what we call it; I'll always defend the "pathways".
1
I can't prevent laughing each time I heard a Republican using the word “socialism”. It's ignorance ignoring itself.
1
Once again, Paul Krugman is right on target!
I wonder how many contract or direct government employees got evicted from their homes after the 5 week shutdown, or
how many actually got paid the missing paychecks from the shut down.
In Alameda, CA, we the citizens donated food and money so that the Coast Guard families could weather the shut down.
trump should be ashamed of himself.
5 weeks is a long time without a pay check and endangered so many families.
trump is a combination dumpster fire and a train wreck.
He's damaged this country in ways that will reverberate for decades on the American people and the rest of the world.
I hope the evangelicals waiting for the end of times get it and are blown away so the rest of us can start cleaning up the mess they've made.
BTW Pompeo is an end times believer so everything he does is suspect.
1
To my knowledge, Ivanka Trump -- the mother of three children -- has never visited the migrant children on our Southern border or advanced any ideas for alleviating their brutal treatment and condition, a job for which it appears she would be highly suited.
Yet recently she was among the administration figures screening candidates for the position of President of the World Bank, a job for which her qualifications are slim to none.
A chance to really make something of herself and do her own kids proud -- and what does she do, she throws it away.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/business/world-bank-david-malpass.html?action=click&module=Latest&pgtype=Homepage
2
Reminds me of the joke.
Q: How do you make a small fortune.
A: Start with a large fortune.
3
If we did the math, with inflation etc. over the past 40 years (since 1970) the minimum wage should be $20.00 per hour. At 40 hour a week thats $3200 per month and about $38,000 per year. OK, you have a wife and 2 children, with health insurance, food, shelter, maybe a car plus your "fair share of taxes" you cannot exist on this. Yes we want to get what we earn but to be given a salary of 8-10 dollars per when we need minimum 20-30 is not the answer. Remember the working middle class has almost a zero increase in wealth in the past 2 decades while the upper upper has a 25-30% increase in wealth. This woman is clueless as is most folks in her social and economic group.
2
The US does not need "social mobility."
The term itself is offensive, implying that there will always be inequality.
The US needs prosperity for its entire population, in a truly classless society.
That requires that those who do the work receive all the benefits therefrom, with no unearned profits being siphoned off by a non-working parasitic capitalist class.
1
There can’t be a classless society! In what world are you living? Some people contribute a lot to society, others just live at the expense of others, some are intelligent and educated, some are just very limited... nobody’s fault. And of course, many people try to make their way up of the social scale...
"What Ivanka Trump doesn’t know about social mobility and everything else in life, apart from what it's like to be part of a wealthy kleptocracy, could be written on the back of a stamp with room left over for the Gettysburg address"
Not as snappy a sub-heading and the subs of the NYT might have had an issue with it, on length, but definitely more accurate, I'd say.
1
Ms. Ivanka Trump is beautiful, and my parent, an art expert, would have ventured she belonged on the wall of an ancient Egyptian temple.
From 1980 to 1997, only one business woman came to visit my boss at our office for financial advice. Perhaps this has changed, while Alice has long left The Mad Tea Party where the Hatter has been singing off-key, and The March Hare is looking at his watch and can think of nothing better to say than lamenting 'It was the best butter' in gloom.
A decent hard-working neighbor, and staunch Republican, recently asked 'where has the money gone'. Silence. He continued that if none of us had money, we would all be equal, causing us both to smile.
Noticed that Mr. Krugman omitted to mention that African-Americans born in a rich household, do not always maintain this threshold of social mobility and tend to founder. It might be worthwhile revisiting this cover feature in the New York Times to assess the reason for the above.
A Self-Made Woman? A distant cousin in Landscaping, in possession of a fine education and a sense of wanting to accomplish something of value to benefit others, mainly children, and growing a garden in their hospital cancer ward.
Trump does not appear to be responsible for what he is saying, and on occasion gets it right. Luck plays a role when this happens, and his daughter should look after him at home. She would be doing the Republicans a great favor, but most of all, a substantive contribution to our Country.
Regardless of your socioeconomic class, hard work and good choices reap success. Finish high school. Go to college. Wait until you are older to get married and have kids. Live/prosper in a stable dual spouse household. Live within your means. It is not complicated.
2
You forgot a few pieces of advice:
Also find mentors who can offer advice on how to choose wisely, who can keep you on a productive path through adverse times, who can demonstrate a healthful lifestyle, and who can introduce you to technological worlds to which you may not have been exposed.
@Nancy Rathke Absolutely
But how can you have upward mobility if everybody's equal? /s
People that go rags to riches are rare though they do exist. Take Harold Brown for instance.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/obituaries/2019/02/25/harold-brown-who-built-expansive-real-estate-empire-dies/FNRl0Lr31uj3lYWa3Ng4HN/story.html
People who do well enough, often better than their parents, are common enough. What they have in common is ambition, a willingness to work hard, intelligence, skill, and a little luck. You can deny this to the cows come home, but a good attitude, thoughtful intelligence, and a willingness to really try to do the best work you can, are very valuable skills that every employer looks for, recognizes, and rewards. Employers also recognize the opposite traits, which are also common, and are promoted here daily. If your staring point is believing the "system is rigged" and your employer's function to provide you with a paycheck I can guarantee you will never get ahead, at least in the private sector.
1
People that go rags to riches are rare though they do exist. Take Harold Brown for instance.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/obituaries/2019/02/25/harold-brown-who-built-expansive-real-estate-empire-dies/FNRl0Lr31uj3lYWa3Ng4HN/story.html
People who do well enough, often better than their parents, are common enough. What they have in common is ambition, a willingness to work hard, intelligence, skill, and a little luck. You can deny this to the cows come home, but a good attitude, thoughtful intelligence, and a willingness to really try to do the best work you can, are very valuable skills that every employer looks for, recognizes, and rewards. Employers also recognize the opposite traits, which are also common, and are promoted here daily. If your staring point is believing the "system is rigged" and your employer's function to provide you with a paycheck I can guarantee you will never get ahead, at least in the private sector.
Oh, Ivanka, that is just a distraction.
1
What Ivanka doesn't know about socialism, or much of anything else, could rival the national archives. People born into wealth, even upper middle class, don't fully understand how challenging it is if you're born in the wrong zip code or the wrong family
4
Why would anyone on the face of the planet care what Ivanka has to say about anything more complex than living with the burden of inherited wealeath, fruit smoothies or the most exclusive yoga crèche on the upper east side.
2
Socialism isn't just politics, it's a belief system that effects how you make decisions. Here's a true story. My friend is a proud socialist. We walk into an empty bar and order drinks. We turn round, look at all the empty tables, some large some small, and decide where to sit. I suggest the big table by the window. He sees that table for a big group and suggests the small table in the corner. We sit there, two adults cramped in a corner by the kitchen, the worst seats in the house while the place is empty. That's socialism for you.
1
When you’re born on third base it must be difficult to understand why other people may have a difficult time dealing with everyday financial issues.
3
"In other words, they have what Republicans denounce as 'socialism' (it really isn’t, but never mind)."
No, not "never mind." If liberalism is going to move left then it had better start shouting how they're defining socialism from the rooftops, else the conservatives are going to convince the electorate that liberals want collectives and state ownership of the means of production.
The average American is so ignorant he can't pick out France on an unlabeled map. France! Your average American already believes that socialism means becoming like Russia, so it's not "never mind" when it comes to what liberals mean by socialism. Liberals have to make clear that socialism means Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, a social safety net, higher education for all, and affordable healthcare. And it might help to start making clear that conservatism as currently being carried out by Trumpublicans is affirmative action for the rich.
3
Dear Paul: Keep trashing the Trumps, they deserve it. However, Sweden and Norway are Socialist nations. I’d give you stats but you’ve already pointed out how big their governments are and that leaves only one way to pay for them-very high taxes.
1
Every new generation today has to reinvent itself. It can’t just rely on how and why things worked in the past. That just isn’t going to work anymore.
When I grew up in the late 30’s and early 40’s, we didn’t use words like “The Middle Class” because it really didn’t exist. By todays’ standards, the middle class was poor. From there, the poor were really poor, and the rich were really rich!
The 50’s brought sunshine to almost everyone! Remember the G.I. Bill? Look it up! After WW2, almost anyone could buy a home, even the poor. Communities were springing up everywhere. Unions were very strong, and so was the spirit of our country. Everything was very “White!”
During the 60’s, everything started to change, and change rapidly. War was no longer “glorious.” Blacks and Whites were beginning to come together on a somewhat equal basis although very slowly.
Today, things are moving so fast that it’s impossible to predict what’s going to happen tomorrow. Truth, Beauty and Goodness are no longer reverent. Enter Donald Trump and his band of followers to fill the vacuum.
Want to change the world for the better? Get involved once again in Community, NOT in us versus them!
More discredit to the conservative, neoliberal, laissez-fair model of trickle-down, shareholder, supply side, austerity economics.
The same for conservatism in politics and economics. It has been discredited (like the tested alternavites to Relativity). The key commitment of modern conservative theory in politics and economics is to laissez-faire, and that has been discredited. It is no more than nihilism. They promote freedom and liberty, the same thing, but offer a false model of human freedom.
Laissez-faire in economics leads to monopoly, cartel, abusive economics that produce sweatshops, instability, and repeated crashes and panics (millions lose their homes, jobs, insurance, career opportunities, etc.) as we had in the 1800s, and to which Reaganomics returned us. Leaders in tech were ignorant of history, politics, economics, modern social science, and common sense about people. Thus we have our current monopolists and gig economy.
Laissez-faire as the main system in politics is always unstable and soon leads to warlords, oligarchs, kleptocrats, and tyrants, as in the former Soviet states.
Laissez-fair as part of a stable system is important. We need decision making, initiative, and entrepreneurship.
There are 3 criteria in science and in debate. You can't make your case if you make your case by lying, personal attacks, or by failing to respond to criticisms of or alternatives to your proposal. Modern conservatives failed spectacularly to meet any of these criteria.
"Scandinavia leads the rankings"
Krugman cannot not obsess with the most uber-white of uber-white privilege, the pure Nordic race. Someone needs to point out to him, that the "upper mobility" of blond people is just that. It does not extend to the parallel societies that exist in the explosive non-integrated parallel societies that simmer in the ghettos. Trump too speaks highly of those photogenic Norwegians. Cuba anyone? The Business has been (is) tried right in our backyard long before the Danes got wind of it. But Krugman sees little more to like there than Trump. Strange.
For more about how social policies advance social mobility in the Nordic Countries, read anything by Anu Partanen. She is a finnish journalist who now lives in the US and therefore is able to compare and contrast specific policies related to, for example, childcare.
She also doesn't know that the MORE wealth you have, the LESS hard you tend to work for your income.
2
Maybe it is a distortion from the camera but Ms. Trump's neck length is disturbingly long in the photograph. Equally disorienting is she looks older and strangly fearful. Much older, in fact and while her husband appears adolescent. Her eyes are distinctly watery as if she might have been listening to Congressman Cummings yesterday: his (Cohen testimony) summation. The photo journalism here is either brilliant or evil because Ms. Trump looks Barbie-like, or possibly manikin-like in an absence of normal experiences.
Fully agree, but continue to use the word 'socialism' to describe your policies and be ready to be easily attacked and loose the election in several key states. Preaching only to the choir the democrats are getting ready to loose another election that they should easily win.
2
It's amazing what people will do when they have some insurance that their risk taking won't end up with them becoming homeless.
In America those of modest means are forced into making compromises for survival whereas those with a good safety net, which in America is Mommy and Daddy, can take risks to get the experiences and education needed to succeed.
American's look at social welfare as only being a drain to moochers. What it needs to instead be looked at is a way to enhance and unlock the immense amount of human capital and potential that remains untapped when people are killing themselves with underpaid work just to keep food on the table and roof over their heads.
"They want to work for what they can get" is a curious sentence, is it not?
It suggests whatever the price offered for your labor is something you want.
Is she suggesting they do not want to work for more, i.e., a higher salary?
More likely, she is saying, whatever you offer, they are happy to get.
Presumably, she is no fan of a minimal wage.
But mostly, just look at her, or listen.
The lights are not all on upstairs.
2
I left New York City in 2002 after living there for over 40 years. As an Ivy League graduate I sensed that the quality of life was better on the other side of the Atlantic having traveled around Europe more often than most. I also sensed that the American dream was a farse. Life in New York City was tough and I was going nowhere. Skyrocketing rents and the cost of every day living was becoming more difficult by the year. Living in Germany now since then has proven to me one thing...I was right! The quality of life is better in Europe than in the US. I can afford a far better and balanced lifestyle than the one I experienced in New York City; not to mention that the social network allows me to have affordable medical coverage in world class medical care facilities. Yes, I do pay more in taxes, but the infrastructure, the schools, mass transportation, unemployment, social security benefits, etc., etc., etc. far exceeds what is available in the US. If you want to live the American dream, then come to Europe! Life is better here.
6
@Orlando
Germany is such a diverse country, yes? So similar to the US in demographics.
1
@ Jako Germany has diversified over the years. Berlin itself has become a melting pot of residents literally from around the world. In fact there is a large expat community from the US in Berlin as in other major German cities. Germany‘s open doors to migrants, especially from the Middle East such as Syria, has been well recorded, surpassing the influx into the US by hundreds of thousands.
If your point is that Germany does not have the same social-economic issues with its migrant communities as does the US, you are right. You can not even compare because Germany has a program of assimilation that supports immigrants settle into the country and become active tax paying members of society that you will not find in the US.
Her statement is just empirically wrong. People love gifts. They love getting things without working for them. However, most people understand that working to get things makes sense and are perfectly willing to endure the normal ups and downs of life. All most of us want is a change to get up again when we fail. Instead many of our brothers and sisters find themselves held down before they even have the chance to try and fail. And yes, people resent it. Unfortunately that resentment often leads to irrational hatred of "others" instead of political engagement. Democracy doesn't work better when people opt out, but it's hard to blame people for feeling our system is a hopeless wreck.
Please Mr. Krugman, continue to speak out & educate Americans about what is real versus what is hype, provided by con men/women who seek only to increase their own wealth & opportunities for the same.
Years ago, I explained the heart of America to an individual who then looked at me like I had 2 heads. Basically, as Americans we are supposed to be willing to lay down our own lives so that we can rescue the downtrodden, abused & disenfranchised. That little factoid is true providing the victims we choose to rescue do not live in America, or are of color, female, wrong religion, poor, drug addicted, family members, disabled, etc. I cannot make up the reality of America versus the American dream & soul.
Ms. Trump & her ilk are indeed tone deaf & their photos need to appear within a dictionary as the definitions of 'tone deaf'. The folks who support her & folks of her ilk, if they are not wealthy or are working class illustrate how folks who don't have a dog in that fight vote repeatedly against their own interests.
One might ask what are the interests of the non wealthy who support the DJT larvae of America. Well it certainly isn't a woman who chooses an abortion or who needs a gun, absent background checks, or a free or subsidized college education or people of color 'eating up' benefits the US cannot afford to provide. Its all about how money is spent, i.e., for the 1% or the 99% of the population. MAGA is a con job, if you are not wealthy.
What’s also different between the US and Canada, Sweden, etc? They don’t have half the population paying no income tax. Maybe a big part of the problem is Ms Trump is wrong. Most Americans don’t want to earn it, they would much prefer to be given. They like having failure excused as a rigged system that leaves them as a victim.
1
Ivanka should use her prerogative to issue statements while the sun shines, tone deaf or not.
The Trump name will soon live in infamy.
No one will care what she says, what she does, and she will be ostracized by a large majority.
She won't be like humble Pat Nixon, an admired daughter of a silver miner. Ivanka's countenance will be a trademark for greed and fraud.
2
So what does Ivanka make of the hundreds of workers her father stiffs? If that isn't a foot on the neck of working people, I don't know what is.
The Trumps are only the logical extension of corporate policy that implements across the board when it comes to labor. They want something for nothing and have been largely successful. The whole robot thing is also part of it. No power, in bad repair, no machine will work. You simply cannot argue with a machine. People, not so much. Ivanka, her father and corporate America knows it.
What's most galling about what she said is that behind it all is the smug notion that everyone wants to be her. I think she's a perfectly disgusting role model.
2
She is the example of an entitled airhead, an icon to that class of people that you will find all over the US. People who were born on third base (or more likely home plate) and feel that they have the right to even more.
The majority have never done anything of substance (seriously, Ivanka is just a blonde figurehead for Trump) and are just insecure enough that when anyone of a lower tax bracket than they are gets anything (like a tax cut, a minimum wage or God, forbid a "basic income") they are annoyed that they aren't given something as well and act like it is being taken directly from them.
Most of the extremely rich families in this country lack a sense of community or morality. Sorry, but if you are a billionaire and aren't embarrassed by the wealth disparity, it's gonna be really hard to pass through the eye of a needle while on your camel.
3
An accounting of the Russian oligarch money that the Trump Organization has laundered in the past two decades would help us understand Ivanka's positions on social mobility more than anything else.
2
Ivanka knows very little about a lot of things. She does know lying, cheating, stealing, grifting...
All the things that Republicans keep labeling "socialist" happen to be things that most Americans want and that would make America great again. The things they claim are "socialist" aren't actually socialist, but if they keep at it they are going to convince most Americans that socialism is excellent.
1
Your writing has led me to state simply that the Republicans are using only the word "Socialism" as a dog whistle to rally their base whom they have carefully cultivated the following of by psychological manipulation of hatred and anger to reduce their base voters to unthinking grumbling masses.
But it occurred to me that people don't have a very basic knowledge of the difference between Capitalism, Communism, and Socialism. In my most primitive explanation, we all want upward mobility of Capitalism without the public control of Communism. That means something like Socialism that aids that upward mobility, thus accelerating economic growth to the greatest extent possible. Under pure Capitalism, many are left behind, but with a degree of government help, more people excel.
I don't like the domination of a nation by Communism that inhibits opportunity to rise, and I don't like pure Capitalism that somehow appears to be the practice of criminally expressing greed through seemingly criminal conduct. But Socialism combines terrific opportunity, economic growth, and a deterrent against uncontrolled greedy practices. It boils down to criminal conduct versus "To Promote The General welfare" written of in the Preamble of our Constitution.
The lovely Ivanka should keep her advisory role to smiling brightly and posing with alert interest on her face for photo ops. Every time she opens her mouth to issue an opinion or statement she reveals how pitifully unprepared and hopelessly out of her depth she is in her position as “high level presidential aide. A job she occupies, not because of talent, insight, expertise, training, or even slight ability; but because Daddy gave her the job. Yes, she got it, like all her other jobs, not because she worked for it, but because Daddy bought it for her. Her cluelessness is epic.
4
Oh, I think the Republican elite know exactly how it works. They want you to BELIEVE in the 'hard work brings success' model, while enacting policies that will cement their own high status in place.
As a friend of mine cynically says, 'you gotta make money worth having.'
Meaning, what's the point of being rich if you don't get better health care and education for your family? Therefore, policies need to strip away the safety net for poorer people.
Nasty, no? Believable? Sadly, yes.
Our "progressive" democrats are calling for government takeover of health care, the energy sector, and food production. They appear ignorant of the potential consequences even though a perfect example exists in South America in a place called Venezuela.
This is not what I pay for The New York Times for. This country has provided more opportunity than any other country from any other time of history. Historically speaking the last 100 years has ushered in more wealth, prrosperity and increase in quality of life than any other time of human history.
@Jon "This country has provided more opportunity than any other country from any other time of history."
And over the last 100 years the U.S. has operated with public policies that today's GOP denounces as "socialism" (just as they have always done).
Subsidized retirement? Social Security = socialism
Guaranteed work? "The war effort" = socialism
Public employment? CCC = socialism
Subsidized higher ed? The GI bill = socialism
Subsidized health care? Medicare = socialism
And on and on and on and on and on .........................
Thank you Prof. Krugman for a clearly stated truth.
1
It is one thing to be handed everything you've ever had -- wealth, education, employment -- and quite another to make good use of it. I would forgive the Trumps their inheritance, over which they had no control, if they used it to the betterment of society, if they appreciated their privilege for what it is and lent a hand to those less fortunate. Instead, the Trumps have spent their lives and their fortunes standing on the necks of everyone else -- by refusing to rent apartments to people of color, by refusing to pay the laborers who literally built their business, by exploiting the undocumented workers they now claim are "invading" the country, and now by promoting policies and tax schemes that will ensure no one shares the advantages they have milked for generations. If one were to list every despicable human trait and congeal it into one person, that person would be a Trump.
3
Good on you for acknowledging that what they have in Europe is not actually socialism.
2
Fine progressive apologia for "socialism". I know I'll be following the good Doctor somewhat anxiously this go-round, recollecting the horror of the last presidential election, in which Dr. Krugman fought hard, and I thought unfairly against the progressive candidate; he positioned Bernie with Republican trickle down propagandists and deficit hypocrites as a Progressive fabulist who degraded the Democrat brand. This took my breath away when I read it. I mourned for the "Conscience of a Liberal" that day.
An analysis like this is an oversimplification; it leaves race and ethnicity out of the equation. The Scandinavian countries are overwhelmingly white. People who are down on their luck and need government help to keep from passing their problems down to their children look just like the rich. There's no marker that sets them eternally apart.
In America, it's easier to convince people that the ones who are down on their luck and need help are different, lower, less hardworking or whatever-- because their skin color sets them apart. (The fact that millions of the people who need help are as white as Wonder Bread gets buried.)
Republicans in general and Donald Trump in particular play this up endlessly. Birtherism, trashing a Muslim gold star family, five- and six-year old Mexican "rapists" being separated from their parents. As long as they can keep up the fiction that the only people who need help are the "other" white Americans can be manipulated to vote with their prejudices against their own interests.
And the rich, who don't actually mind showing their lack of prejudice by hobnobbing with Saudi princes or the Duchess of Sussex, gain all the rewards.
But the way I see it young Urban Socialists don't want a lot of stuff.
All they need is a real small house, no meat, used clothing, a bike, a train station, and a smart phone.
So guessing they don't need much money.
Right?
Misleading article, as it should be expected by a socialist. First- Nordic countries nearly went bankrupt when they did expand government. They reversed direction quickly and sold back state owned businesses, repealed many of their welfare reforms and replaced them with working models of capitalism. Nordic countries also have less external influences from illegal immigrants that left socialist countries because those policies failed there. Your paintbrush is too broad mr. Klugman. One final note- I am a second generation legal American. I identify with all things American and not with my previous family’s cultural heritage. We were never in a good place growing up. Father was nothing more than a sperm donor and I was the oldest of 6, raised by my mother. By all accounts, I should be poor. I’ve never been poor, broke but never poor. Today, my wife and I are close to being debt free. I made life changing decisions to improve my life WITHOUT depressing governmental handouts. I went out and found ways to self educate myself, support myself and several of my siblings at the same time. Many of my closest friends are first and second generation legal immigrants who came to America, struggled and sacrificed and now are leaving legacies. It’s a choice to live and thrive in a country that rewards struggle, sacrifice and the desire to improve.
1
The wealthy practice a grotesque form of socialism.
They share their financial losses with us so that we finance (bailout) the preferred order.
They share their wars with us so that our family members defend the preferred order.
They share their divisive politics with us so that we are too divided to resist the preferred order.
They share their myths with us so that we believe the preferred order is natural law.
As for the preferred order, it is sacrifices by the many for benefit and pleasure of the few.
1
The good old believe what we say, not what you see or experience first hand ruse. I am absolutely fascinated by the concept that the middle class got a tax cut. Every week you got more money in your check. Compliments of Donald Trump. Then when you do your tax returns, you have to pay or your refund is less than last year. All because you failed to have MORE in taxes withheld in your paycheck. The government didn't cost you more. YOU cost yourself more. It is all your fault. This is like you go to buy a car. The list price is $300 a month, but the deal is you can have the car for $250. a month. The door bell rings and it is the repo man. Apparently they are taking your car because you didn't pay the $300. They aren't taking your car. You LOST it because you thought the deal was actually a deal. You fell for the deal which was not really a deal even though we said it was a deal. But it's not, really. Got it?
What kind of soul does a country have that has no problem with the phrase “working poor” and the reality that phrase describes?
3
If only administrative and congressional leaders would take the time to experience a week--or even a day--in the life of an American earning ca. the median income.
I don't fault leaders who enter office with myopic knowledge and experience.
I do fault them for remaining ignorant. How can they even pretend to represent the American people?
1
It is all about educational attainment. 84% of children from the bottom quintile that get a college education move up.
1
I come from a lower class American family. I could only afford a state college, “university mill” degree. Had I remained in the US I would have gotten, at best, a lower to middle rung job in a corporate veal pen. I likely would have lost that job in the ‘08 meltdown and bye bye health insurance. And savings...
But I immigrated to Canada decades ago and found a wealth of opportunity, high earnings that put me into the top 5% income bracket, single payer healthcare and a financial system that didn’t collapse in ‘08.
All good luck to be sure, but to young Americans with skills I say vote with your feet. Your forebears did it once to better their lives. Learn from them.
1
The pernicious myth of capitalism as a meritocracy. As a kid, I believed everyone had an equal chance to become whatever they wanted to be. I also internalized (through no fault of my parents) the belief that wealth was linked to personal worth, if not exactly morality. I remember coming home after my first year in college, babbling about my new rich friends, and the hurt in my dad's voice as he suggested I should judge people by what they personally accomplish rather than how much money their parents have. It never occurred to him that the two might be linked.
It took me an embarrassingly long time to understand that America has never really been a meritocracy. Maybe, as some have suggested, it became a little fairer for a while, but in my lifetime the rich have always started the race of life with a huge advantage and received an enormous amount of help along the way - the best elementary education, private tutors, legacy college admissions, parental connections that lead to internships and jobs, family money that provides a safety net when they make mistakes. As exemplified by those I will not name, one can be utterly mediocre and succeed in America if born rich enough. Maybe that's true everywhere, but we're the hypocrites.
1
The problem begins when folks are given credence with no proof of being experts at anything. Like you and me, we need to prove our successes. Rich people are automagically praised for being rich. That is the problem humans have: they worship rich people.
Once humans stop worshipping the rich, humans will be better off. Ivanka and the Trump family is qualified to clean toilets in my company, I really do not see any other accomplishments other than taking money to try to make more money.
Don't know if Ivanka's a baseball fan, she was born on 3rd base, but is convinced she hit a triple.
I’ve often said there’s a segment of society who believe people do fall through the cracks, but that’s what the cracks are for. Obviously, these people don’t want all poor people to disappear. After all, there’s great need for maids, pickers, factory workers, etc.
Why is it that conservatives think that handing gobs of money to already-wealthy people will make them more productive, but handing a little bit of money (even in the form of cheap or free healthcare and education) to poor or middle class people will make them lazy? It is just self-serving twaddle coming from people with power. Ivanka is no exception.
4
The U S is still a colonial nation. The Pilgrims came to NA as representatives of God with the right to subjugate all before it.
Has anything changed other than the technology?
The white ( and subsequently any other coloured person who knows what’s good for them) American thinks he should be able to democracy and Freedum whenever and to whoever he/she wishes!
This ‘exceptional’ attitude reinforced with monopoly capitalism and military excess leaves you on the heath screaming to the wind, I am God. A broken experiment in the goodness of man brought down by individual greed and a philosophy that rejects civilization for subjugation of the soul.
Well done Trump.
On the upside, Michael Cohen just named Ivanka Trump as a massive co-conspirator in multiple criminal investigations. So Ivanka's opinion really doesn't count for much. She's probably facing criminal liability if not jail time. I can't wait for that subpoena to drop. Ivanka is going to be a case study in downward mobility.
2
Ivanka Trump appears to be the Marie Antoinette of our era, and as such she is likely to be the harbinger of an era of the tumbrils for her privileged class. Grotesquely unfair societies do not fair well over the long run.
The other advantage of the rich is that they have support when they fail. If you haven't a wealthy background, you have to risk your own, finite resources. You have Daddy, Mommy and their friends at the bank to slip you a loan.
This doesn't mean your life will be devoted to venial pursuits. Warren Buffett made his billions with the help of family friends, but is now giving it back to people in need.
But the poor and most middle class people don't have that kind of safety net. If they can get a loan, they have to pay it back. If they default, they can be ruined.
Donald Trump could bankrupt his companies and continue with his playboy lifestyle. The vast majority of us can't.
Thank you, Paul, the princess needed a public rebuke. The fact that these privileged, conspicuous consumers are the face and voice of aMErica is farcical.
The Republicans have an excellent propaganda system that has convinced a large percentage of American voters that any sort of social program is evil. That's why a lot of elderly voters who depend on Social Security and Medicare support a political party that, given the chance, would slash those programs to the bone.
1
The people who are really on welfare in this country are the rich.
They get the tax cuts. They take advantage of the carried interest loophole. They stash their tax cuts into buybacks. they stash their wealth in foreign countries to avoid American taxes. They act as if a $15/hr. minimum wage would tank the economy, when they know it wouldn't and they KNOW that even $15/hr. is merely scraping by.
And yet the poor and working class are supposed to work two or three jobs to pull themselves up by the bootstraps. they're supposed to go bankrupt over healthcare. They're supposed to go without dental care, eye care. They're supposed to ration their prescription drugs so that they can make it through the month.
They're accused of "socialism" because they want subsidized healthcare and lower college tuition and lower student loan rates.
Meanwhile, the rich carve up the country and stuff it in their pockets offshore and accuse the rest of us of being "socialists" who only want a hand-out. What black comedy.
5
Last time I checked there is free college, join the military for three-four years and you can earn it.
1
It sounds like Paul Krugman is trying to convince people that the earth is round. For those of us who believe the earth is round (as opposed to flat) it is almost painful to think that flat earthers still exist.
Looking beyond Ms. Trump's comment about American's wanting "to work for what they get," this is more about worker resilience and less about self-reliance. Most folks just simply want to feel good about the work they do and be compensated fairly.
We can debate what "fairly" means of course and the mindset of those that fail to recognize that success is most often built on the shoulders of others.
The political and economic discourse over the most of the last century has been focused on who holds the power to decide where resources are allocated. Red state voters generally (though not exclusively) live in areas highly dependent on traditional labor intensive industries that are vastly different eco-systems when compared to blue state urban ones.
This widening disparity creates a gulf that plays out in rhetoric targeting the most vulnerable and radical on both sides of the political spectrum.
It is naive to believe that national policies implemented in Scandinavia and Canada are applicable broadly in a nation with a much greater population, diverse economy, and workforce. That said, it is possible to see how individual states and localities might apply various aspects of them.
We have seen this playing out since our founding when the Federalists and Anti-Federalists conceived the framework for the Constitution and Bill of Rights. What we need now is a pan-partisan plan that recognizes the value in promoting resilience in rural, urban, and suburban eco-systems
1
Wonderful to see that, because of the coming 2020 election and the Democratic Party candidates who are talking of "Medicare for All," a marvelous discussion of equal opportunity, social justice and socialism has started.
The problems are with the Main Stream Media, who are promoting the Republican idea that such policies are "too expensive" and of course the Repubs are yelling the old "socialism horror stories." Quite amusing to watch.
I saw a horrid CNN piece with John King interviewing Kamala Harris. He asked her the "how to pay" question specifically where she would get the 2.5 to 3 trillion dollar figure for “Medicare for All.” What an absurd question! Easily answered. In fact America spends about 3 to 3.5 trillion on health care so he was already incorrect. Regardless, we will get the money from where we get it now; from working class people paying premiums, from retired people who pay a medicare premium, from taxes, and from everyone who will pay a medical tax; that's how insurance words and that's how the rest of the modern world does it. And many national health system are excellent and we can do even better. A single payer system we will be more efficient; our costs now are through the roof. The wealth will pay more with higher marginal taxes and in fact many will pay less than their current premiums. Remember there is a Koch Brothers study; showing that med for all would be cheaper than current 3-3.5 trillion spending. Harris did a good job of shutting up king
America's fear of socialism is out of proportion to what socialism is. Socialism is not a system that squashes individuality or initiative. If anything, capitalism as it's practiced in America, is killing initiative and hard work at every level. Ms. Trump is correct when she says we want to work for what we earn. But what we earn has to be enough to do a few things other than just exist. My parents were able to earn enough money to save for their future, to have a house, to take the occasional vacation, to put food on the table and to dine out when they wanted to. For 99% of us life is not working out that way.
It's very easy to sit on top of the economic ladder and make Delphic pronouncements. Travel down it and what you see isn't pretty. People who were earning enough losing jobs, not able to find new jobs, going bankrupt due to medical bills (their own or a family member's), unable to receive medical care when they need it, losing homes, living in substandard housing.
For a self proclaimed Judeo-Christian country America falls far short of meeting the least of those ideals. We do very well on the punishment and penalization side. And we certainly hand out welfare to the richest while neglecting the rest. However, as Obama said, no one accomplishes wealth all on their own. There's a lot of luck involved. Ms. Trump was born into wealth. She has not experienced the despair of a man or woman unable to find a job no matter how hard they look.
2
"People want to work for what they get" -- Does that mean that they are happy to work for whatever they get, even if a pittance that is insufficient to live on? Or does it mean that people generally would rather receive a wage than a hand-out? The latter is true, I think, but I am afraid Ivanka meant the former -- and that is very scary!
2
The middle class knows about “paying dues” - starting at the bottom. Waitressing, working in factories, answering phones, being bored at work but learning how to get through the day. Today it’s the gig workers going from job to job, stranger after stranger, dependent on those reviews to continue finding work. My fear is that in a few decades the gig workers in their 40s and 50s and 60s will still stuck in this odd economy. A lot of skill, experience and intelligence will be going to waste while we all get stuck with AIs running our lives.
1
Nutty ideas haven't just survived over a decade of Paul Krugman columns, where he keeps repeating basic, basic economics about trickle-down, and good times to borrow on infrastructure; they've survived the super-popular books of Malcolm Gladwell (mine were 2-for-$20 in an airport bookstore).
Gladwell's "Outliers" pointed out the hockey-player problem: most of them were born in the first half of the year; an even more disproportionate percentage in the first few months. All their young lives, these guys were a little bigger than the rest of the class, the team - did a little better, and so got more attention, help, challenges and opportunities. Your odds of being the NHL are halved by a December birth over January.
If that slight a bit of luck can double your odds, what effect do rich parents have?
It's not just the health and education; it's the connections, the first (and second, and third...) jobs. Fred didn't just give Donald hundreds of millions; he introduced him to all the NYC real-estate players and sharp lawyers. Fred knew all the politicians that could grease a project, get it federal and state grants and tax deals.
The "Ivy League" are not really about better education, not at undergrad levels. Basic chemistry is basic. It's about the connections you make, hence the stupid frat system.
A kid with connections, a first job, and the ability to fail (repeatedly) and come back, has way better odds than a January-birth hockey player.
258
@roy brander
Life is unfair and it isn't my job to fix it.
If I get lucky and win the lottery why must I give it to you because if I kept it I might spend some to give my children a good education which will give them a advantage over someone who can't get that education.
It's my money and you have no right to take it.
You can't take from me because others do not have.
That's not taxation to pay for programs we all need.
It's income redistribution and is legalized robbery and I am against it.
2
@lucky I am the product of an elite undergrad school. More was demanded of us in order to graduate. Yes, there are connections once you graduate. However, to say it is not about the education reflects a lack of knowledge of what the course work - required reading, papers, presentations, etc were expected. What is needed is better primary education in more schools - even if it means holding some students back.
12
@lucky
I don't think this is about taking money earned (or won) by person A and giving it to person B, who hadn't lifted a finger. The way I see it, it's more about trying to have ACCESS in society to opportunities for future economic prosperity (which would be dependent on work and innate ability, of course) being EQUIVALENT (not necessarily the same). This may seem hard and undesirable to socially "engineer". But if this is our goal, we can at least eliminate those societal pathways that are clearly unfair or non-equivalent, in terms of opportunity.
14
It might be good to remember that we had a grand experiment with what Mr. Krugman is discussing after WWII. It wasn't set up as an experiment but the results are instructive.
After WWII there was enacted something called the G.I. Bill which 'established hospitals, made low-interest mortgages available and granted stipends covering tuition and expenses for veterans attending college or trade schools' But is was not administered equally for white vets and vets of color. And we all know what group got the most from the bill. And the results continue to impact people of color today.
But it points out the fact that this Government help and support ushered in a period of economic, business and educational success for those who partook of it. Strangely, it is the very time that Republicans want to return to. I wish they would remember that the catalyst for this era was Government help.
2
Ivanka Trump missed the point of the Green New Deal proposal and the interviewer’s question. The proposl is for Government to provide a job for every able-bodied person if the private sector does not. Trump said she thinks people want to work. That’s what the proposal is all about. No handouts, but an opportunity to work and make a living wage. Trump is trying to quash the proposal only because it would require very wealthy people to pay their fair share of taxes to pay for the program. But those government jobs would raise up millions of hard-working Americans. Furthermore, if the jobs were part of an infrastructure program, all Americans would benefit. This is a proposal to build bridges to the middle class and everywhere else people want to go.
3
Back in the '50's when I was a young working woman/mother, with 1 year of college to my credit (couldn't afford more), I could always get a job.
In addition to job availability, there was the opportunity to "work your way upward", and as a result of that opportunity, I was able to reach the position of vice-president for two small hospitals. That's not possible now.
Too many jobs now require some kind of degree and obtaining those degrees has gotten more and more expensive and unobtainable for poor young people.
4
The right wing playbook is always to say those born on third base hit a triple. A wonderfully convenient fallacy to ensure wealth inequality in a rigged system. Meanwhile bloated government contracts and massive subsidies given to businesses aren't considered "welfare," but a family with both parents working getting a modest food stamp allowance is "welfare" of the worst kind. Until this kind of propaganda is reversed, America will continue betraying it's own promise of true reward for hard work and dedication.
9
Many people here have written--accurately--about the connection between Puritans and the gospel of wealth. But other factors have played a role as well. Early in American history, privileged white male leaders figured out that the best way to keep the poor in line was to fuel antipathy among impoverished people of different ethnic groups. They accomplished this aim by creating narratives that engendered fear: Native Americans were savages, African slaves were either docile and not very bright or a moment away from brutally attacking your wives and daughters. The most effective ploy: reminding poor whites that they may not have money or prestige, but they shared one trait in common with their oppressors--the color of their skin.
3
Actually when you think about it, what Ms Trump is saying is actually right - she is advocating meritocracy, which is what our capitalism is based on. The implication of what she is saying is that NO ONE (not the poor, nor the rich) should get what they have not worked for. No one should receive large estates. 100% estate tax is one way to do that.:-) What is needed is COMPASSIONATE CAPITALISM - a safety net that catches you if you fall; education and social support to open up ALL opportunities to ALL people; and a system to allow you to earn and keep as much as your efforts can get. Morality and Christian (or ANY religion) values are important but are NOT the business of the government
2
The idea that someone like Ivanka Trump or anyone from the Trump family should present her/himself as an icon of upward mobility is, well, laughable.
12
I maybe as old as dust but it wasn't all that long ago that someone was considered daft and wrong minded if they thought wealth was a reasonable goal we could work towards. We knew it was a mental illness to think that way. The last thing we respected was wealth, but we aspired to be a civil society and we thought our neighbors were not our enemies.
6
The other big thing Ivanka hit on that AOC said was something regarding people who don’t want to work. Trying to provoke division and anger in the “lower class” against those people who are the lazy and taking away all the hard earned taxes from those who work. The age old Republican play that’s worked forever especially when they can imply that those people are black. Fact is, it’s much better for if some do not work especially if the only option is a non-living wage job. Creating a scarcity of labor will cause wages to rise. And working 2 low paying jobs to survive leaves no time to move up in this world....especially if you have a kid to take care of.
1
Ivanka Trump knows nothing about the world of work .
She is an entitled heiress in the genre of Marie Antoinette.
She like her father could care less about working class and middle class people. They are rich and they got there through the benefits of democracy, clean air and water, gov taxes and the rule of law; all of the things this criminal family is busy trying to destroy . they are morally reprehensible, yes deplorable. If American could get over its insane worship of the dollar bill, maybe this would become clearer.
3
I would suspect most people don't even know what socialism means....if you are GOP, the meme is to stress the USSR and now Venezuela avoiding all the happy and prosperous countries in Europe and Asia. This will continue throughout the next campaign. It has already been echoed by Mnuchin.
Meanwhile, the GOP will keep their favorite socialism payouts as in tax breaks for siting a factory, farm subsidies, fossil fuel subsidies including corn ethanol stupidity and even McConnell's famous "Health care for Horses" subsidy. (etc.)
Asking Trump to give back the hundreds of millions of socialist subsidies he received is an idea...but the GOP's propaganda machine is excellent at deflecting that type of knowledge from their base. The GOP hive mind rolls on by keeping people ignorant of how things actually work.
2
I am sure Ivanka thinks she works very, very hard. And she has three kids to raise. But all of that goes much easier when you have gobs of family money both personally and through your rich husband, nannies, chauffeurs, other hired help, private planes, the nicest homes in the nicest neighborhoods, security details and the wherewithal to buy whatever you want, whenever you want.
If Ivanka really wants to live her tired trope (“Americans want to work for what they get”), she and Jared should try living without their daddies (and granddaddies’) money and hired help, get a couple of jobs (or more) working for other people for little more than minimum wage, work on the weekends (the poor and lower middle class often don’t have the luxury of taking their “Shabbat” off) and live paycheck to paycheck, worrying that any car breakdown (assuming they can afford one), medical issue or housing repair could result in a catastrophic financial problem, including eviction or foreclosure. And many of the working poor end up moving at least once a year, as their rents increase beyond their means or conditions become intolerable due to crime.
Like a bunch of other dilettante dime-store sociologists like her who were born on third base and think they hit a triple (thanks, Ann Richards), Invanka simply has no clue.
6
The Republican Party has become a fairy tale factory, a sort of Disney for oligarchs, spewing out propaganda on behalf of the 1% and multinational corporations. Absurd, thoroughly discredited lies such as trickle-down economics, taxation as theft, and the fake freedom and mobility of the “free market” are churned out like an endless, demented soap opera. Most Republican voters are not wealthy by any means. It’s a cruel joke that they think a crony capitalist fraud like Trump is on their side in terms of economic opportunity. The Republican Party are economic Royalists, desperate to preserve dynastic wealth and crush any real opportunity for the other 99%.
3
I respect Dr Krugman a lot. I have no respect for Mr Trump at all, but he has unquestionably come a long way. From a bombastic businessman and beauty-contest organizer to President of the United States is a high climb. You have to admit that, for a person of limited intelligence and questionable values, he has been eminently successful in his ambition to get the top job. It makes his feat both astounding and incomprehensible.
Interesting question. Why is it that America, the land of the great democratic experiment, goes and votes such mediocre individuals as George W. Bush and Donald Trump to the Presidency?
Mr. Krugman:
Please explain your thoughts on how the Democratic platform differs from socialism.
1
Telling it like it is Paul. Thank you.
The sad part is that the GOP will run the word “socialism” up the flagpole as the big bad bogeyman.
Never mind that no one in the Democratic Party is advocating that the government take over the means of production. Never mind that Canada, the Scandinavian countries and the rest of the first world haven’t fallen off the edge of the earth by providing strong healthcare, public education and safety net systems. Never mind that the overwhelming majority of Americans not only see nothing “socialist” about Medicare but would fight to the death to keep it.
Trump will nonetheless continue to trumpet “America will never be a socialist country,” and Fox TV will no doubt take up the chant. And millions of American will vote against their interest because they haven’t a clue what “socialism” is or what they are in fact giving up.
1
Bad enough we have to see and hear the president every day. Despite the cluelessness, ignorance, and let-them-eat-cake attitude of his children, especially his daughter, please don’t put them in your articles - and definitely leave out the photos. To see this as I was eating breakfast made me nauseous.
We all know how unrepresentative this family is when it comes to values that most of us care about. Hopefully they will soon be gone and history will record the disgrace of their departure. Voted out would be my preference as it would be an indicator that the American people get it. Maybe the kids will have to quit if their security clearances are revoked.
it's time to question ivanka, under oath, about her role in the family crime business. she knows a lot.
She personified cluelessness when she opposed guaranteed employment because "...people want to work... " Employment programs put people to work! Is that too hard to understand, or did she not hear the question properly because she had wads of trust fund dollars stuffed in her ears?
Would a GREAT man and father modify his Last Will & Testament if he knew his favorite daughter sold him out?
Ms. Trump would be absolutely astounded to learn just how hard lots of people toward the bottom of the economic heap actually do work, and how many problems and insecurities they have to deal with *now*, in order to survive...
1
Whether any of this is true or not-it really does not matter. I have friends born on third base and they think they hit a triple. So proud of themselves. I am self made, I watched and emulated the wealthy. The new Democrats truly scare me. They stand for true evil. Go to Cuba-the socialist paradise. Venezuela. That is their dream. I try to keep an open mind-but Cortez and the group, they are scary- they are not cute. They are not idealists, they are here to destroy.
2
@one percenter
Try visiting Sweden or Norway instead.
@one percenter While I am not sure that I agree with you about the new Democrats, if they truly scare you there are things you can do. First, recognize what gives rise to socialist movements. It is when extreme wealth and income inequality becomes established in a nation that extremist solutions begin to appeal to desperate people. Second, join a group called The Patriotic Millionaires. They recognize the danger of social unrest resulting from extreme inequality and work to address it while avoiding revolution. https://patrioticmillionaires.org/
Ivanka is against socialism. I am against socialites.
1
American workers have had to fight for every benefit they have ever received, whether higher wages, health benefits, reasonable hours or protections on the job, and when workers stop fighting all those elements erode. Yet Ivanka Trump, as many elite, act like the benevolent wealthy class generously bestows good jobs on the "deserving" poor.
The reality is she only need look at how she has personally benefited from her father's policies and business strategies to keep the poor poor: from redlining to the fraudulent Trump University to the workers who make their shoddy products. And she, in turn, trades on the Trump name to continue the exploitation. I was shocked by her statement about what workers want.
Americans want to work for what they get? Did she? If she really means it, let her put her kids in a ghetto and see if they can work their way up like all us other "patriotic" Americans. Otherwise, it's just another "let them eat cake" episode from another agent of corruption and rot in the USA. She may be more articulate than her father, but she's just as hypocritical, greedy, arrogant and empty.
The worst disconnect is that the Trumps own sweatshops overseas; and their employees work on a piecemeal basis, thus slaving away for them until an unrealistic quota is filled.
It's the closest thing the wealthy in America have to owning slaves.
Trump goes to his rallies wearing a suit manufactured in his Mexico factory, a tie from his facility in China, and a Trump-manufactured shirt from Indonesia while his loyal subjects scream out that insipid "America First" rhetoric.
Apparently it means what it has always meant. Prop yourself up on the backs of the people you dehumanize and treat like dirt.
How extraordinary it is that someone “given” the advantage of an entire life of inherited wealth, as well as always operating within a family owned business, actually would state that Americans do not want to be “given” guarantees of access to work for a livable wage and a chance at quality of life. I guess “What is good for the goose, is not good for the gander”. How very clueless and out of touch this entitled woman is.
Nordic countries are full of white people that share a history and values. Those policies won’t fly in a divided nation. This is a land of individuals and diversity. And it’s sink or swim.
1
I echo congressional democrats who called out Republicans for being more concerned about Cohen's potential book deals than the core corruption of Donald Trump. The GOP lacks ethics, morals, and holds a strong double standard -- including using people of color as props to show Trump is not a racist. They should all be ashamed of themselves, but shame is foreign to them.
Paul Krugman, you never cease to amaze me. I thank you for this perfectly brilliant piece.
1
There are no self-made men or women without society's participation and resources - capital and human. Wealthy Republicans hate the common good because they feel entitled to all of the good. Great wealth normally comes through great corruption.
The upward mobility applies first to this family who has taken over the government of this nation like a mafia takes a business in charge . And won't leave it until force separates them from it.
It is more than probable now that this ordeal will have a painful and possibly violent ending .
Among the extremely wealthy who are shaking in their boots at the prospect of a wealth tax over their first $10 million, has anyone explained what exactly they do with the excess that they can't do with $10 million?
You can be happy for under $100,000, with more than that not adding appreciably to one's happiness. Perhaps a few therapy sessions are in order. Surely their insurance will pay for it.
https://www.newsweek.com/how-much-money-do-you-need-be-happy-scientists-deliver-new-global-income-806996
I recently read the obituary for local Harold Brown. Interesting to contrast him with Trump. A genuine self made man. Not without his own warts but the good outweighs the bad and the real deal. People that go from rags to riches are uncommon but they do exist.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/obituaries/2019/02/25/harold-brown-who-built-expansive-real-estate-empire-dies/FNRl0Lr31uj3lYWa3Ng4HN/story.html
Many of the beliefs that Republicans espouse were well described by Charles Dickens. Workhouses were created because some thought that giving a helping hand -- which in most cases amounted to no more than a bowl of cold soup and a piece of stale bread--would make them lazy. Also, there was the "Puritan ethic" that the poor were poor because they and their descendants were being punished by God for their past misdeeds. By contrast, the rich were rich because God blessed and rewarded them for all of their (inherited?) goodness and virtue. So, here we have Trump, an amoral narcissist of immense wealth, who is interested only in satisfying his debased animal instincts. All those who support him and call themselves Christians should ask themselves "What would Jesus do?". When he feed the multitude with bread and fishes, was he concerned that they might get lazy after getting "all of this free stuff"? Was his feeding the poor and hungry an example of socialism?
I recently read the obituary for local Harold Brown. Interesting to contrast him with Trump. A genuine self made man. Not without his own warts but the good outweighs the bad and the real deal. People that go from rags to riches are uncommon but they do exist.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/obituaries/2019/02/25/harold-brown-who-built-expansive-real-estate-empire-dies/FNRl0Lr31uj3lYWa3Ng4HN/story.html
One of the reasons I read Paul Krugman is to check out the bluster from the right wing trolls who are usually drawn to comment on his pieces the way ants are drawn to picnics.
When they don’t — and they seem to be conspicuous by their absence this time — I assume it’s because Krugman’s points are so transparently self-evident it’s a waste of time and effort to try to tear them down.
Certainly seems to be the case today.
1
And Jeff Bezos started out selling used textbooks out his garage. Why didn’t Krugman think of that?
It’s called risk. Krugman is more comfortable in the safe space of academia.
2
Ivanka speaks of work when she and “the family” parade around on our taxpayer money.
2
Worst of all, think of the hundreds of thousands of men and women killed or maimed on the battlefield, believing their terrifying sacrifice was honorable, in defense of a country that now exists only for the enrichment of people like the Trumps and the citizens too blind or unwilling to see the indecency of these sickening corporate criminals and the few thousand more of them in control of the destiny of this nation. The tragedy of this is epic.
Oh really Ivanka? How does shilling Chinese manufactured clothing from the White House fit in with your concept of upward mobility for all? I think, my dear, you're confusing privileged opportunity with free-market rough and tumble game play as few (in fact no-one) have been able to access the 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. pop-up boutique. So you want to run that 'upward mobility' appraisal by us once more - after perhaps even a tiny little bit of thought?
This column highlights a long-standing economic performance issue in our economic system which many call free market capitalism and others call our system a regulatory welfare state.
Whatever you want to call it, the record shows that what we have created has an extremely difficult time with rendering a politically acceptable distribution of income and controlling an increasing concentration of wealth.
NYTimes Opinion Page Editor, David Leonhardt did a column recently on the subject of distribution of income and he published a chart which made clear that our society has been distorted significantly by our system.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/24/opinion/income-inequality-upper-middle-class.html?
This distortion of income distribution, I believe, can be corrected with public policy but it will require a careful study of the origins of the income gap and what we have been doing in since the end of the post WWII to aid and abet this distortion with public policy.
I am not much on the isms, my first thought on your lede, was I don't think the Trump family understands them, or concepts such as social mobility.
But it doesn't really matter because this morning I have been watching the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington and the speakers seem to mush all of society into a series of homilies and platitudes under the label of liberty and freedom. This kind of dialogue receives an amazingly enthusiastic response from the audience.
1
Wonderful column, Mr; Krugman, one of your best. Keep up this kind of thinking and you'll become a Bernie Sanders supporter, who stands for all the positive things you mention, always has.
1
Ivanka Trump knows as much about upward mobility as her father does about economics. Or foreign policy. Or the Constitution. Or government.
4
The other part of the privilege of elites is that the game is rigged in their favor. Not only are they born with privileges, but they do not pay for them in the form of progressive taxes and when it comes to crimes, the rules don’t seem to apply. The startling thing about Cohen’s testimony was how long he, Trump, Ivanka, Don and others had been getting away with bank fraud, other crimes and probably massive money laundering. Manafort too. Then there’s the guy who was convicted of human trafficking and got a slap on the wrist. Poor people can’t get decent lawyers, let alone make plea agreements like that. Elites don’t stay rich by working hard, they do it by bending the rules made just for them.
4
When low income members of any established social structure aspire to rise up, work hard, persevere and move out of the lower economic level many will succeed and prosper. Many more, for countless reasons, will not. Be it inability, lack of drive or commitment, family distractions or responsibilities or just plain bad luck, many, many people fail to reach their economic goals in life. This is normal, success isn’t always - in fact almost never - easy. Some start off on third base, most have to work their way around the bases and keep on keeping on. It’s always been this way, in any society that has ever existed...and it always will be. If you believe that taking from the well-off to lift the not-so-well-off is the answer to income inequality, you are either not paying attention or are deluding yourself...and that includes Paul Krugman.
So true: If I had a hundred dollars for every manager I have worked for in my career, who "grew up poor working on a farm" only to become a self-made man, I would be a "self-made" man. Even better, I cut grass for a wealthy business owner in high school who claimed to be self made...until his daughter informed me he got his start on a 3/4 of a million dollar gift from his mommy (1960's money). Not enough, there was another 3/4 million dollars later when his business was in serious trouble. His business only succeeded when he was lucky enough to manufacture a part for the "Six-Million-Dollar-Man" action figure which sold well...the bionic self-made man. Howl.
3
We haven't even reached a point of consensus on finding a way to provide group health insurance for those who do not fall into a "group" for health insurance purposes. In between the many covered by employer-sponsored group insurance and those who are Medicaid-eligible are working people who are one hospitalization away from financial ruin because they are either self-employed or working for a business too small to provide group insurance. All these people ask is what so many others have - a chance to buy group insurance. Compounding this tragedy is the fact that it costs taxpayers more when someone goes on Medicaid than if that person had group health insurance. Premiums for the insured continue to rise, as well, because hospitals have to get money from somewhere to treat the uninsured and so they continue to raise costs for the insured. This state of affairs exists because neither the private sector nor the government will move to close the gap. In the last analysis, it's the government's responsibility to see that crises are resolved - and make no mistake, this is a crisis. The Affordable Care Act attempts to resolve this, but politics has decreed that whatever aspects of it need fixing are not to be fixed. It's a mean kind of politics that countenances a system in which taxpayers pay more so that that a segment of society gets nothing.
2
As favorite myths go, there are a few other unicorns and easterbunnies we could retire. Take for instance our great Meritocracy. The concept that what you know (or know to do) will lift you up the ladder almost magically, has long obscured the fact that the real up route lies in Who You Know, not what...
Once upon a time this country, by dint of being the big winner after WW II, largely because our productive industrial capacity had expanded and was intact, experienced a Big Bang in GNP growth for a couple decades. There was such a need for qualified folk (men, then) to fill economic slots that what, not who, you knew got you in, then up, fast.
That boom subsided in the Nixon years. Since then "equal opportunity" has been the Leprechaun's pot'o'gold.
But, let's talk SOCIALISM.
Socialists should be buying 3 billboards outside every city to establish the lines of debate. "SS, Medicare, the Interstate roadways, etc, ARE SOCIALISM. Do you want to get rid of that?"
Get rid of that, of course, translates to- Privatize. As in exchange public tax for private "tax" ( and this opens the door to discuss the privatized taxes we all pay for goods and services for- well corporate healthcare- every purchaser pays for healthcare, just not their own. There is also the consumer private taxes for "political influencing"...against our interests).
The huge, HUUU-jah!, threat of the GOP attack on socialism is that it is not DEE Fence, but a ploy to eliminate the socialist by privatization
224
@M. J. Shepley I'm still looking for where I can donate to finance those billboards. Progressives are incredibly stupid not to educate the voters en masse. There are many working people who would "get it" on their way to work and switch their votes from R to D.
14
@M. J. Shepley Amen.
6
@abigail49
so am I!
Let me know when you find the folks doing it (why not, I gave Bernie over $200 in 2016).
Oh, and I would say, at least in major Metropolitqan Areas, a weekly newspaper (to give some pushback to the MSM and rightwing Oligarch media) would be a good investment. Long term.
Plenty of journalistos looking for paychecks...
9
As I understand it, Socialism means that the government exists for the benefit of all its citizens, not just for the "1%", Trust fund babies like Trump, Koch Brothers, and Jarad Kushner, and other Kleptocrats. The right wing in the United States has made Socialism in this country a taboo word where the average person does not comprehend that social policies that benefit everyone in the society are good for them. They have allowed a small minority to drive the conversation by using fear, propaganda, and theft of voting rights to make people vote against their vested interests. Don't fall for the Trump con man tactics and ask yourself "Has this man done anything for me?" Donald Trump and the current Republican Party seem to be doing Putin's business of turning the United States into an isolated, 2nd world power that no longer is a leading supporter of Democracy in the world.
3
What Mr Krugman always forgets to mention is the disparity in size between the US and countries that he mentions as having generous safety nets.
He also fails to mention that some of those benefits are now under review as with population growth and immigration, they are becoming unsustainable at current levels.
Also being ignored is the wealth that comes from oil in Scandinavian countries. As everyone moves "green", where do you replace the profits that come from fossil fuels?
Maybe he should be comparing states as opposed to countries.
Social mobility is a lot more complicated than just having opportunities like health and education and working hard. Although these are essential. There is also a whole social and psychological side that makes climbing the ladder difficult. People from different social classes have different outlooks. As Sen observes people at the lower end adjust their dreams downwards to what is more “realistic” for someone in their situation. When you are at a social disadvantage and get the message that you’re second rate all the time, it’s hard not to internalise that. There are also a lot of unwritten rules that if you’re not born into the club, you don’t automatically know, you have to learn. Without the “right” social contacts, you’re very much the outsider. For instance, when I first started in legal practice at an elite firm everything had always been such a struggle for me that I was grateful for every crumb I got. Unlike my more well heeled colleagues, I had no sense of entitlement. I remember saying to my boss that our client wanted to do something but the relevant authority had said “no.” In my world, if you tried hard and an authority said “no” you accepted it and moved on. So I was surprised when my boss retorted “well, make them say “yes” then.” It seems so basic, but I needed to develop a completely new mindset. As for my colleagues who came from legal and business royalty, they had so many advantages just from having the right surname and from who they knew.
2
We may not be able to overturn Citizens United at the moment, but at the very least we can put our politicians running for high office on the spot. Know where their corporate campaign dollars came from (check Open Secret, for one source) and then hold them accountable. Ask them how the money has influenced their votes. Ask them how much they take the lobbies' views into account versus the views of the rest of us - the "little people" - who might or might not vote for them.
1
I found that sociologist Arlie Hochschild Russell's book "Strangers in Their Own Land" illuminating about the myth of upward social mobility and why people vote against their own self-interests. Based on years of field work in Louisiana. TY Mr. Krugman for this clarifying perspective.
1
What Dr. Krugman fails to mention is that in this country (unlike in many others), poverty is highly correlated with race and ethnicity. Racism is a significant reason for why certain poor people do not get ahead - because in addition to being poor, they have brown skin and/or maybe speak a different language. Humans being humans (very flawed ones), we are more likely to want to give a helping hand to someone who looks like us, rather than someone we consider to be "Other". Fans of socialism always point to the Nordic countries...well, did you know that in Iceland, for example, every citizen is related to one another? You're basically helping your cousin, as opposed to someone whose language and culture you can't understand. I am certain that if we were an all-white, same-language country, we'd help each other much more. It's racism that is getting in the way.
2
@C
U are so right on! I saw it in the Air Force and in my career years ago and it hasn't changed that much. When Obama became president a lot of people thought this would help alleviate the problem. To the contrary with Trumps help it has gotten worse.
1
To win elections in the US, progressives need to acknowledge the power and beauty of the myths: we want choice, maybe more than any other nation so we believe that we have mobility choices. The desire for choice keeps abortion legal, keeps the public option, but not Medicare for all, possible, and keeps the disdain for those "unwilling" to work strong. We admire extreme wealth so much that we pretend it is usually deserved and we pretend that it is available to those who seek it with unwavering intention. Think about how amazing it is that the estate ("death") tax isn't greater yet subsidized day care is not available. The American religion is wealth without charity.
1
The terror evoked by the word “socialism” result from the most successful con game ever perpetrated upon the America people. Fear of the “freeloading other” has been institutionalized. The media meanwhile promotes “up by the bootstraps” stories as the idealized version of American life, never mind the odds. Work hard, win a competition, meet the right person. Ta da! No inborn advantages or government ha doubts required.
200
@1 Woman Why would you want to work hard for $8 per hour? There are not enough hours in the day to earn a decent living, no less get ahead. And on top of that, you have to be smiling, grateful for the work. Sounds a lot like the expectations of a slave owner.
19
@1 Woman
"Fear of the “freeloading other” has been institutionalized".
And that tired old trope is not going to be dismantled any time soon in the US. How you educate those that have been brainwashed by those who want to keep them at heel is beyond my ken.
23
@mary
Because you don't have a choice.... Let's face it, if your parents didn't go to college you probably won't - maybe a community college and then... you better be good with your hands and have no vices. In contrast, if your parents went to selective universities it's almost like having a trust fund.
And these parents should know that their kids' advantages are at the expense of other kids - as they celebrate their kids' admission into 'highly selective' universities and other "educational" programs. Quite an education.
What I learned was that capitalism is based only on competition - and no cooperation - and even Darwin wouldn't go this far.
15
My experience has taught me that teaching kids about social justice does less to help them climb out of difficult circumstances than teaching them fundamentals the enable to them to understand and reason in a complex world. Progressive views are generally always simplistic in assigning outcomes to chance and denying the natural laws of the survival of the fittest. Rather than ridicule someone like the Trumps and lament how unfair life may be, time would be better spent teaching principles that help individual rise above their circumstances through developing behaviors that improve their odds of overcoming their dire circumstances.
I know what it's like to be poor and I know the pathway out of poverty and it isn't through the doors of government assistance. It's through some very difficult days working and sacrificing to get something better. Frankly, the harder you work, the luckier you get.
Some interesting reading to ponder in relationship to this author's view.
https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/three-simple-rules-poor-teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/
Some interesting viewing from someone whose perspective has worth in light of his scholarship and racial experience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7hmTRT8tb4
1
Professor, while I agree with your analysis, there is one cultural element that no one seems to be talking about -- our obsession with celebrity. This runs the political gamut: pundits on both the left and right are worshipped as the second coming of the Buddha. Athletes, pop music stars, actors -- the list goes on. Everyone wants to be associated with his/her hero of choice. It is this phenomenon which brought us Donald Trump and which continues to keep our eye off what really matters, namely policy decisions which affect ordinary Americans. I can only hope that the new breed of public servant, such as AOC, resists the temptation to join the cult of celebrity.
1
Hard work, determination, and *luck* are what it takes to succeed. Very few people succeed with just one of those, luck being the most important. And if you do happen to be lucky enough to have a good life, you don't have to necessarily go out and save the world, but please for God sake be grateful and try not to complain too much.
5
Mr Krugman. Don't you get tired of speaking the obvious. Please share the words that bridge the gap of not understanding. Embracing income the reality of income inequality appeals to some magical thinking and ego disruption that winning the lottery is the only way to achieve a decent life. And not just the little lottery wins. The big one. The 100 million dollar, once in a life time win. Why doesn't that once in a lifetime resonate with people. It won't happen to you. Zero. You won't win the lottery. Nada. Never. Won't happen. Why is there no appeal of a plan B? Access to health care and education and a social safety net that insures that you will have a chance to participate in society. Insures. Guarantees. What is the emotional disruption that substitutes a phantasm of self-reliance for a shared pursuit of the common good. That is what is in the Constitution. Why is that not the pursuit of the vast majority. Why do we buy the fake for the real?
1
To focus on one point, I have read time and again that healthcare related expenses are the leading cause of bankruptcy in the United States. If nothing else, we should strive for free or low-cost high-quality healthcare for all. I firmly believe this to be the most important thing for our society at large. Sick, unwell people are on able to contribute in the ways that they would like to. A healthy workforce is the only kind that has a remote chance of making America great (again).
1
Yeah, we all agree 'Nordic socialism' practiced in small, low population relatively homogenous countries like Norway & Denmark, seems to work fairly well. However, our country seems to have an element which wants to send it careening into what might be called 'South American socialism,' as in Venezuela, promises of free handouts to all, especially the poorest, with no plan as how to pay for them. Nordic countries have small homogeneous populations used to centuries of pulling together to hack out the possibility of survival in harsh cold climates. That ethos isn't what's driving current 'progressives.'
1
America has an “element” that is intent on hoarding vast amounts of wealth and denying others the opportunity to improve their lot.
6
Mr. Krugman, I wish you had included in your article two institutions that helped people from modest backgrounds into the middle class: one was the GI BIll for higher education after World War II and the other was the rise of unions, which guaranteed a living wage to all participants. As a woman, I am grateful to my union for wage parity during my working life.
560
@RachelT
I totally agree with you. My brother went to college on the GI bill, and I taught school for 25 years and retired with a modest pension. Without a union, I would have retired only on what I could save at a low wage and social security benefits. The GOP wants to take that away from teachers and retirees. People in SD are uninformed about unions and do not support them. This is a "Right to Work" state - meaning no unions and low paying jobs.
36
@Kris
They myth of unions being part of the economic socialist engine that raise wages, provides benefits including heath care and pensions as well as job security is just that, a myth. Unions totally wrecked the railroads, the textile and apparel industry, the shoe industry, and a host of others. Unions were corrupt and tone deaf to the changing world around them. They could not adjust to automation, inflation, advanced jobs in technology, advances in science, and tax policies the broke the back of the middle class. Kowtowing to unions bankrupted the auto industry as it did to steel and mining. The effects on the health care were equally devastating. Socialized medicine has seen increased costs for doctors, drugs and long lines everywhere for doctors. Try getting an appointment for a specialist. That's socialized medicine. Worse, go to a crowded emergency room. Maybe South Dakota has well informed citizens. Socialism works only to a point and then it becomes self-destructive. With Republicans in power there is little hope for real change. Unions are not suddenly resurrected and they are not the benign benefactors upholding the rights of workers.
I don't like what we have now but I don't want to go back to the days where unions ruled by intimidation and demagoguery. There must be a middle ground and a new middle class. We don't need a union class. First lets end Republican power and then find a better way to equality in jobs, wages, and power. Without unions.
1
Hard work may be virtuous, but what is the virtue in three jobs that leave no time for sleep or enjoying one’s life?
8
It hardly matters whether Ivanka's opinion stems from an astounding cluelessness or from pure mendacity; either way it's another example of "morailty" espoused by someone who wasn't just born with a silver spoon in their mouth, but who slept in a silver crib.
I come from a white, upper middle class home. My parents were highly educated and I went to good schools, two of them private. I served in the USAF, I went to college on the GI Bill, and I've spent the last 50 years working hard for my family and myself.
I had advantages many Americans never had, yet here I am, now entrenched in the lower middle class, knowing that I will likely have to continue working until the day I die.
I dream of a future where my own children might do better than I did, but in front of me is a nightmare vision where the United States of America turns into a version of the Trump Corporation.
Sad. And scary.
654
@Gregory Howard, I feel your pain! Here I am in my early seventies and still working. Most probably will have to keep on going till I drop dead.
54
@Gregory Howard
Totally get your pain! Parents were refugees (WW2) and worked hard - I had a public school education in NYC (excellent at the time) and went to the top music school in the US (Juilliard) I call my career "fame but no fortune" as the salaries of musicians has stagnated and is now falling. (ex. what once paid $500 is now paying $250 given budget cuts in all aspects) I'll be working until the end...
54
@Gregory Howard Right there with you. My parents (father a laborer and WWII vet) actually were lower middle class and for a time, it looked as though I would rise higher (college education, etc.), which was their wish. Then some job layoffs in our 40s and high medical expenses in our 50s struck. The final blow was the 2008 recession. Gone was a good portion of our savings till we made it to age 65 and social security.
Now we mostly depend on our social security checks to survive, though the increase this year did not even cover our increased Medicare/supplemental premiums/Part D costs. Wish someone would hire me (age 69) so I could supplement that. Believe me, age discrimination is alive and well and no one wants to train someone my age.
At least our kids lived through our pain and live themselves well below their means so the same does not happen to them. Unfortunately, they may be supporting us in about ten years if we're still around.
52
I often wonder if progressives ought to be talking about, and keeping the focus on, un-rigging the system rather than our stingy social safety net. While I favor a more much more robust safety net, I also wonder if a simple leveling of the playing field, requiring the oligarchs to play be the same rules as everyone else, would not very effectively address many of the social ills we face.
2
If the Republican party is so committed to rewarding hard work, how come their first order of business was to abolish the estate tax on inherited wealth? A laborer who is owed money by the deceased person or even the estate for services rendered has to pay taxes on what they receive from the estate, but the child who inherits the money doesn't?
If Ivanka thinks her father actually was working at the age of 3 to earn his 200K annual salary, I'd love to know what she thinks he did.
Why is it that the media never asks these people the obvious questions? Is it because they know that the Trump's would retaliate by refusing to be interviewed ever again?
2
See “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism,” in which Max Weber argues that material success is a sign of spiritual election.
It is a shame that in a so-called leading Western democracy, so many basics of life such as access to quality healthcare, childcare, and education are a function of income. This is not the way it is in that part of the world that Mr. Krugman adduces.
Universal basic income should be the foundation of any serious social reform. One cannot function as a human being without adequate income. Families can fail through no fault of their own.
Methinks Ms. Trump is rather envious of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s fame and celebrity. That is what is motivating her self-serving obtuseness.
Just a chip off the old block.
1
What is too often overlooked in the success equation is how much your social network matters as much as your innate abilities. Republicans love rags to riches stories which they cite as evidence of the American dream's universal access, but these stories are notable because they are the exception and not the norm. Opportunity does occurs in a context. Democrats recognize this, Republicans pretend it's all up to the individual. Trump was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple.
3
We need to hear more from Ivanka and Jared. Without interviews like the one cited in Mr. Krugman’s column, we would be left to speculate that they are a couple of vacuous, lightweight, trust fund ciphers. Now, we know.
4
@RH: Yes. She makes me shiver, so cold and artificial (plastic). Her affected "voice" makes me cringe.
Clearly there is no such a thing as self made (economic) success for starters. Access to education, a culture of curiosity and empowerment, role models are part of the things we need to have a chance to "succeed". Those are not equally available to every kid, but it is all provided to us during our youth. No one ever self taught themselves to talk or read.
Then access to money, network of resources is a second dimension of enabling social success.
Lets not forget, there is also what the genetic lottery gave us. It is far easier to succeed when you are good looking and bright than if you are not. We don't really choose our genes.
My wife and I can be a good example of "success", we both studied in France and moved to the US with Ph.D.s and 4 suitcases and very importantly no debt. Twenty years latter, we have good jobs an awesome daughter and quite a bit of wealth. We would never ever though of ourselves as self made. While we did not start with a lot of money, the access to education and referrals from network of scientists enabled us to get started here on a good track.
The US had and have opportunity for people like us that France did not have.
Now what is success ? In the US, it is really how much wealth you have. In France, it is more how interesting and decent a person you are.
At the end of the day, I think success should be about feeling in the right place in the world. Insecurity with status make this hard everywhere.
3
This may be the most important column in the Times in quite a while. Forget about Trump's tweets.
The key sentence is: "Americans whose parents have low incomes are more likely to have low incomes themselves, and less likely to make it into the middle or upper class, than their counterparts in other advanced countries."
Conclusion: good schools are a very important input to helping the poor improve their chances to rise in economic terms. Thus the #1 priority in the USA and western Europe should be the best schools. That means spending money on schools, on teacher salaries, on equipment for advancement.
Everyone needs to ask themselves whether they support this and whether they are willing to pay higher taxes for this.
3
It's maybe a bit simplistic to think that the progressive agenda is going to change income inequality and improve social mobility. One of the problems in recent years in the U.S. has been the influx of immigrants with low educational attainment who tend to stick in their income categories. Another problem has been the great rise in the permanently unemployed who are on SSI disability insurance, basically ensuring stasis. Good educations and good health certainly can contribute to mobility, but by expanding the low income, low education immigrant population and expanding welfare programs, there are forces at work against mobility in the population as a whole.
3
Thank you Mr. Krugman. We are proud when you speak up about matters of fairness, true democracy and social justice.
Please keep up this kind of discussion. It points out the many mythologies of the "pure" capitalists and the sad state of the countries republican party. (and perhaps Democratic Party)
You are an authentic person and provide hope to many of us that America can progress toward a certain kind of greatness as in some of the nordic countries, which over and over again give measures, that people there and some of the happiest on Earth.
1
Great piece. I would love to hear more about why Paul Krugman states that the social system in Scandinavia is not actually socialist. Their systems are often referred to as democratic socialism, but is Mr. Krugman taking it a step further and suggesting they are not even that, but simply vibrant democracies with robust social safety nets?
One other thought. I would also add environmental regulations to the list of social protections that these countries enjoy, while our country is falling behind. Our reality show president displays a heartless indifference toward the natural world. He has gutted the EPA, and has silenced and censored legitimate scientific data. He denies climate change, and is trying to eliminate protection of our drinking water, national parks and other shared aspects of our natural world. The conservative extreme-capitalist agenda is "toxic" in more ways than one.
8
I rarely go for memes, but I saw one that is a brilliant microcosm of debating Republicans on this:
Republican: "Socialism never works!"
reply: "Norway is socialist and they're doing great!"
Republican: "They're not socialist! They're capitalist countries with with strong welfare policies!"
reply: "Then let's adopt those policies!"
Republican: "No that's socialism!"
The original lacked the exclamation marks but was considerably more visually dramatic.
The only way to get through is to expose the cognitive dissonance between right-wing policy beliefs and the actual effects of those policies, and pray that they cannot squirm away from thinking about it.
4
@Jacob Sommer Norway has very strong immigration policy. You cannot get a job or any benefits there without a proper paperwork. Why don't we start with this here.
2
It's great to contrast the Tea Party and the progressive approach, but to reach a stable political solution, we are going to have to meet somewhere in the middle. We are not going to become Sweden, now or ever.
1
Thank you Mr Krugman. This is a wondrously illustrative and helpful column. You go to the heart of the problem of the sneering socio-pathy of the Trump regime and its Republican enablers.
1
Thank you! The advertising skills within the Republican Party continue to spin things into the opposite of reality, in service of the rich wanting to be even wealthier. It works like a charm for a minority of voters, as in "you can fool some of the people...," but it is always at the direction of the wealthy (make America the old Confederacy, anyone?). The League of Women Voters accept men as members, so I joined. We work to get out the vote, regardless of Party membership, while our whole platform has truly humane content. I admit it with pride and would like to believe that getting out the "vote" will be the greatest help, given that the majority of the voting citizenry want things that will be truly for the common good. It is in the near vacuum of the non-voting populace that the con has worked to get certain people into public office virtually by default. No wonder the voter suppression through the yet again false advertising of "voter fraud," of course also aimed at the poor and minorities. I'm hoping that the turn-out in 2018 and it's results in general is a sign of a turnaround, despite Trump's very revealing threats to Republican candidates who dared to distance themselves from him.
1
Thank you Paul Krugman,
It is not everybody but all I can do is relate my experience growing up in ultra conservative pre quiet revolution Quebec.
The Ivanka Trumps of this world know only their society, why should they acquaint themselves with societies whose ethics and more require learning and asking questions that may require self doubt and reflection?
My parents spoke English to each other because their Yiddish dialects were completely different. My mother was a product of working class Montreal and my father's background was many generations of professional class Europe.
Socialism for America's celebrity class is just another word for the other.
We may make fun of Ivanka and her inability to understand how ignorant her words seem but she is everything she was raised to be. We need to include our Ivankas in our conversations as well as all those conservatives for whom our world moves much too fast. Forgive me my prejudice but the number one food in Scotland is curry not oatmeal.
At least conservatives understand the dangers of exposure to other cultures in world of choice.
1
@Montreal Moe
I enjoy my Haggis on Robbie Burns day and we now have vegetarian and vegan Haggis but curries with fresh naan or puris and a mango chutney are for every day not just a cold day in January.
My father always had a garden and I grew up near Little Italy and Montreal's Jean Talon Market and I learned very early our diet was very different from that of our neighbours. I am 70 and my cohort didn't grow up eating eggplant, chick peas and fresh garlic. I remember being admonished by the vice principal for my garlic breath 59 years ago. The pain is still there but I now understand who was the loser.
1
I think to prove the point about wealth and opportunity a person need look no other place than Capitol Hill. There interns and low paid staffers typically come from some kind of moneyed parents. That allows them to take no or low-paid jobs, gain the experience and build the connections to move up either in politics or business connected politics. The low income, smart person from the state school is rarely seen on Capitol Hill, regardless of ethnic background.
4
and the right has vilified AOC for paying her entry level staff more and higher level staff less
1
Quoting Krugman:
If Tea Party types got their way, we’d see drastic cuts in Medicaid, food stamps and other programs that aid Americans with low income — which would in many cases leave low-income children with inadequate medical care and nutrition.”
Why?
Seriously, why?
Most Tea Party adherents have no more chance of escaping poverty than poor people.
Give me a wonkish answer, religious, philosophical; anything that explains this potentially self-destructive behavior.
2
Found this to be compelling. I live in suburban Detroit, and I am so discouraged by the meanness and vulgarity that plagues our nation. We have to find a better way to foster dignity and equal value amongst all our citizens and guests. This is for me the defining issue of our time. How we see the worth of others is reflected in how we handle all international and domestic political policies
6
@AEF: I hear you and agree, neighbor in Northville!
I would love to know Mr. Krugman’s thoughts on whether the question is inequality or a lack of a basic decent living standard for everyone? In other words, do we really care about the gap between the bottom 20% and the bizzilionaires if the bottom 20% has decent healthcare, housing and education? In other words is inequality itself a bad thing? Or, is the moral issue providing the basics to all members of society. These are two different issues, though connected in the sense that moving resources from the top and the bottom might the inequality gap, but not necessarily. I personally don’t see the problem so much as inequality but rather proving the basics to all members of our society. If we did that, mobility would increase and I don’t see inequality in and of itself as a moral problem.
,
1
Upward mobility has a lot to do with opportunity. The following example is a good illustration. Beijing, the capital of China, now has more millionaire than any other city in the world. And among those millionaires, the majority of them come from poor and middle class background. It is the plentiful opportunities that giving them the chance to innovate and moving up. Mr. Jack Ma, chairman of Alibaba, and Mr. Pony Ma, CEO of Tencent, both came from ordinary background, are very good examples of that.
It is time that Krugman turned his considerable talents to looking at the US Military as an economic engine. Points to consider:
1) GI Bill - All who served - women, draftees, enlisted, or career-got the GI Bill to pay for a college education and a down payment on a house....building blocks for the middle class
2) Integrated the military - Truman integrated the military in 1948 - military children, regardless of parent's rank or color, all got the same education and all had access to medical care and were fed adequately....for the first decades, dependent children were also raised in two parent families..
2
The GI Bill could be justified following WWII as a means to address the economic disruption that occurred and for veterans who’d faced combat but makes no sense if applied to members who entered after the end of the draft since they are much better compensated than those who served during conscription. Additionally, the taxpayer spends quite a lot to recruit, test, screen, transport, train, feed, clothe, house and care for them. When they leave, they do so with a lot of expensive training. The taxpayer shouldn’t be on the hook again simply because they want a career different from what they were trained for.
1
@From Where I Sit
Maybe you haven't been following the news for the last 15 years, but the US military has been continuously involved in wars and peacekeeping operations. With a very small percentage of the population joining the military, the airman, sailors, soldiers, and marines have often had multiple tours away from their families and friends and in a very dangerous profession. I believe that these patriots, who could have done what the great majority of Americans do and avoid serving, deserve our thanks and financial commitment. A GI Bill for these veterans who served our country in wartime for extended periods is more than warranted.
@From Where I Sit What if we developed a GI Bill type of entitlement that wasn't just for military service? If you put in five years of national service by the time you were thirty you would qualify for health care, schooling, and a modest stipend. But national service would be broadened to include teaching, social work, daycare workers. As with the military, you would go where you were sent during your time of service. It could be entirely voluntary.
I encourage any and all to read Oxford Economic Historians Robert Allens miraculously short & easy to read “Economic History: A very short introduction”.
It’s not long, its not laborious, it is not expensive and it is highly informative.
Outside of Britain, the entirety of the 1st world (during the 20th century) got to industrialized 1st world status by following Alexander Hamilton’s “Standard Plan” for industrial policy during the 19th century.
That plan relied upon four legs:
1. Protection for infant industries.
2. Invest heavily in infrastructure,
3. A central bank to moderate the affect of panics and provide credit for infrastructure and new industies
4. Universal public education
All the countries that adopted this plan in the 19th entry were 1st world in the 20th century, including Germany, France, Italy (and Japan belatedly in the early 20th century).
One country adopted the first 3 but not the 4th (education) - that country was Mexico. As a result Mexico could not absorb the technology of industrialization.
In the U.S., the North basically followed Hamilton, while the South followed Jeffersons vision. The Civil war was basically a face off between the two men’s visions. (That makes Hamiltons death the first casualty of the Civil War).
Hamilton’s plan no longer worked after the civil war. New strategies had to be devised.
But in the 21st Century higher education is paramount to prosperity and we need to set it FREE to all who can reach it.
7
Higher education should be available to all who can afford it up to the limit of what percentage of jobs actually require those skills. We shouldn’t be graduating too many lawyers, too few engineers or any art history majors. Beyond the sheer numbers who can actually be absorbed by each major, all others need to be efficiently matched with realistic job projections: train the necessary number of grade school students to do their eventual jobs in big box retail, the necessary number to cover specialty jobs and the rest to be drafted and assigned to the military and critical industries.
@From Where I Sit
So higher education is only a jobs training program that should only be used to prepare people for jobs in commerce. Really. I don't think you understand the meaning of "higher education." We have lawyers running non-profits, English majors leading major Fortune 500 companies, and art majors teaching our children. Education is about learning how to learn, not preparing people for jobs in the steel industry, or to become coal miners, or to be an autoworker -- or any other trade that may become obsolete before the studen even graduates. Instead, "teach them to fish" and you will have a workforce that is able to do many types of job.
@Noqwus
Higher education is appropriate to the numbers of people employed in the associated majors but since the vast majority of it is supported by tax dollars, a finite resource that is collected through confiscation schemes, it should be rationed appropriately. No one employed at Starbucks or taking claims class at Allstate truly needs a college degree to properly do their job. Fire, no one at JiffyLube or Home Depot or the local supermarket legitimately needs a full K-12 education.
Doing away with the estate tax is practically guaranteed to move us away from capitalism in the direction of feudalism. That's certainly not the kind of economy that anybody wants.
5
Alice Walton and the rest of Sam’s family certainly have more right to the proceeds of his “better mousetrap” than you, me or the guy off loading their trucks at the nearby Walmart.
Thank you Dr. Krugman. Although, given that this isn't truly a democracy, it doesn't really matter what the people think or know. America is a kind of purgatory for those that know truth and live ethically.
8
Many conservatives and moderates claim that the way to get ahead is to get a good education. The only problem is that education in this country has become an expensive product. If these folks really believe the poor and lower middle class could succeed with more education, they should be backing legislation to create low-cost education programs instead of funneling federal money into student loans to be used at private, for-profit schools. The whole private education scam has created a class of educated poor people who are saddled with large student loans they will often default on.
8
City and state colleges provide excellent educations to those who actually do the work.
Most colleges are very generous with their scholarships. Full and part scholarships are routine; ditto work stints.
Yes, colleges have gotten more expensive. You can thank our federal loan program, which has enabled colleges to charge more.
A little like health insurance.
(A few years ago after I had to switch insurance providers, I was charged $450 for a drug that I used to pay a $20 co-pay for. "But I have no drug coverage!" I exclaimed. "I think I can't do this!" The druggist went back behind his tall counter, did some recalculating, and said, $130." That's what I have been paying ever since.)
1
@Mike
If by moderate you mean "Keynesian", then yes. Keynesians theorize that any inequality between workers and unemployment is due to the "skill gap" -- i.e. it is the responsibility of the worker to get the skill the labor market is asking at any point in time. The only other responsibility is with the State to do a policy which guarantees full employment.
Social mobility has decreased in the US as inequality has increased - for example:
https://www.businessinsider.com/social-mobility-is-on-the-decline-and-with-it-american-dream-2017-7
Both trends correspond with more "conservative" policies on the part of both Republican and Democratic administrations since the 60's.
4
@skeptonomist Some recent economics research papers found states with high taxes and regulations correspond to more economic inequality and less economic mobility. These types of policies sure don't sound conservative to me.
2
Funny that you don’t name them, or these “studies.”
I agree with Mr. Krugman, except there are some very notable exceptions to his explanation. Recently when discussing Mike Bloomberg's possible run for President in 2020 with a friend he made the observation that Bloomberg is just another big money guy from NY, just like Trump. The big difference however (and I do mean big) is the fact that Bloomberg, unlike DJT, is indeed a self made billionaire. I don't know how he'll fair with voters should he run, but he is no comparison to Trump and his silver spoon.
7
@Buddy Badinski
Very good point. I would also note that despite DJTs boasts about exactly how wealthy he is, in reality Bloomberg could buy and sell him ten times over.
6
It was the (sort of socialist) New Deal and then the policies after WWII - the GI Bill - that enabled the social mobility in the US that we have taken for granted. My father, who had to leave high school to help support younger siblings during the Depression, was able to work his way up McGraw-Hill Book Company from the stock room to a white collar position and put his daughter through a private university.
All that has eroded largely since Reagan and, today, is impossible. Please let us go back to those values. If calling that democratic socialism is too bitter a pill to swallow, let's call it Bernie.
8
The original GI Bill was EARNED. No subsequent program has been.
1
Having lived in rich and poor communities,an observation. When you leave the Halloween candy out on the honor system someone always steals all the candy in rich neighborhoods. That hasn’t happened to me in lower income neighborhoods. Just Saying.
13
I used to work at children’s birthday parties. The people with money rarely left tips. The lower income families were almost always generous.
11
I believe it was Will Rogers who said, "The reason Socialism never took off in the US is because most people don't see themselves as exploited workers, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."
He also said, "I am not a member of any organized political party! I am a Democrat."
As usual, what's old is new again.
5
Deep Space Nine was a little more blunt about it: "Ferengi don't want to stop the oppression. They want to become the oppressors."
Left out of Krugman's analysis is culture, somewhat taboo.
If we guarantee a minimum income regardless of working or even looking for work, how many people will retire now? The answer depends on the work ethic of the culture. I suspect that variance in work ethic is significantly higher in the US than in Scandanavia or Canada. However, having some people loaf around may not be a bad thing. Besides everyone knowing that no one is truly desperate, there would also be less emission of greenhouse gases, less fill going to the land fills and fewer plastic bottles floating on the high seas.
I am for it.
2
@Anony.
Yes, and if you dig deeper into that analysis, you could argue that the *quality* of work done would rise. You would have fewer workers doing lackluster work, the bare minimum just to get a paycheck, while glancing at the clock every 10 minutes until quitting time.
2
I’m a Democrat and agree conceptually that more needs to be done to close the gap between rich and poor. That said I can’t believe how much money I already pay in taxes.
I also am troubled that 50% of babies are born to women in Medicaid. Apparently the government is already doing a lot to help women get care. And why do so many poor women bring children in the world when they don’t have the funds for it? I realize some of them may lack access to BC and health care. But 50%
Is throwing more money at the problem really the solution? Maybe we just need to reallocate where tax revenues go.
6
If you were to receive your healthcare, education, and other necessities of life, wouldn’t higher taxes be worth it? Especially healthcare
@Wendy: I can't believe you said what said in your second paragraph. Are you serious?
In 1979 my first year in college my tuition was 196 dollars for the year. At that same university it is still a good deal but the cost is 7488. That is for California residents. I’m a professional teacher and former corporate manager. My wife went to the same university. Neither of her folks went to college. She works for the DoD. Her dad was a crane operator, mom a property manager. They did quite well.
My father went to Purdue, paying his way by getting a tuition waiver for maintaining an A average. This was in the 1930s. His father was a diary farmer and a socialist, a follower of Eugene V. Debs. My father was a scientist, who worked on the moon exploration.
My kids started university around 2009. Tuition started around 8000 a year but rose to over 14000 a year by graduation. They are still paying some loans. Still a good deal. They haven’t started significant careers.
It is not getting easier but it is still “doable.” But it seems like we are headed in the wrong direction. School should be cheaper. Period.
9
$196 in 1979 would be equivalent to $727.35 today. Still think $7000 per year is a good deal? For whom?
2
"O.K., this was world-class lack of self-awareness..." No, it is not. It is one man's opinion. P. K. may enjoy the coming debate with Larry Kudlow on socialism. P. K. has an advantage. He has 'world-class' credentials.
3
There are instances of people who come from nothing and become very successful in their vocations, and/ or wealthy. And they do give credence to the argument that opportunity is there. However, the cards are stacked in the favor of those with parents who have money and connections. Oh honey, you want to go to my alma mater? Let me call my favorite board member and see what I can do. But you'll need tuition and housing, I'll cover that. Once you've graduated, I have a few friends at a prestigious CPA firm that can get you in the door. I have plenty of money in my investments to tide you over until you get your feet on the ground. Poor people have connections too, but not the same types of connections as the wealthy. The vast amount of wealth people acquire is usually through inheritance. From one rich generation to the next...
11
Spot on. I could be the poster child for social mobility. I hail from a family of very modest means, neither parent graduated high school. I received a decent public school education and was able to afford a public university on my own with minimal debt thanks to publicly supported merit based scholarships and low tuition due to adequately publicly supported university system. I completed my medical school education on a scholarship from the military that required a four year stint in the army after completion of my residency. I am in the top 10% of US wage earners and I did not have to invent the iPhone or design Prada fashions. I believe the path I took should be open to all young people and adequately funded public education at both the local and university level are key along with healthcare insurance and adequate affordable childcare. And guess what, my taxes should support this because I did not “earn” my success in isolation.
18
No one is stopping you from giving more in taxes now. In fact, if all who support "democratic socialism" were to increase their tax rate, we'd have enough money to do all you suggest without taking money from those who believe they're paying enough already. I appreciate your interest in healthcare and childcare, but the reality is nearly all people professing an interest in having such care universal want it to be paid for by using someone else's money @Robert
1
I came from very humble beginnings but I managed to do very well for myself and my family all because of access to higher education. I finished four college degrees including a PhD while working full time. I was able to pay for my education from my earnings without negatively impacting my family.
Access to reasonably priced higher education is the real social leveler. When the U. of Illinois has a sticker price of $31k per year, wide income inequality is unavoidable.
12
My father's parents immigrated from Sweden ( doubt they would today). I wish we had a system much like those in Scandinavia. However unlike the northern countries we have a diverse population and that makes a difference. While there has been some immigration that makes Scandinavia a bit more diverse a dark-haired Jewish friend who was in Sweden on business said 'I have never seen so many blondes and blue eyes'. I think I am a bit of an American rarity as I wouldn't mind paying more taxes for better services and financial security. But Americans are adverse to taxes especially if they think those lower than them on the economic/social scale, or look different are unfairly benefiting from their hard earned dollars even if it is inherited like the Trumps. Unless the young see things differently America will continue on this mean spirited path and we all will continue to suffer except for the 10%. The fact government workers during the shut down found it difficult to buy food and pay mortgages after missing one paycheck says something profound about our economic system.
7
I turn 39 in in three weeks. For my entire lifetime, I've lived in a nation flooded with endless propaganda extolling the "virtues" of wealth, endless worship of the wealthy, endless right-wing social and economic policies designed to exacerbate income and wealth inequality and not ameliorate it. We're saturated with the sadism of greed. With the opinions of prominent individuals, in politics and broader society, who delight in stomping the poor and laughing at the struggles they caused. This mentality, of greed over everything, has bled any sense of compassion, community, nobility, and greater thinking (dare I say beauty) out of our nation.
I am sick - to death - of hearing what rich people think.
I'm sick of the greed, the sadism, the callousness. I'm sick of having a government so corrupted by money that it ceases to function for anyone but the 1%. I'm sick of the environmental destruction this causes. I'm sick of working hard my entire adult life and barely treading water, all while being saddled with student loan debt. I'm sick of the degradation to our infrastructure, educational system, healthcare, and our cities and neighborhoods.
And I'm not the only one. There are millions more just as fed up with this as I am. We're voting. We're volunteering. We're running for office. And we're winning. This has gone on too long already.
44
@Dominic I encourage you to read some recent peer-reviewed publications in economics that found evidence of more inequality, less economic mobility, and less innovation in states with comparatively high taxes and regulations. The emerging insight is that predominately wealthy and/or politically connected people are best able to thrive in these conditions. People of more modest means are far less likely to successfully navigate the regulations and tax code.
2
@Marcas This is excellent advise. Since Dominic is from Queens, I would also offer that running 25,000 Amazon jobs out of town does not help economic prosperity. No high paying jobs = no additional tax revenue.
3
@Marcas If the implication that my living in New York state is the reason I've had the challenges I have, I'd like to mention that I spent the first 26 years of my life in a red/purple state with "at will" employment laws. The income and wealth inequality we face in our nation is directly related to right-wing "trickle down" economic policies, which have hollowed out the middle class and poor for the benefit of the 1%. "High taxation" and "regulations" have little or nothing to do with that. As a further rejoinder, I'd mention the state of California, which is both (in your terms) a "high-tax" and "high-regulation" state yet is one of the largest (perhaps the largest) economic powerhouses in our nation. In fact, were California it's own nation, it would be in top five globally.
11
Nordic economies have less business regs than America, the cause of their prosperity. Rational economics relates production to markets, ie, to mans independent mind. Statist Krugman relates production to a govt gun stuck in the faces of productive people.
@The Wizard
Nordic economies are less regulated than the US? All of them are members of the EU or have relationships that require regulatory convergence with the EU. Where do you get the strange idea they are less regulated than the US? However, thanks for providing a good example of the huge American capacity for self delusion.
22
Right, cause in America no businesses do well or create fabulous wealth. All those government regs have killed innovation and technology. No one bothers to start up a company cause there is just too much big government crushing them.
1
@John
Thank you Johm for a bit of reality to the self proclaimed wizard with a chip on his shoulder and his head in the sand.
See what watching and believing Fox News does to the brain? Alternative facts make an alternative reality. Like in Alice in Wonderland.
1
There also seems to be an innate quality to the American character. As one of our nation's founders, John Dickinson, observed "Most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor."
23
Good explanation (at least, one part of the whole) as to why so many lower income voters back Trump.
7
Ivanka does not have a clue!
Those who have not been at the bottom of the heap in society have no idea what those that were on the bottom had to go through. I wore, for 6 years in elementary school in the 50s, the knickers that my father wore in the 20s. I can remember going out in the middle of the night to steal coal from other's pipes to keep warm in winter because we could not afford it. I can remember time after time when the water man would come to the house to collect a bill for $2, which my mother could not pay and then telling her to fill the bathtub so we would have water in the house.
I can remember having to steal .22 ammunition to kill squirrels for dinner.
The six of us children did not want that in perpetuum. We all paid our own way through college, some getting graduate school, but all six of us to a level far above our beginnings.
There is no way that Ivanka cannot identify with that situation at all and to bless someone out who has gone through it, she needs to be pulled through the mud we were pulled through.
16
I apologize for my typo, it should be coal piles, not coal pipes. I try to read through things before I post them, but read over a typo every now and then.
Poverty is a way of life or many. It is not a pleasant situation but most in that status don't realize that they are as poor as they are. It takes nothing but pure guts and ambition to climb out of poverty and make something of yourself. My father would not even take us to the hospital or to a doctor's office because he simply did not want to pay the bills. In 1954 I was involved in an accident that broke my leg in 3 places and cracked it in five. It was over 24 hours after the swelling got so much that he took me to "see about it." He never paid the bill. The fortunate thing in my life, and in the lives of my siblings, was the simple fact that the city that I lived in had an incredible school system. It was due to that school system that I learned the way out of that hole that I had been born into. The same is true, of course, for my siblings.
Actually, we were not poor, my father was earning $60K in 1957 and if you do the math, that amount equated to quite a bit in today's money. He was more interested in women of the evening and liquor. While those of us at home had almost nothing, he had several other families that we did not find out about for quite a while.
I am not moaning and asking for sympathy, I, and all of my siblings, simply worked out buns off and escape what would seem the obvious.
There are three groups who need jobs;
College Graduates who can't find a niche (What should we do with all the MFAs?); A lot of schools would LOVE to have art teachers and librarians.
Discarded factory workers. No they can't learn to code or be entrepreneurs. BOTH my uber drivers on a recent trip (to/from the local airport) were bored, comfortable retirees, it really doesn't pay a living. And what about the construction workers replaced by low wage immigrants? Some of us are too old to hustle around the Amazon distribution center. Iraq veterans who already wrecked their knees.
The bottom 20%. Mentally Ill, Probationers, paroles, special needs individuals, and those only slightly outside those classes. These people would benefit from a supervised, non-exploitive work environment.
The first two groups have skills that often are rejected, or the "Lump of Labor" MBA's refuse to recognize. I've been successfully selling on ebay for ten years; I'm NOT interested in working in Shipping-Receiving for $9 an hour, you lose ground at that rate, even in a low cost area.
All three groups are seen by the financial system as cheap serfs to be exploited (Student loans anyone?), squeezed of any wealth they may acquire, and discarded to freeze in the streets when corporations are done with them.
19
My mother a single parent, my brother and I came to Canada, from Germany, in 1952.
I received a lot of support in school from teachers. By 1964 I had an MBA from Western University in London, Ontario.
I worked as a management trainee, accounting student and became a teacher in 1965.
The key is opportunity for all, education and health care.
Siegfried Schranz
12
Ivanka and her father are the personification of the triumph of legacy over meritocracy.
This “win” is destroying our positive image as a force for good in the world. And, it‘s severely hindering Americans in need of an outstretched hand. Yet, it seems that many with the most upward social class distance to gain buy into the Trump and GOP con that tax cuts for the rich and cuts in their social net are good for them. I hope at least 70,000 of them living in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania wake up by November 2020 and vote their interests, but I’m not holding my breath.
9
True democracy is based on fear of the top before the bottom, and autocracy, of the bottom part of the population before the top. Balance of fear-it is what counts. This balance has become apparent due to French revolution in France and October revolution in Russia - both contributing, to different degrees, to establishing of welfare states at least in Europe.
As for Canada just look what is happening in the province of Ontario where all the economic and social rights are being trashed by its present prime minister Mr. Ford whose family have been alleged drug dealers including Mr. Ford himself.
The conclusion: criminalization of "elites" which stay unafraid of the rest of the population.
We used to have "subsidized" college education in the form of states providing sizable funding for their state institutions. Now the amount of state subsidizes are so low, some institutions are considering refusing the funding in order to avoid the rules and restrictions accompanying the meager funds. The question should be why did states stop funding their institutions appropriately which is an "old" concept rather than thinking funding state schools is a "new" idea and therefore a bad one. A state school in my state for an in-state resident for tuition, room and board, and fees charges $48K/year. That is outrageous. We want a well educated citizenry, so they won't be conned by charlatans and frauds.
11
Schools and colleges benefit the entire US economy. And without an educated population, we can’t have a working democracy. Higher ed should be a higher priority in the scheme of America and the federal government, with skin in the game, should subsidize (to some “to be discussed” extent) the ability to be a greater part of our democracy.
2
As a high school teacher, I taught The Great Gatsby for many years, and I perpetuated the lie that only in America can you move easily from one social class to another. Where did I learn that in order to pass that information on to my students? Was it college history classes, notes on teaching Gatsby, or my own experience, which wasn't dramatic but still an example of a child from solidly middle class parents moving slightly upward?
Though I agree with Mr. Krugman, I also saw in my classes examples of students whose parents had crossed the Southern border, speaking little English so that their children could excel in AP classes, attend college, and become part of the American dream. I wonder if that ability to move from lower to middle or upper class is easier if you are a first generation American?
3
Read John Ogbu, a Nigerian anthologist, on immigrant and caste-like minorities.
People of color or different ethnic groups who are in the bottom rungs of a society have limited opportunity, are discriminated against, live in dire straits, and are regularly oppressed. Even when they get higher education, the existing societal patterns limit how much that is translated into economic benefits. (His labor market theory mirrors what happens in many societies.)
Those who move to a different country shed most of that baggage, can start afresh, are rewarded by the labor market and not discriminated against, have much greater opportunity, better chances for success, and end up with much more upward mobility.
2
@T. Baxter The Great Gatsby, however, does not perpetuate the “lie” you refer to in such a simplistic way. Gatsby’s money comes from bootlegging, he’s basically a crony capitalist. And Fitzgerald brilliantly underlines that the “American Dream” is in many ways, just that. A chimera, a fantasy, a fairytale castle built of sand that many will chase but few will quite attain.
I am an example of the upward mobility America, and NY, provides. I grew up in the Bronx, the son of working class parents. I was able to get a good high school education not by going to an elite private institution, but because I was accepted to Bronx Science HS. I then received a scholarship to an elite university. I had a successful career as an executive in large companies. Had it not been for the good education I received in NYCs public school system, I may not have have been able to move from my parent's lower middle class life in the Bronx to an upper middle class life.
7
You rate totally right Dr. Krugman. Your thinking "hit home" in my case.
After deep analysis, my nephew resolved to emigrate to Canada, and my niece to Netherlands. The U. S. did not enter into their plans in life.
The opportunities to improve are much better in those countries, and yes, they hold well paid, good jobs, positions.
Yes, they are after "The Real Dream", not the "American Mirage."
17
Coming from a family where one parent was born in a one room cabin and the other who had malnutrition as a child would have doomed me except for nearly free public and university education in California and a lot of hard work on all of our parts. It takes both to succeed in our society. The problem is that the Republicans just want to shut the door on everybody that doesn’t look like them.
19
Ivanka Trump is a stereotypical Marie Antoinette. And, her father would be King if he had his way. Since WWII the US military provided a stepping stone for the disadvantaged to advance their social status. No so much anymore with repeated deployments to never ending conflict. It used to be that public colleges and universities received strong financial support so those from average working families could afford higher education. That support has eroded dramatically. Then to add insult to injury, along comes Betsy Devos.
18
Freedom isn't free, it costs health insurance and childcare.
9
Here's the test for Ivanka. When her children apply for internships and college, will she let them "work for what they get" or will she/Jared make a couple of calls to friends for summer jobs and to Harvard or Penn for college?
15
Higher taxes to the wealthy, why?
In the name of equality, socialism, and upward mobility?
That’s ridiculous.
Let everyone pay their share of taxes except the poor.
Private sector, public sector, non profit sector, publicly traded companies...everywhere you turn, Republican or Democrats there is legalized and organized corruption everywhere you turn.
We all have seen waste, corruption, cover ups and lack of transparency and accountability in every industry and among Republicans and Democrats.
So it is not about more policies or more taxes to advance the poor and guaranteed work for all.
It is about the execution.
I assure that our treasury will have surplus if we held everyone accountable and especially those in power.
Before raising taxes on the wealthy, ensure the wealthy paying their share. Ensure a system with full transparency and accountability. Ensure a plan that is executed with the best interest of their citizens.
The ivankas and Trumps of the world need to pay their share and held accountable for failing to comply with state and federal laws.
There will never be equality. But we need to ensure that everyone has equal access, equal rights, equal opportunities, and bring equally treated.
2
@Lets Speak Up / Lea
Good ideas but it will never fly as long as there are the trumps in this ol' world.
You wrote:"Ensure a plan that is executed with the best interest of their citizens."
Good idea but the millionaires and billionaires of this country only look after themselves. They claim everyone is equal.
It's just that they feel they are more "equal" than anyone who are not in their "class."
2
If the wealthiest people and corporations are able to buy the government that serves them best (as they are increasingly able to do; look at the numbers of millionaires and billionaires in the current Administration and Congress), then such enforcement is a gold-plated pipe dream.
The only way to reach your goals (with which I mostly agree) is to change our whole election system (see, e.g., most Bernie Sanders’ speeches of 2016).
1
Well said. It is simply logical that people need to be healthy (have access to health care), have sufficient income to live (basic income), and educated (opportunities for tuition support) tomove ahead with their lives. The sweet part is that in addition to being only just, these three basic pillars led a a much happier society with greater equity - both social and financial overall.
5
The progressive agenda would surely benefit the working class more than the elites. Why have Democrats been unable to sell it? Perhaps if they played down their emphasis on feminism, identity politics, and political correctness and focused on the economy, social mobility, and the social safety net, they would have a chance of defeating Trump. If not, get used to that big, beautiful wall and another four years of corrupt governance of the elites, by the elites, and for the elites.
7
@Ron Have you seen the net worth of our "illustrious" leaders in Washington? On both sides of the aisle? Why would they want to tax themselves? This from a group of pols who have pretty much everything paid for by us working stiffs. McConnell's net wroth roughly
$ 40,000,000.00. How does one on a civil servant's salary attain weal at that number? Diane Feinstein's net worth? Roughly $ 94,000,000.00
And you ask why nothing has been done in Washington.
Feminism is the answer, not the problem.
Don't forget the impacts of Corporatization. The outsized influence of corporations in the past three decades has had a devastating impact on small businesses that has robbed many smaller communities of a source of local prosperity that has been redirected to Wall Street and the 1%.
When my wife and I traveled to Sweden this year, we were surprised by the abundance of local businesses everywhere. There was a large shopping plaza near the city center with the obligatory American chains, but by and large most business were locally owned and doing quite well. It certainly does not fit well with the image of Socialism that the GOP likes to label Scandanavians with.
The best part was that many of these business had little or no drive up business or public parking. They were community businesses in the true sense of the word.
4
I want welfare reform. Unlike Conservatives and Libertarians however, my reforms start by looking at the 1%,and their corporations.
Privatize the profit, socialize the risk?
No more.
13
American social engineering is not a new idea, state supported kindergarten up to high school is a prime example. There have been bad attempts such as Prohibition and good attempts such as Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid.
We should not be surprised that the issue of job guarantees is now front and center especially as many americans that invested in expensive college educations found themselves upon graduation without jobs for months. Ms. Trump probably does not know how much her education cost, she is probably not worried about affording health insurance, however these are the worries of people without jobs.
Not only did recent college graduates have difficulty finding jobs during the last recession but unemployment insurance also failed to keep families from falling into bankruptcy, Some of the people that lost jobs were teachers, lawyers, assembly line workers and what they all had in common was that they were eminently employable...yet out of work. The idea that the government should play a role in assuring employment is not as far fetched as it may seem, in fact the Fed is very involved in the idea of full employment. Given the ability of the government and its resources to stimulate the economy the notion of a government role in job guarantees should be studied and acted upon, Roosevelt knew this and so should we.
6
With all the talk of “infrastructure” and the need to rebuild and further it, we have an ideal scenario to create public works projects (as we did during the Great Depression of the 1930’s) to hire the un- and under-employed, skilled in such a variety of areas, to actually make something great.
Oh, and don’t forget to use e-verify to assure that the jobs go to those legally qualified to work here.
1
The key words, the real clinchers, are "want to work for what they get". It's all in there, the entire attitude of the GOP toward the poor. She wouldn't know work if it sat in her lap, and she wouldn't recognize bootstraps if they were wrapped around her neck. But, hey, it's all a show - that's what daddy taught her.
7
There were a lot of factors that helped me in life.
1. My parents were part of the "Southern diaspora" that moved to California in the 40's to find jobs. I got to go to good tax-supported public schools. Also had good teeth helped by fluoridated water.
2. My mother felt socially dissed in the South, so she insisted on good manners in California. My dad was an avid reader, though he worked in a shipyard (union job!). We had books in the house.
3. Vietnam was my watershed, and I was able to come home whole and to finish college on the GI Bill. Luckily, I went to a tuition-free UC campus in the late 60's and the early 70's when it was "cool" to wear old, grubby clothes not get regular haircuts. I fit right in to just look at me. And I had a nice smile and proper manners.
Hard work and luck in a progressive environment. And a little touch of myself thrown in. Success!
23
Also, Ms. Trump should understand that having a living wage does not mean one cannot still strive for more and climb up the economic ladder.
Having a living wage does not remove the "potential for upward mobility." If someone wants to pull themselves up using their bootstraps, they can still use all that exceptional gumption to do so.
1
While her father was voicing his scripted analysis on his scripted show "The Apprentice," the camera always moved around the board room table (prop) in the studio catching the looks on the contestants' faces. And amid the contestants sat Ivanka Trump always looking serious and imperious. Those who voted for this administration voted for wealthy celebrities acting like leaders. And, most people I talk to don't understand the term income inequality. We live in a world of memes and symbols and I'm sure the people I'm talking about aren't reading Paul Krugman's excellent column.
8
I'm from Canada, lived in the USA for 26 years and returned home when I could no longer live without health insurance either because I could not afford it or because I had lost my job (could never understand why health insurance was always tied into a job) and could not afford to send my kids to the best schools.
While militating in favor of a health-care for all program (in California) at a public event and explaining that I came from a universal health care country, someone in the crowd "objected" that this was socialism, to which replied: well, then socialism is good!
8
I believe my comment was taken down because I said that the self-made woman was an _ _ _, the(Online Dictionary) definitions for which include:
1. an animal of the horse family, which is typically smaller than a horse and has longer ears and a braying call. synonyms: donkey;
2. INFORMAL•BRITISH
a foolish or stupid person."that ___ of a young man" synonyms:fool, nincompoop, clown, dolt, simpleton.
As the word often used in the Crosswords, and far worse labels are used in articles, why ?
5
"Luck favors the prepared,"
Edna Mode - INCREDIBLES.
"Prepared" can mean educated OR born rich OR both.
This LUCK thing is what REPtiles do not want to admit has anything to do with success. They want all the credit especially when their cast has already provided economic status. KRUGMAN explains this perfectly. Better than that he is right. A strong social system will always prepare its members leaving the luck factor which now weighs less in the balance increasing chance of success.
5
Test American meritocracy: set the estate tax at 100%. Then, let the people see for themselves whether Ivanka, Jarred, or any of their ilk could actually earn their own way.
29
I was working at Trump Tower when Trump gave Ivanka a whole floor at the Tower to begin dabbling in business after she graduated from college. She didn't start from the ground up but from the 18th floor.
61
The thing I think of is that neither Ivanka, her husband, nor her father have ever to work a day in their lives. Sure they had jobs, but in terms of actually working to cover a mortgage, car payment, insurance and all the others expenses of life, they know absolutely nothing. They have zero basis to even talk about the workplace or the needs of the average working people, whether that is someone making minimum wage, pulling down a healthy white collar salary, or running a small business.
44
And, of course, you can say the same thing about cabinet members like Steve Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross and Betsy De Vos. They’re blissfully unaware of the hardscrabble lives of (ironically) the working stiffs who voted Trump into office.
2
No you are wrong. Ivanka works very hard maintaining a perfect figure. I imagine she has to give up meals so she can look like a Barbie doll.
1
Krugman is only partially right. Overlooked is negative toll familes suffer through separation and divorce.
For families struggling financially, one parent, usually the man, leaving the scene inflicts a costly burden on the woman left to raise the children. With less money, and less time to pursue education and or promotions its difficult for women to raise the families financial status. Single women with less income have a harder if not impossible ability to purchase a home. Without home ownership and the appreciation that comes with it they are trapped in an endless cycle of renting and rent increases with no equity to show for it and no deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes. And if they are lucky/unlucky enough to live in an area of gentrification like Brooklyn then they get priced out instead of cashing out like the owners are able to do. For those who bought a home thirty years ago, if they still have it, the mortgage payment stayed the same (fixed interest rate) its now paid off and the home is worth probably five to ten times what was paid for it. For a person that wasn't able to buy, they were saddled with steady rent increases and no equity for all those years.
With a home purchase, a steady payment and pay increases throughout the years the home owner has more money for their kids college tuition, home impovements etc. A renter instead gets no reward for their montly rent payments.
9
I agree whole heartedly with Krugman this morning. And I think Ivanka is clueless about what it means to struggle. This isn't her fault. But neither was it Marie Antoinette's fault. Both women were and are very beautiful. That isn't a crime! But being clueless needs to be attended to. One way or another, we all tend to learn about struggle.
7
What are the tenets of a meritocracy?
1. Healthcare - accessible, affordable and available
2. Childcare - accessible, affordable and available
3. Education - accessible, affordable and available
4. Housing - accessible, affordable and available
5. Food - accessible, affordable and available
If those exist, then opportunity exists to start to differentiate on merit on a more equitable basis. Yes, stable family, family connections, and family wealth all influence where one is positioned at the starting line. But without the five above, so many will not think of participating because they did not know where the starting line was.
12
Not for a moment to excuse Ivanka Trump's seeming obliviousness to troubles worse than a hair out of place:
Look at photographs of her as a young girl probably around the time of her father's affair with Marla Maples. Kind of mousy and very, very frightened; more so than other kids whose parents are having a rocky patch or even a no-holds-barred divorce.
You have to wonder what else was going on.
6
If you want a thoughtful answer to a question about social mobility, ask an actual robot, not someone who impersonates one.
6
great article. I feel that the anti socialists in government and other organizations have an hidden agenda to kill the so called american dream. you make it hard to survive here, squeeze the middle class so America no longer attracts next wave of immigrants. I think the strategy is working. In immigrant circles (myself included) people are finding other countries to be more attractive.
13
to take a phrase used by Sanders and Warren, the rich have rigged the system to their advantage.
16
I think people should watch "Downton Abbey" to see where the Republican economic philosophy is headed. Working hard to get ahead is good, but without a social conscience those with the least moral suasion would get further by cheating. If the wealthy are protected by their own wealth and power, there would develop a two (0r more) class of society. Rulers, masters and the minions who work at subsistence, yielding some of their worth to the profits of the masters. We fought this system, but now it seems that without unions, without social safety net, without public education there is a slip toward two classes. If you keep the lower class angry, racist and confused, you can further this split until you get upstairs/downstairs. This is the only rationale I have been able to imagine for the Republican party of McConnell, Ryan and Trump.
16
It’s when I’ve been saying for years: the republican moral philosophy begins and ends this way—with a populace of the rich and those that serve them.
3
The C-level people make hundreds more than their average line worker from the same company. This in equal reward for hardwork is not just. No CEO or other C-level employee deserves the high level compensation they receive in the US. Greed is the horseman riding roughshod through our great country. Blue wave 2020 !
18
Right on. Today I had a hearing examination at the University Hospital here in Linköping Sweden. The "audionom who did the testing was born in Abadan, Iran and grew up iin Bandar Abbas until she came to Sweden. Done well and like all of us has very low cost Universal Health Care. I could give many, many examples. My health care is better than low cost since it is "NO COST" thanks to being 86.
One key is completely free education all the way to the top. With free education and low cost health care able young people can learn.
Trump's daughter is not worth a column except if it helps my fellow Americans understand how far our country has fallen.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
26
The rich in the West have usurped the concept of meritocracy. Originally it was intended to mean that you could achieve a position in society that your talent and hard work deserved but this has been subverted to be a means instead that those who own the wealth use to justify their increasingly unfair slice of the pie - "I am rich therefore I must be better than those who are poor".
Opportunity is denied to those who are not rich to begin with and it is impoverishing our society and culture in so many ways by limiting the available field of talent.
11
The prosperity gospel was inculcated into us in the 1950s, and like so much else about the 1950s that conservatives are ever trying to return to, we refuse to let go of this myth. Who cares about bootstraps when you can't afford a pair of boots?
28
That Americans can succeed by hard work alone is a myth. The people who settled this country west of the Appalachians, were homesteaders, who yes, worked hard - on plots of land provided gratis by the federal government, or 49-ers who filed mining claims and enjoyed a federal monopoly over their gold or silver stake. And that's not socialism? Success today is almost entirely dependent on either family wealth or access to an excellent taxpayer-funded secondary education leading to a trade or university degree. That's not socialism, is it? So-called moneyed interests perpetuate the self-reliance myth in large measure to keep the great mass of Americans working (for them) like dogs, nursing the hope of upward mobility so they will not demand the reasonable public benefit of good education so they can claim their rightful share of the American Dream; and so leave the money on the table to be taken by those with means. Hard work is vital to success, but only when used to build upon some stake (a loan from papa, a homestead, a claim, or a good education), can it be a guarantor of success. Once achieved, we must vow not to join the greedy class, but recognize that we owe it to ourselves and our posterity to continue invest in our fellow Americans and so stake the the next generation to the success their hard work can enable them to earn.
27
Ivanka is a Red Herring. All 0.1%ers and 1%ers are Red Herrings in these arguments. The "upper quartile" is really who keeps the bottom half down. Dr. Krugman and many of his wealthy readers seem content to go after the freakishly rich, while staying clear of the very rich (aka "upper middle class"). They have enlightened views about investing in education, healthcare, child-care, etc. for their poorest fellow Americans. But this otherwise noble focus on the bottom quartile (or even 10%) will serve to protect the long-term prosperity of the upper quartile more than it will promote social mobility or economic justice for most Americans.
In America, economic opportunity and prosperity is based on EDUCATION. Improving our worst, primary and secondary public schools is a great goal, of course. But our elite, private and public universities are the real deterimants of success in America (and successful parents are the key to lower level education.) We will continue to have a two-tier society as long as 90% of our corporate leaders and national-level politicians and journalists attend one (or more) of around a dozen, highly-selective universities. These elite institutions are supported by the taxpayers they, for the most part, exclude at a level far exceeding (by an order of magnitude) public support for community colleges and non-elite state universities (not to mention technical and trade schools).
5
Read French economist, Thomas Picketty's book, Capital. Extensively researched, it examines the relationship between tax policy and income inequality around the world, with special focus on Europe amd North America, over a period of centuries. He finds there a causal relationship. Income inequality in America was at its lowest after WWII, when tax brackets were highest. That is same period when our highway system was constructed, because with more taxes on the wealthy, there was funding for infrastructure projects. The highest levels of income inequality he found were during ancient Rome, the Gilded Age in America just prior to the 1929 stock market crash, and today in America. Since our neighborhoods tend to be segregated by income level, we seldom see how great the wealth disperity actually is.
11
@Mary M
Thank you, very much. I probably wouldn't get through a whole book (without pictures) unless I was laid up... unintended self-parody, once again. A problem I noticed in at least some of Europe is that their relative INCOME equality due to more progressive taxing (without so many loopholes) does not show the major limits on social mobility due to existing WEALTH disparities. When property taxes are very low and you don't have inheritance tax (!) "old" money, property, assets, etc. don't change hands much. We should only take some cues from Europe. In general, I wonder how much of our economic inequality is due to culture and just physical access to income opportunity, i.e. who gets the prime jobs or limited spots at universities and professional programs. WE may not see wealth disparity because of our zip codes, but society sure does!
1
Ivanka Trump is a type. Her type was destined for success, beauty and wealth because of the obsessions of upwardly mobile baby boomer parents. Lots of projection went on. These obsessions caused parents to do things like volunteer for the PTA or the "right" social groups. Affluent boomer parents made sure their kids had the best skating lessons, the best music lessons, the best summer camp. They hoped other affluent boomer kids would come in second to their kids. A little donation to the college of choice would ensure easy admission; the right doctor, beauty. Once these parents had what they needed, they quickly withdrew their support. Would Ms. Trump prosper if she attended a public city high school and lived in the projects? We know the answer. Plenty of less affluent parents became angry at what they saw and projected their anger towards the poor, exactly the wrong place. They bought the Republican line about social services and voted against their own needs. Ms. Trump's has no idea why her comments are especially insensitive to women. Women start life knowing they will have less opportunity. They will make less money. They will have inferior health care. Her daughter will not.
21
Being from Sweden, one of the Nordic countries Mr Krugman refers to as a champion of social mobility, I can only agree with his analysis. Social mobility is of course more easily accomplished in a place where higher education is not only free of charge, but where students actually get (a small) monthly stipend for living expenses. That said, I think Mr Krugman is not really addressing the very hart of the idea of the "American Dream". This notion is not about moving from poverty to middle class or from middle class to some level of limited affluence. Rather, it's the idea that hard work in and of itself can lead to true financial independence. And while I for one am enjoying my 35 days of fully paid annual holiday and 420 days of equally shared parental leave, it is true that Sweden has a compressed wage structure which means that the difference in income between say a bus driver and a doctor is not as big as in the US. While Swedish doctors of course live a comfortable life, they rarely enjoy a lifestyle as lavish as what can be expected by say a successful M.D living in Beverly Hills. Whether this is good or bad can be debated. But it is this fact, that working hard can lead to great financial success, which is behind the notion of the american dream.
16
Sweden is an inspiration. With greater financial parity in Sweden, one assumes there is also a greater sense of community, of trust in meeting strangers on the street. Here many people buy guns for personal protection. It is a sad comment on our country that many Americans feel their country is so unlawful, they need to be armed.
4
Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers does a good job of challenging the American myth of the self- made man.
6
Ivanka's comments are not off the cuff and they don't have to do with economics. They are calculated and are about helping her father stay in office. It's about marketing, she's rebranding herself. In 2015, when the campaign started she was a centrist. The one advisor Trump would listen to. A voice of reason. She was used to give voters on with concerns about Trump some comfort. "Don't worry, he listens to Ivanka". Now she's being repositioned to help solidify the base, or the edge of the base. It will be more party line (whatever that party is) and less New York closet liberal.
13
I think one of the biggest things that changes social mobility for poor-middle classes Americans is migration or immigration, because it is hard to rise through hard work alone. I knew a black man whose grandparents and parents had been sharecroppers in South Carolina, whose way out was the military and the GI Bill. He did not graduate from college, despite being a brilliant man, because he could barely read or write. Nonetheless he was a hustler in a different state, and he and his family thrived. They also took advantage of every social program available both as veterans and as young parents in need of food stamps and health care for their children. Sometimes moving to a wealthier community if possible works; sometimes leaving the country altogether, at least for a few years, works. But most of the risk-taking and innovation is not coming from the self-satisfied and absolutely comfortable, but from the immigrants and the internal migrants. To give Americans a better shot at rising in class and having a more secure country, I completely agree with Mr. Krugman's assessment on the need for an expanded social safety and social justice net.
1
People who do well enough, often better than their parents, are common enough. What they have in common is ambition, a willingness to work hard, intelligence, skill, and a little luck. You can deny this to the cows come home, but a good attitude, thoughtful intelligence, and a willingness to really try to do the best work you can, are very valuable skills that every employer looks for, recognizes, and rewards. Employers also recognize the opposite traits, which are also common, and are promoted here daily. If your staring point is believing the "system is rigged" and your employer's function to provide you with a paycheck I can guarantee you will never get ahead, at least in the private sector.
Oh, Ivanka, that is just a distraction.
4
@Daphne
There is much scientific research related to this. Particularly the time in the womb and the first year of childhood permanently effect the epigenetics, which then effect all learning, behavior, etc. for the rest of life.
Great response. i agree
The main point to take from this is that both Trump and his daughter believe their success is earned. You cannot talk them out of it. It’s another useful lie without which they would have to judge themselves failures. No one does that. Instead they preach to justify their existence.
27
It is time for all of us to go read Upton Sinclair’s book, The Jungle.
Work gives life meaning. There is many different types of work. Work is necessary for our soul.
I believe that every person really wants to work.
1
That is an odd title to depict the virtues of work. The book inspired labor reforms.
3
Thanks to quality, affordable public education, I was able to rise from being a foster child with no other resources to earning a graduate degree, and a decent livelihood. Education was the key. Growing up in California, I benefitted from a robust commitment to state universities, which were financially accessible with work-study programs and a modest amount of students loans (repaid). I could not have reached the middle class without decent, accessible higher education . . . and dedicated public school teachers who made me believe I could succeed.
Republicans are rewarding people who are already have all the advantages, and eviscerating the middle class. The Rs don't have any solutions for most Americans. They just lie about their real agenda, which is to curry favor with religious fanatics and oligarchs.
74
I think the lack of awareness sits with the writer. I am one of many who have witnessed and accomplished the generational move up the economic ladder. My father was a steelworker who grew up in the coal mining region of West Virginia. Through a solid family situation being raised in a lower middle class but loving and safe family environment both my sister and I were able to get undergraduate degrees from highly ranked universities and go on to enjoy career and economic success. We both attended public schools growing up and what I saw was that people either took advantage of the opportunities presented to them or threw them away. While I do understand that there is an important role that environment plays I also know that too many people either take the "woe is me" approach or simply do not care enough to work to improve their lot in life. I spent summers working in an auto assembly plant and witnessed first hand how many people wasted the opportunities provided to them. We need to do what we can to address the scourage of drugs and poverty but it is also time for many to take responsibility for their own lives instead of expecting someone else to do it for them.
11
@DC Those possibilities were there for you, and that’s great. My parents benefitted from some of those opportunities, too: college you can pay by working construction in the summers, middle-class incomes high enough to support a family. Recent studies have shown they are dwindling. For example, about 5 years ago, a study showed that the US was no longer a democracy but an oligarchy. The increasing gap between CEO pay and employee pay is further evidence. Krugman didn’t have space to discuss the historical development if these processes, but I think they can be a clear model for reforms like higher corporate tax rates. That’s better for countering those who cringe at the mention of socialism, even if there’s the “democratic” qualification before.
4
while one has to be careful when using statistics, one also has to recognize the limitations of anecdotes. They often prove the rule rather than refute it
2
Anecdotal evidence is the absolute worst command to use when making a decision or judgment about any topic.
Compare the still numerous stories of success through hard work and education to the indisputable facts of opportunity and wealth inequality in this country. If you do not side with the conclusions based on the actual data, you will make decisions that are wrong, every time.
1
Canadians are what I would call "reluctant collectivists". We accept that while the private sector is good at creating wealth, it is not so good at managing collective endevours such as health care and municipal infrastructure. We understand that some can jump higher than others thus rewarding hard work, educational achievement, and so on but we also recognize that no one jumps 200 feet higher than others. We accept that there is a role for the state to regulate capitalism and to provide a restraint on its uglier side by protecting those who, through no fault of their own, are left behind by the system. To call this socialism is a misnomer. We call it social democracy. America could use some of that.
96
It's important to highlight here that the axiom capitalism provides the most social mobility is pure ideological extrapolation: we don't have any significant data on the Ancient World and the Middle Ages.
And yes, there are documentation of class ascendency in both ages.
The reason capitalists (liberals) say, as a political discourse, that capitalism provides social mobility is because the context it rose to power: at that time, the bourgeoisie was already the most rich class in France, but the aristocracy still held political power. The bourgeoisie didn't have the brute force to topple the aristocracy, so they had to use the other lower classes as masse de maneuvre to do it. Free market had to give way to (individual) freedom in this case (thus social mobility), since the proletariat didn't have any property.
I agree with Elizabeth Warren that our free market needs some reforms. As it currently stands, big donors, especially members of ALEC, can virtually write state laws to their benefit, and can probably have nearly as much sway on the federal level. But there are no big donors advocating for greater consumer protection. As Warren puts it, our so-called free market isn't free, nor is it transparent--it's rigged.
There is a fundamental difference that may have been over looked here. When a person rises from poverty they very much contribute to society in many ways because they do not take what they have accomplished for granted. When a person is given what they have they take much for granted and tend to contribute very little.
The current system results in more people who take things for granted being the decision makers, resulting in a lessening of our countries ability thrive as we have in the past. This is not at all desirable.
16
America enjoys a myth of upward mobility...anyone can grow up to be president. They cite Abe Lincoln. And all things are possible...
But let's be honest. The chances of someone raised in poverty (yes it exists today in America), without access to good medical care, without the opportunity to attend good schools and have private tutors, without successful role-model parents, without powerful family connections; the odds against that child reaching the Oval Office are greater by many multiples than the odds that tens of millions of Americans all buying lotto tickets for a billion dollar jackpot will all have the same winning number.
Nevertheless, nothing will dispel the American myth...Americans would prefer to go their their graves happily believing the myth rather than do what's necessary to make it a reality.
11
I love it when the Ivanka Trumps of the world tell people that they just hit a triple, when in fact they were born on third-base.
But Mr. Krugman, there are evermore precise policy considerations that even Democrats won’t touch, including revisions to the trusts and estates code eliminating generation skipping trusts, or a tripling (90%?) of taxes on income from trust funds.
These precise potentially more actionable policies that would dull the extraordinary (and unseen) privileges of the very rich are not even being discussed as policy. The trust fund is the “safety net” for the rich and an unspoken part of the problem, but the rich and powerful will likely never bring this “socialism of the privileged” to the table.
16
I love your idea. Read the book, Capital without Borders, by a wealth manager. This is an industry few people know about. Their aim is to protect fortunes in perpetuity, from both taxation and greedy heirs. I think you will find it to be an eye-popping read.
I don't see what the value of upward mobility is. Upward from what seems to be the question? As well as upward to where.
Having a society where people are not economically up against it. Don't breathe foul air, have decent medical care, decent places to live and create is basic to a good society. The cruel alienation, dehumanization life deadening suffocating economic hardship is the "what" that shouldn't be there.
And where is the destination for "upward" mobility. Upward to where. And what is the value of being there.
11
You are right that if you are born into a comfortable home in a safe community, with good schools, and a chance at employment comparble to what your parents have, you should not need more. But many Americans struggle to find a safe place to live that isn"t a long commute from their work, and that they can afford. The lack of safe, affordable housing is especially keen in cities.
1
I totally agree.
It's not only a family's economic status that might keep them mired in poverty, but also their attitudes. How to change attitudes? Growing up poor, my mother didn't think I needed college and I never planned to go. However, at 18 after working in an office downtown in Manhattan, I KNEW I didn't want that. So I enrolled in a community college, telling my mother I wanted to be a school secretary - something she would understand. I loved learning, loved school, and transferred to a 4 year college, lying again to my mother that I wanted to be a business education teacher (not). Finally, I graduated with a degree in English and Journalism, happy. Worked at a day care center while living at home, and then started my masters degree in Education, realizing that THAT was what I wanted to do. Yes, I had peers who were college bound at the time, so I guess that was my luck. But I have to tell you, the struggle to convince my mother that this is what I wanted created a chasm between us. She just didn't understand. So again - how to change the attitudes of the poor?
16
@Piemonte I was told ,"People like us don't go to college." Free tuition @ CUNY daytime twitched to nights to help pay the rent. We knew the city was our 'campus.' Dedicated young professors. "Subway University" NYC teacher UFT
Graduate school on my dime Crawled into the 'middle class'. College education was the key. It ought to be available for anyone regardless of family circumstances.
I paid a lot of taxes in a 38 year career and made a contribution to society. A good investment in me paid off.
1
@Piemonte
Your attitude was changed by experiencing opportunity that you hadn't had before.
2
Some parents fear that if their kids move up, they will turn their backs on their families. Your mother may have worried she would lose you.
2
I had several years of hard times after graduate school (hint, I never landed the college teaching job I wanted). So I would teach as an adjunct, and work at 2 different part time jobs, seven days per week most weeks. It took a while to find a new fit for a career and I did not buy a house till I was 46. Still working at 67, I can affirm that effort is not enough. I worked harder in my 20s and 30s than I do now when I earn far more. I also had tremendous advantages - I was well educated so could pivot to a plan B. I also had a supportive family that would take me back from time to time (wife and I had to split for a few months while we moved).
Ivanka has no business speaking about what the American people want (but neither does Donald).
21
One only needs to look at one very common practice as an example of inequality and elitism, which is the “golden parachute” of oodles of cash and stock agreed upon to be paid to the CEO if he gets fired. He can mismanage, bilk, sell off, and run the company into the ground and still get his payout. What about the workers? Nada.
I work in the upper levels of management and the partners refer lots of their kids’ friends, kids of our clients, etc. Most are well educated but not the best candidates. We have to hire them anyway because the elite take care of their kids that way. They will always get a seat at the table. Just like Ivanka.
23
Practically everyone I know belies the assertions of Paul Krugman and his hatred of free enterprise. In my family, my grandfather came here from Italy around 1900 and worked in a factory in urban NJ, shaping felt into hats using steam, wearing rubber boots, standing in a pit of hot water formed from condensed steam--in a classic sweat shop. But grandpa launched our American dream.
Two generations ahead, I and my cousins include engineers, a computer scientist, teachers, a TV news correspondent, a superior court judge, business owners, and manager of a university food service. We illustrate upward mobility and the value of American education. My generation's children include an assistant US attorney, a tennis professional, more engineers, business executives and the wealthy proprietor of a highly successful boutique stock brokerage.
I lived in Tennessee and the Carolinas. Many of my friends, only a generation ago came from poor dirt farmer families living in the mountains and foothills in rude shacks. Today they are state college graduates and thoroughly upper middle class, in a wide variety of businesses and professions. And yes, both blacks and whites.
If you you live in the blue blooded gentry, as Krugman seems to, I guess it is hard to see success based on merit and hard work. But in most of America, families and friends like mine appreciate the value of freedom and free enterprise. Why? Because we see ourselves, with upward mobility everywhere--plain as day.
8
Krugman is not diminishing the value of free enterprise. Your family benefitted not just from Grandpa's hard work, from a time when our society invested more heavily in the upward mobility of individuals. Value for both things can in fact be held by the same person. I am guessing that the education of all of those highly paid professionals in your family was subsidized, in part, by public funds. That has certainly been the case in my family and many others I know.
27
Your anecdotes are inspiring, but unfortunately they cannot belie the growing and significant body of social science research showing that, for the vast majority of low income people, they will be born and die in the same “class” in this country.
Good policy is not formed based on inspiring anecdotes. It’s formed based on actual social science data and research.
23
And what better data than to study a place where greater income equality thrives?
Let me add, in my humble opinion, The "hospitality industry" is polite terminology for the "service economy" which is polite terminology for a word that we like to avoid since the Civil War.
20
IVANKA may misstate the pattern of upward mobility, or lack thereof, in the US. Being at the very top, she operates blithely unaware that the only place to go after that is downward. Since 1980 and the era of Ronnie Ray Gun, the GOP has declared war on the middle class. With Trump, there is an exceptionalism he built into his "changes" in the tax code. In fact, he has the stinking deStinKtion of transferring the largest amount of wealth from the 99.9% to the 0.1% to the tune of between 1.6 and 2.2 TRILLION over the next decade. That's NOT a plan for upward mobility. Those who succeed in college are often left with crushing debts at predatory rates of interest. In many cases just about all they can do is pay off their college loans. That's social mobility that pushes the middle class downward. Trump's blocks persons of color with advanced degrees from remaining in the US to strengthen us with their inventions. No! He sends them back to their countries against their will where they may indeed invent new things. But NOT to the benefit of the US. That's a shoot-yourself-in-the-foot policy. Poor Ivanka. It looks like she's having another let-them-eat-cake moment. She'll keep her head though. Meanwhile Wilbur Ross, Trump's money man, suggests that during the government shutdown, people seek loans from their banks. What about those whose credit is maxed out and can only get predatory rates for loans. They have to pay up thanks to Trump's heartless, brainless policy.
4
I think part of the problem is how technologies are utilized--centralized control. It's stifling. Take care of employees and employees will take care of you.
As for mobility, it's a known fact that mobility has decreased for New York and Pennsylvania State residents for a while. And, the problem is only getting worse. Are we headed to another Gilded Age? Thomas Piketty's answer is "yes."
I've been listening to news coverage on CBC. The Hospitality Industry is having a similar problem. Being to focused on debt can limit creativity or put a cap on the energy needed to sustain and bring an idea to fruition.
1
The best example of social mobility is the small state of Kerala in India. During the last 70 years Kerala has become the most developed state in India with the best human index factors anywhere in the world. That is all made possible by a left leaning Governments .
Social mobility is only possible by Socialism.
2
Paul,
Thank you. Another excellent bit of educational writing. I learned quite a lot.
In fact, I have long been under the impression that, in America, unlike Britain, I had a better chance to gain middle class status starting from being poor. But, it has been one very hard, lifelong slog. Brutal one might even say. But, I did it.
Unlike Trump's lie story about his rise from a measly million dollar loan in the mid 1970's. A million bucks to start!!! Heck, that is something like $40 million in today's dollars even if the story was true. Hardly self made.
Reading your article, and, thinking carefully of what might have been had there been a hint of a social net that I had been aware of is interesting.
What if I had not been afraid my whole life? How would my health be different.
I have never been laid off but 100% of my friends, equally hard working, have been as American management has sought to maximize its bonuses while destroying the corporation that just got a tax break from Republicans keen on outsourcing.
What if the fear of being laid of by incompetent American management was gone?
I think you are on to something, but, I fear nobody will read this.
18
How does one even respond to a statement of such ignorance? If it were the twilight zone a trickster would appear to con a vacuous dolt like I Trump out of her wealth. But this is not the Zone, so awe must do it the hard way. One thing that runs in our favor, when the tide turns against those in debt, it can move fast. The Trump Empire (if there really is such a thing) sits on a mountain of it. Second, the Trump Empire doesn't really make anything, it sells the name. That name is getting to be less valuable in these times. Lastly, society may be reaching the breaking point on being lectured by grifters like I Trump. I am pretty sure, even in Trump Land, that message was met with some sense of "did she really say that?" Let us hope on the next take down nobody (read the Federal Reserve and easy money) steps in to help the uber rich. Oops, I just woke up. I must have been in the Twilight Zone.
6
The previous -- before Bill Clinton and Obama, Democratic Party -- would by current standards in the media be referred to as Leftist and Socialist -- beyond progressive.
So interesting to me that Krugman leaves out the term "single payer" in describing Universal healthcare. Both Obama and Clinton were simply Reagan Republicans at heart and in fact.
But problems lie not only in social policies but in wars of adventure --- which Denmark. e.g., cannot be accused of participating in nor being a major arms dealer. May be better NOT to be a power players.
If they got there way? They already got it: "If Tea Party types got their way, we’d see drastic cuts in Medicaid, food stamps and other programs that aid Americans with low income — which would in many cases leave low-income children with inadequate medical care and nutrition. We’d also see cuts in funding for public education. And on the other end of the scale, we’d see tax cuts that raise the incomes of the wealthy, and the elimination of the estate tax, allowing them to pass all of that money on to their heirs."
4
@Patricia J. Ruland
their*
Socialism, in my view, isn't the core reason for Scandinavia's social mobility and other social successes. Based on my experience living in Iceland for many years, there is a deeply ingrained and longstanding "do onto others as you would have other do onto you" mentality that directly translates into how Scandinavians treat each other and instill policies and laws to match. It's helped greatly that up until recently Scandinavia's been a "one tribe" highly homogeneous group, and time will only tell if this attitude withstands their burgeoning multi-tribe population which is becoming more like America's. I'd also footnote that in Denmark, Sweden and Norway you still can't mobilize yourself to become king or queen. That social rank is entirely based on birth and fully tax paid for by their masses.
3
What happened to the question about guaranteed government jobs? I thought this column would address that but it seems to have fallen by the wayside to discuss economic mobility in general. I hope he’ll tackle that subject for those of us less sophisticated about the economics.
2
An excellent and fact-filled essay on inequality and social mobility, Professor. But of course those who adore Trump will never believe you. You could try and argue the point till you were blue in the face and you would not convince them otherwise.
There is just something about the human brain at work here. In order to understand what that is, it is useful to consider the phenomenon of religion.
In the year 2019, there is no rational basis for believing in God.
Yet enormous numbers of people do, even liberals. You could try and argue the point till you are blue in the face and you would not convince them otherwise.
1
This is one of the sad realities of our times, that much of the general population apparently does not know what is going on around them. It is not "as if" they are living in a dream world, they actually are. More scary than sad is that they are so open to manipulation, and there are no shortage of people in the Republican Party ready, willing and able to do just that to their own ends.
Decades ago it was the fear of communism, which was instilled in everyone alive in the country at the time, mainly due to the cold war and nuclear weapons, but the shtick was carried to the extreme by the same people, then, who will be using "the fear" of socialism, now, for the exact same purpose, which is not just to maintain power but to make a profit. It worked. So, the leap to "fear of socialism" is not a huge one at all. It falls right in line, kind of like an upgrade, of sorts, just when people might have been catching on to the the possibility that the economy is not working too well for them.
Do we waste our time trying to educate these people, change their minds? No! That would be impossible. It is not based on reasoned thought. It is all based on the belief that socialism is UnAmerican. Well, it is. That's the point. We need change, if we want to save our democracy and what is left of our society. We need to move ahead an try to do what is right, and right in this case is what is life giving, not life denying. It means health care, education, and controlled capitalism with a job.
5
It's all about access to good education, lots of hard work - and a lot of luck. Ms Trump does not deserve the attention she is getting here.
9
The curious question I've always had is why such a huge swath of the population who have either benefited in one way or another from the very social programs they despise (i.e. conservatives and Republicans like former House Speaker Ryan and others) have such a disdain for so many others who struggle to merely get by and are so unwilling to see their plight and come up with creative ways to help without running afoul of their so-called moral or religious bring 'em up by the bootstraps views?
3
And as one moves from knowing to
understanding what each of the noted
opposing scenarios, their temporary and
more permanent implications and
outcomes would be,
with sufficient sensitivity to an
ever-present reality of "unexpecteds"
which simply exist, unexplainably,
who will be accountable for the created harms?
Who, and What will enable...foster,
personal responsibility to
operate as an inherent dimension of a
civil society, garbed in, and
protected by, mutual trust?
Mutual respect?
Sensitive caringness?
Mutual help, if and when needed?
The equitable sharing of human and
non-human resources
which are critical for creating and
sustaining existential wellbeing and
menschlichkeit?
Who will be knitting, as Madame Defarge did,
when, somehow,
ordinary hardworking people,
who have chosen, complacently, to
BE come willfully blind, deaf and
ignorant "awaken?"
WHO will be twittering?
Tweeting WHATs?
As opened-eyes focus.
SEEing. BE ings.
Open ears enabling both listening
as well as hearing.
WHAT is, which never should have been.
Which is transmuted into understanding and
insights. In safe sites of the WE, in
our enabled WE-THEY culture.
Now made vulnerable.
As bridges are created.
For, and to, needed changes.
To replace made-made barriers of
violating, anchored traditions.
Transmitted as revisionist history.
Alt-facts mixing fictions and fantasies.
And perhaps the Nameless One
who seems to have given up on his creations will return to...
The logic of this article is absolutely biased. There is no correlation between what we call socialism and intergenerational upward mobility. Take France for example, you have a massive State that intervenes a lot in our economy, we have very high tax rates (VAT is at a 20% rate for most goods, Income Tax represents 70 Bn€ of revenues for the State and more than a third of our salaries is punctures by the State), we have tuition-Free universities and schools and our upward social mobility is...worst than the one in the US, according to OECD.
2
@Marwan Kanaan
In 2011 French sons did better than sons in the US in upward mobility( but not by much).
https://www.epi.org/publication/usa-lags-peer-countries-mobility/
1
Another dimension to this is that greater equality leads to happier lives of those who are well off. There's an ecological factor, such that the well-off in societies with low degree of inequality are happier than persons in other societies who are equally as well-off, but live in a society with much greater inequality:
"How economic inequality might affect a society’s well-being"
PBS News Hour today.
http://tinyurl.com/y6hnq4ab
2
As a British socialist, I find that the US discussion to be very thin. Unfortunately socialism is used mostly as a swear word to block discussion of social progress of any kind (it is noteworthy that the vile Trump has started using it in these terms.)
Nordic countries are not socialist but social democratic, which means that institutions have been set up to advance the interest of everyone and not just the very rich (who still exist there of course; these societies remain capitalist.) But words don't matter that much. What does matter is the belief that society creates advantages for everyone, including removing the selfish advantages put there by the rich and powerful to block progress by everyone else.
7
Ivanka's comment reveals that despite appearances, she shares her father's ignorance about lifestyles of the nonrich and nonfamous. My father grew up during the Depression, dropped out of school in the tenth grade to get a job in the cotton mill, and joined the army a few months after marrying my mother; he didn't take advantage of the free education after the war, since he needed to support a family, but what he learned in his first postwar job led to his starting his own business, and when he died in 2004, he was a millionaire. I don't think that would be possible now. Just getting a first job without a high school diploma is difficult, and one really needs a college degree to get further, unless one is a tech wizard. Dad had two advantages: he was a white male, and he had a well-educated wife who helped him figure out what he needed to know. He also had ambition and enthusiasm, which have no price but need to be encouraged from a young age. These days, I wonder whether money is all that matters to most people--particularly Republicans.
11
You can't expect people to improve their lives if they are constantly struggling to get food on the table, to provide safety to their family and to have access to affordable health care.
Yes, upward mobility requires commitment, passion and a lot of effort. But it needs to start with giving people access to decent jobs and wages and affordable health care.
None of which the GOP or Ms Ivanka Trump care about.
11
It's not like these arguments take place in a vacuum. Just Google the state rankings for pretty much any marker of success and wellbeing like per capita income, longevity, years lost to disability, education, etc. At the top are the progressive, usually Democratically led states. At the bottom are the most conservative, usually Republican led states. This is NOT an accident. What the Republicans have been preaching hasn't changed in 40 years and they still have nothing to show for it.
25
@Philip Greider
The sharecropper mentality still rules the South. Everyone must cower before the bossman and then go beat up on someone even less fortunate than themselves in order to regain a bit of dignity. They've internalized a caste system hundreds of years old. It's the reason workers consistently vote down union membership, so afraid are they that companies will pack up and leave. Meanwhile, they never question whether their wages deserve to be higher. Even in West Virginia, where coal miners used to engage in bloody, pitched battles with management goons, it's only the fed up teachers who are raising their voices.
1
@stan continople Spot-on and trying to get white Southerners to understand that the GI Bill and their VA healthcare is socialist is impossible. The military has a huge presence in the South and yet it’s not seen as a socialist government institution. Some of the most hard core right wing white Southerners love their Medicare , SS, and VA care but they think they deserve and earned these programs and others don’t. They enjoy having lots of people beneath them in the caste system.
I see it like this.. In each country you have a limited number of Einsteins and Marie Curies. If you somehow ensure that all children (regardless of sex, skin color..) get proper education and opportunities to pursue their dreams and explore their opportunities, whether its art, philosophy, music, science.. then you are more likely to find the next great Einstein or Marie Curie or Mozart.. than if you only give a small part of the population all the opportunities.
7
Thank you for your perspective on this subject, and on many others. Reading your takes, in these times, is a comfort, a sanity check.
11