Democrats better pay attention to the needs of the middle class

[natrlron]

Why are Tea Party people so angry and fearful? Yes, right-wing demagogues aided by right-wing funders like the Koch brothers have stoked their fears and anger to a fever pitch, but why were they angry to begin with? Why are they and many in the broader population so receptive to the lies and fear-mongering?

President Jimmy Carter posited that their fear is of a changed social order evidenced by the election of a black president. While I’m sure that is part of the answer, is it really so simple as the color of Obama’s skin and his progressive policies? No, the answer lies elsewhere.

Feeding this fear of a changed social order, racism, and the Tea Party’s resonance has been a sea change in the wellbeing of America’s middle class. The middle class is made up mostly of nonprofessionals … people with only a high school degree. As manufacturing and other middle class jobs have disappeared over the past 30 years, their standard of living and the quality of their lives has been drifting downward.

The recent recession only exacerbated the trend. In March 2011, 12 percent of those with only a high-school diploma were unemployed compared to 4.5 percept of those with college degrees and 2 percent for those with professional degrees. The greatest impact has been on men … in 1967, 97 percent of men 30-50 years old in this cohort were employed; in 2010, just 76 percent were.

Not only has this resulted in economic problems for these men and their families, these pressures have brought about greater interpersonal stress, with a resulting increase in divorce rates and other examples of social dysfunction. The greater income inequality that developed during this period has also resulted in heightened actual and felt lifestyle differences between the middle class and those with more income and education. (All data from, Don Peck, “Can the Middle Class Be Saved,” The Atlantic, September 2011)

The world as the middle class knew it since WWII has been turned upside down. Small wonder they are scared, angry, and alienated. Yet this important shift in the American social fabric is never discussed. Politicians talk vaguely about the need to protect the middle class, but the evisceration that has already occurred is not mentioned.

If the Democratic Party wants to win in 2012, it must clearly let the middle class know that it is aware of their pain, that it feels their pain, and that it proposes a series of interrelated policies to restore the lot of the middle class. It's a complex economic and social engineering question that will require the attention of our best and brightest. Obama and the other candidates must share their vision for where they want the country to go and how they propose getting there.

For more on this and other issues, see my blog, http://PreservingAmericanGreatness.blogspot.com

[PoliticAverse]

1. Or in order for Democrats to win all that is necessary is for Republicans to be worse. n/t

[Romulox]

3. It's a scary thought, for both parties, and for America, that Obama is likely to win by default

It's not good for either party, or for America, imo, for the office of Presidency not to be the subject of serious competition.

[woo me with science]

4. It's a clever game, isn't it?

What a stroke of brilliance to purchase BOTH parties.

[xiamiam]

7. some bodies will emerge from ows..we're all tired of this crap

i like my reps..sam farr and boxer..feinstein not so much..but as far as i can see, most of the rest of the representatives are full of it and need to go

[TBF]

11. And really not so new. Maybe not new to you middle class folks -

but for those of us who grew up blue collar we always knew politicians weren't interested in us (and I'm in my 40s - this has been going on longer than just the Reagan presidency) ...

It is true that there was a bit of a respite between WWII-1980, roughly 30 years, in which taxes were sensible and unions were still around to keep wages decent. But even then we weren't fooled. Maybe you had a house, a couple of American-made cars, and you could graduate from high school and get a decent factory job (and my parents and their friends did - some of my friends as well), but even then we knew that our needs were not first on anyone's lists. And now even that is gone. Certainly gone for the blue collar, and now also gone for the so-called "middle" class who graduate from middle of the road colleges particularly with degrees that are less desirable in the business world.

So, now you have joined us. Any good ideas on how to go forward?

[natrlron]

6. No

The Democrats cannot depend on winning because the Republicans are worse because it's all in the eye of the beholder. What may look terrible and incomprehensible to us, may look very appealing to others. In fact there's no question but that it does.

But this is not just a matter of winning the election. It is understanding what is happening to an important part of this country's social fabric and addressing it.

[Romulox]

2. Recommend. nt

[leftstreet]

5. K&R

[emcguffie]

8. Have to disagree with your definition of middle class.

By far, I think, most college grads are middle class. Graduating from college is no ticket to the 1%. Neither is graduate school. Not even a Ph.D.

[DocMac]

9. I agree.

And that is what is so crazy about people who post on places like yahoo that complain about state union workers making $70k/year. A family of four isn't up to middle class on that income. A lot of non-union places have a top out rate these days and that is usually below $25/hr.

My brother in-law has worked for a wire draw co. for 26 years and his top out is $14.75/hr. He has been at that rate for about 10 years now.

[Taverner]

10. A Ph.D is a one-way ticket into abject poverty

:P

[natrlron]

12. It isn't "my" definition.

The median household income in the US according to the census bureau was $52,000 in 2008. Some economists define "middle class" as the 60% of people in the middle, which would be a household income from $25,000 - $100,000. I think that's too broad. But obviously we're not talking about everyone other than the top 1%. Personally, I would draw the range more narrowly, maybe the middle 40% with incomes of $40,000 - $80,000. Given the gist of the Atlantic article I refer to, they clearly define middle class or middle income more along the lines I suggest.