Rise of the Have-Nots: "The world the New Deal built has been destroyed..."

[DeepModem Mom]

WP: Rise of the Have-Nots
Why More Americans Are Feeling Shut Out of Good Times
By Harold Meyerson
Thursday, September 27, 2007; Page A25

....a poll released this month by the Pew Research Center reveals a transformation of Americans' sense of their country and themselves that is startling. Pew asked Americans if their country was divided between haves and have-nots. In 1988, when Gallup asked that question, 26 percent of respondents said yes, while 71 percent said no. In 2001, when Pew asked it, 44 percent said yes and 53 percent said no. But when Pew asked it again this summer, the number of Americans who agreed that we live in a nation divided into haves and have-nots had risen to 48 percent -- exactly the same as the number of Americans who disagreed.

Americans' assessment of their own place in the economy has altered, too. In 1988, fully 59 percent identified themselves as haves and just 17 percent as have-nots. By 2001, the haves had dwindled to 52 percent and the have-nots had risen to 32 percent. This summer, just 45 percent of Americans called themselves haves, while 34 percent called themselves have-nots.

These are epochal shifts, of epochal significance. The American middle class has toppled into a world of temporary employment, jobs without benefits, retirement without security. Harder times have come to left and right alike: The percentage of Republicans who call themselves haves has declined by 13 points since 1988; the percentage of Democratic haves has declined by 12 points.

This equality of declining opportunity, however, isn't matched by an equality of perception. The percentage of Democrats who say America is divided between haves and have-nots has risen by 31 points since 1988; the percentage of Republicans, by just 14 points. Indeed, though that 13-point decline in Republicans who call themselves haves has occurred entirely since they were asked that question in 2001, the percentage of Republicans who say we live in a have/have-not nation has actually shrunk by one point since 2001. (It had increased 15 points from 1988 to 2001.) Apparently, so great is Republicans' loyalty to the Bush presidency that they're willing to overlook their own experience. And, in many cases, to attribute the nation's transformation solely to immigration, rather than to the rise of a stateless laissez-faire capitalism over which the American people wield less and less power. Which helps explain why Republican presidential candidates bluster about a fence on the border and have nothing to say about providing health coverage or restoring some power to American workers.

But the big story here isn't Republican denial. It's the shattering of Americans' sense of a common identity in a time when the economy no longer promotes the general welfare. The world the New Deal built has been destroyed, and we are, as we were before the New Deal, two nations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/26/AR2007092602069.html?nav=most_emailed

[Me.]

1. More Articles Like This Please

eventually truth will catch on

[DaveJ]

2. This is more important than people realize

This won't get much attention. We've been condition not to think about ourselves. But "ourselves" is what this is all about. It's why we demand equality domestically. It's why we demand fairness internationally. It's why we support our political candidates. We've been trained by the "haves" not to care about ourselves, but that is really what this is all about.

26% to 48% is an incredible change, yet today more than ever, Americans are least likely to care. We are so complacent about it. I can't find words. Fuck it.

[Mend]

3. a lot of people around here have lost their jobs...restaurants, even pizza huts,

are closing, people having trouble renting out their apartments to workers, housing and construction dead, mortgage and title companies idle. Low paying jobs unavailable. Skilled labor, plumbers, electricians inactive. Very scary.

[DaveJ]

8. Who need jobs? It's a brand new economy. Haven't your heard?

Congress says debt no longer matters, it's just a technicality. Ownership is a concept but its still just that. Work obviously has no value. Both sides of the political spectrum want to make the U.S. into a gated community of managers and engineers, yet in the process they have no clue how to prevent us from becoming a Banana Republic, which obviously is where we're heading.

In this great gated community they all envision, we should not need any jobs. Just stop working and everything will still be there. But wait a second, we are being ruled by trust fund brats who never had to work for a damn thing, who don't know a fucking thing about the real world.

[midnight]

4. Thats what you call an economy based on a ownership society

that is run by compassionate conservatives.

[kestrel91316]

5. When 51% decide they are among the "have-nots", we will see

a resurgence in the manufacture of these:

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

17. My favorite...

Stock pick. Along with a skewer run up the asses and out the mouths of the rapacious rich, followed by a smoky hardwood fire and a North Carolina Mop Sauce.

Might as well make them useful.

[Tian Zhuangzhuang]

6. This is the exact problem with identity politics.

Where all in this together. Our enemy is not the southern Nascar fan, or the New york Deli owner, or the union cameraman in LA it is those that would exploit all of us.

The only way they can is if we continue to attack each other instead of focusing on the elites of both parties.

[hfojvt]

7. I have to wonder - are there really that many have-nots?

45% haves and 34% have nots? It seems to me that people have not their sense of perspective, and hope. I have long been in the bottom quintile, except for a couple of years at the bottom end of the 4th quintile. Yet I would think of myself as a 'have'. But many people seem to have more - they have SO's, kids, cars, cable TV, and cell phones. Probably they have electric dryers and hot water too.

What can I say? Except for a girlfriend and a non-psychotic boss, I pretty much have everything I want. People who have more though apparently don't think they have enough, or they don't feel secure in keeping it. Or their perspective is that only people on the Forbes 400 can be considered 'haves' and everyone else is a 'have not' by comparison. How many of those self-described have nots don't appreciate what they have?

[DaveJ]

12. Rotting in a ditch I can appreciate what I have

And even if I had less than a ditch to seep nutrients from, I could still learn to appreciate it.

On the other hand, either take back what was earned or don't. It's your choice.

[RaleighNCDUer]

13. You might look at your definitions.

In another poverty thread someone defined poverty by showing a picture of a starving african woman and her skeletonized child. That's not poverty - that's famine.

You want poverty, you ask how long would you last if your job went away today.

Me, I'm three months from the street - and that last month would see me selling off my TV, computer, library and video collection. And at that, I'm better off than a lot.

Haves and have nots are not to be measured by their 'stuff'. It's by their security. The 'haves' can look at a year with no income with equanimity. The 'wannabe haves' are looking at maybe six months. But most of us, even those who supposedly own their own homes - which are really owned by the mortgage companies - cannot look at losing all income for more than three, before they start losing their 'stuff'. There is no security anymore.

When my mom was a kid she was raised on a farm in Iowa. In the depression, she never knew she was poor because even though they couldn't come up with a nickle for the matinee movie they never went hungry, and always had hot soup for the hobos who would come in on the train looking for work. She was a have.

At least, as I would define it.

[hfojvt]

15. what does that change though?

I have enough in my savings to live for about three years without a job, maybe longer. I would be burning up my retirement savings, but it would keep me alive now. Most people make alot more money than I do, and yet they do not save enough of it. I created my own security despite my low income. I had that ability so I do not understand why they don't have it, or don't exercise it, and then complain because they do not have it.

[kineneb]

22. take it from a real "have-not"

We are one SSDI check away from hunger. We are fortunate enough to have lots of "stuff", but absolutely no liquid assets. What is a real saving account? What is a 401k? Hubby had one once, then he had kidney failure. What is retirement? I won't get one of those.

This is what happens after medical bankruptcy. I suppose I could sell off every thing we own, but then what? I am in no condition to work and Hubby is slowly fading due to his medical problems.

That is what being a "have-not" means: absolutely no financial security; not knowing if there will be enough money to buy food, gasoline, or medicines at the end of the month; hoping nothing breaks, because you can't afford to repair or replace it.

[marzipanni]

16. Aye...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C-u6kdHuXE&mode=related&search=

[hfojvt]

19. so you agree with me?

the vast majority of have nots from that video are not in the USA, and thus, perhaps 25 of the 34% of Americans who consider themselves 'have nots' are in the group that's richer than 75% of the world.

[davekriss]

25. It's wonderful that you have this Buddhist sense...

...of contentment without attachment to physical things others possess. Really. However the bottom 40 percentile own 0.4% of the net worth of this nation (based on 2001 statistics, I'm certain things have gotten worse). Truly this depicts the "have nots".

(The stat, from www.inequality.org's web-site a few years ago, refers to net worth. This means someone in the bottom 40 percentile might have use of a car, a dishwasher, even a house -- but they don't truly own these things. Their debt equals their assets. They are a couple of paychecks away from being stripped of these things. It is this lack of security that is reflected in the poll referenced in the OP.

The bottom 40 percent are increasingly yoked to their jobs in a system of debt peonage. They no longer have the "liberty" to pursue the American dreams of their youth, which forever recedes on the horizon of television programs and Madison Avenue advertising. Frustrated and unaware of why, they lash out at the scapegoats fed to them by our propaganda system. And that system keeps pumping them out in order to keep the bottom from turning to the true source of their frustration, which is the unregulated capitalism that enriches a small portion in the top percentiles, one that is rapidly embracing the tools of overt fascism.)

[PDenton]

30. good imagery

Yes, Americans are relatively affluent... but compared to what?

I think spiritually it is very degrading for Americans to have Ozzie and Harriet, home ownership, memembership in the Country Club, etc. as the ideal, the American Dream, and to feel that slipping away. There is no dream to replace it with, no explanation. So while alot of people are content to be poor, and it is admirable, most people are not ready to be unplugged.

Plus, starving to death or dying of an illness becaues you can't afford medical care just sucks. I don't even think a Buddhist could argue with that one.

[Cybergata]

28. You don't live or work near the Have-Nots.

I'm a teacher, and I have students whose single parent works two or more jobs to make ends meet. Some kids don't see their parents beyond seeing them for short stretches of time between their jobs. These are the have nots, and they have greatly increased in my life in the past 8 years.

[PDenton]

29. You are overlooking security

People are thinking about their security. SUV's, a house, etc. are only a couple delayed payments away from sleeping with relatives or under a bridge. The middle class economic security has been devestated. People are feeling their wages aren't keeping up with their debts and expenses. Even my die-hard Republican relatives who own guns/NRA members and would never dream of voting Democrat... can feel it.

[Octafish]

9. GOP SOP. It's just the new Feudalism.

Meyerson* must not've gotten the memo on the greedy turds.

* And the rest of Corporate McPravda

[kansasblue]

10. Bush wanted to be the anti-Rosevelt.

He wanted to reverse the New Deal.

[kenny blankenship]

11. And that's why I am not voting for any "New Kind of Democrat"

Give me the old kind of Democrat or forget it.

[rockymountaindem]

14. Irresponsible class warfare!

Communist! Trotskyite!

Oh, sorry, just slipped into the "Faux News" mindset for a moment.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. I may point out that revolutions happen in

exactly this environment

Them laws of unintended consequences come to mind

Or as I have been found of saying recently... the best laid plans of mice and men...

[marzipanni]

31. The people came to realize that wealth is not the fruit of labor

but the result of organized protected robbery. - Frantz Fanon

[Atman]

20. My NEW DEAL 'toon

This has always been one of my faves. Seems to fit here...



.

[DeepModem Mom]

21. Good one -- thanks, Atman! nt

[Blue_Tires]

23. will debtor prisons make a comeback as well?

[DeepModem Mom]

24. a.m. kick

[bdamomma]

26. kick

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

27. I think "Republican denial" is part of the big story because that perpetuates the problem. nt