A story that proves Republicans have made middle Americans poorer

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

This story was in my LA Times this AM. It is a LONG read but makes the following points about how much more uncertainty exists for middle and poor America than did 25 years ago. It is the most comprehensive study to date on the dismantling of the New Deal.

It illustrates the following points masterfully and thoroughly.

-over the last 25 years, economic risk has been steadily shifted from the broad shoulders of business and government to the backs of working families.


-That these hardships have been crafted by Republicans and corporate America

-That dismantling social programs, worker protections and deregulating industries left what were previously safety nets to LUCK.

-That Bush's OWNERSHIP plan would expose the poor and middle class to MORE risk than they already must bear.


It is LONG but it is a MUST read.

Here's a snip from the center of the article

If America Is Richer, Why Are Its Families So Much Less Secure?

<snip>

"On the whole, we have moved toward a freer market, a more competitive economy and a richer one," said University of Chicago economist and Nobel laureate Gary S. Becker. "There has been a shift toward people taking more risk on themselves ... and the economy has gained for it."

But there is another, less sanguine way to view what has unfolded.

The more that a family's income fluctuates, the greater the chance it will be caught in a downdraft when a crisis — such as a layoff, divorce or illness — strikes. Then, it can be extremely tough to bounce back.

Over the last three decades, working families have faced ever-changing — and, for the most part, increasingly more perilous — risk-reward bargains.

During the 1970s, families in the economic middle enjoyed a comparatively favorable run. Although their incomes generally swung up or down as much as 16% a year, they ended each year an average of 2% ahead of where they began. The result by the decade's close was that the reward of extra annual income had more than covered the potential loss from a single year's sudden plunge.

But the story during the 1980s and early 1990s was basically the reverse. The volatility of families' income nearly doubled to as much as 30% a year. But now, instead of growing amid all the ups and downs, average family income dropped at an annual rate of 0.3% in the 1980s and an even steeper 2.3% in the early '90s. The bottom line: more risk for less reward.


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-riskshift3oct10,1,4792299.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[salin]

1. Printed up and saved

excellent article - there was a series of articles I read (last weekend?) that laid out how many working poor are at a net loss economically just in relationship to bush's tax policies. I believe that those were from the Detroit News (traditionally the more conservative of the two detroit papers... though since the papers merged I am not sure that this is still the case.) Those articles would make a good companion to this piece.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. If they're online post them

This is the most thorough one I've seen yet.

[salin]

6. Unfortunately they appear to be too old to link

seems that the detroit news makes you pay if the stories are more than seven days old - and the stories were two weeks ago (my bad).

This is from their search (a description of one of the stories from the series) - I found them in the editorial forum here at DU.

2. Working poor suffer under Bush tax cuts
September 26, 2004 •• 1214 words •• ID: det19866717
DETROIT - The Bush administration and Congress have scaled back programs that aid the poor to help pay for $600 billion in tax breaks that went primarily to those who earn more than $288,800 a year. To offset the loss of the tax revenue, the administration has amassed record federal deficits and trimmed social spending. The affected programs - job training, housing, higher education and an array of social services - provide safety nets for the poor. Many programs are critical elements in ...

The article discussed the cutback in childcare voucher programs and what that meant for individuals; another article talked about serious cutbacks in heating/electricity aid for the poor ; another article talked about the cutbacks in programs such as meals on wheels for senior shut-ins... wish I could find a way around the archives/charge thing.

[charlie]

7. Full article is here

http://www.detnews.com/2004/specialreport/0409/29/a01-284666.htm

[salin]

8. Thank you, Charlie

it is now "favorited".

[ikojo]

3. The Democrats are complicit in assisting in shifting the burden and risks

from the government/private sector to working people. Welfare Reform was not passed under a Republican administration that's for sure, nor was NAFTA. It also was not a Republican administration that championed GATT and the WTO.

So, our task should Kerry get in is to remind him of the tremendous debt he owes to working people. His first order of business should be to rescind the rules changes Bushco, Inc submitted to the Labor Department regarding overtime and who is to be paid overtime.

[greekspeak]

15. The DLC is more than complicit

Co-conspiritor might be a better term.

[charlie]

4. Read that this morning

...and spent the rest of it in a hollow funk.

You'd think they'd know that the best guarantor of a civil society is a broad, contented middle class. Or maybe they just prefer living in gated compounds with crime and decay at their doorstep. We're well on our way to becoming the most obscenely rich third world nation on earth.

[Mandate My Ass]

5. Thanks, will definitely check it out

They love to tell people they have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps but then they keep cutting them shorter and shorter.

Personally, I'm in bounce back mode myself, which isn't a first, but for the first time it seems as though the deck is stacked so much against the little guy that I'll keep sliding backwards despite my own best efforts and the help I've gotten.

[oscar111]

10. complex: far too complex to convert joe citizen

the example, if typical of the article, is true but too complex in reasoning to be useful in converting the average Joe.

Perhaps someone likes the article enough to distill and convert its points into simple, brief arguments that will DO SOMETHING to convert fencesitters... not just make us higher intellectuals feel warm inside as we browse on the subtle reasoning and obscure fragmentary statistics.

Thanks tho for the article... just trying to be constructive, not hostile at all.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!

[salin]

11. here is an editorial in the Oregonian

that is more simplified. Doesn't have the same impact though...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x78232

I disagree that articles like this are not helpful. Nor do they make anyone feel "warm inside". Anger is the response. Helpful - as it puts more information on the fingertips of those who are working to get apathetic fence sitters to vote. You don't had those folks a dense article... but you DO refer to the compelling information from the article.

[salin]

9. Kevin Drum just highlighted and linked to the article on the

Washington Monthly blog. Given that his is one of the more widely read blogs... should expand the reach of the article.

Is the readership of the LATimes growing? I never considered it to be a national newspaper (not when I lived in northern california, nor when I moved away). But over the past three years as I have tried to follow national stories I have moved to look less at the Washington Post and more to the LATimes (even the Chicago Tribune at times - esp their business coverage during the corporate implosions - seemed to gain a more national than regional reach.) Is it just me (via DU) or is the paper repositioning itself among the national print media players?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

12. I think the internet has made it so

but I also notice with that growth a distinct slant towards the right in analysis of national and international events. This particular writer, however, always has interesting and prevalent stories.

Don't know how much they've grown in terms of subscribership, but I do believe due to the internet, they are much more widely read and are more apt to be cited in other news publications for their investigative work lately.

[salin]

13. Could be due to the fact...

that they actually do some investigative work... seems to be sorely missing in many publications these days.

btw, there was an interesting story by Laura Rozen in the Boston Globe - for middle east reporting I have been following her website (and articles) for the past several months. Generally she gets carried in the liberal magazines (eg The American PRogressive) - nice to see one of her articles in the Globe. (total nonsequitor, I know... the curse of the stream of conscience posting...)

[SarahB]

14. "If America Is Richer, Why Are Its Families So Much Less Secure?"

Wealth is being concentrating further and further. Unions diminished. Many safeguards are gone. Corporate welfare is considered a good thing, while financial assistance to families during times of crises is considered a bad thing. The US is a second world country compared to much of the world now.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

16. kick