If an economic catastrophe befalls Americans and no one in power hears it, did it happen?
That was the question raised by a new Yale/Rockefeller Foundation report released yesterday that looks at the economic experiences of Americans during the Great Recession. Since one of us (Hacker) was a coauthor, we obviously gave it extra attention. Yet the picture it painted -- based on a two-wave survey between March 2008 and September 2009 -- was only confirmation of what most Americans know: there's a lot of economic pain out there.
According to the report, more than 90 percent of Americans experienced at least one major economic "shock" during these 18 months: a substantial drop in wealth or income, a large increase in nondiscretionary spending (such as medical costs), or similar dislocation. Even if you ignore big wealth losses -- ubiquitous because of the fall in the housing and the stock markets -- roughly 7 in 10 Americans saw their earnings substantially decline or their nondiscretionary expenses substantially rise. Nearly a quarter saw their income fall by 25 percent or more.
Even more worrisome, those who experienced these shocks were much more likely to report serious economic deprivation (going without food, housing, or medical care because of the cost). And this was true for middle-income families as well as the least advantaged. Indeed, more than half of families with incomes between $60,000 and $100,000 that experienced employment or medical disruptions reported being unable to meet at least one basic economic need.
Against this backdrop, the tax-cut deal brokered by President Obama looks like very weak tea. Extended unemployment benefits are a vital lifeline that will encourage spending to revive the economy, and the temporary cut in payroll taxes will provide an important, albeit modest and short-lived, boost. But a huge chunk of the bipartisan deal is tax cuts that the Congressional Budget Office has judged singularly ineffective as economic tonic, including massive cuts for the richest of Americans and their heirs that will pile on future debt, exacerbate inequality, and crowd out other, more effective measures -- all for little or no short-term economic gain.
What about a major effort to create jobs to rebuild our crumbling roads, bridges, and transportation system? Nope. What about giving more relief to struggling states that are laying off teachers and first responders? Nada. Perhaps we could step up the implementation of the health care law to provide expanded Medicaid benefits during this weak recovery, when millions of Americans are still losing their jobs and health insurance. Are you kidding?
That the tax-cut deal may well be the best that Obama could have gotten only makes the joke crueler. What's wrong with our politics that so much hardship evokes so little response?
At the event launching the Yale/Rockefeller foundation report, the panelists -- Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, Larry Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute, and Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation -- seemed genuinely puzzled by this question. Even Butler, an astute conservative thinker who saw the report as a chance to have a real conversation about the level and distribution of economic risk in the United States, appeared not to have a precise response.
Two answers floated around the room. The first is that our political system is so dysfunctional that even political leaders deeply worried about what's happening just don't see any prospect for serious action. Klein fingered the Senate filibuster, which has showed its ugly head again and again during the lame-duck session. With an intense conservative minority in the Senate, everyone from the president to those peddling deficit-reduction proposals to liberal democrats simply assumes that nothing that involves direct job creation or serious public spending or increased revenues -- even revenues gained by letting tax cuts expire -- is feasible.
But there was second hypothesis: Maybe a good chunk of the political class is just so insulated from the realities in the report that they don't feel the same sense of urgency that most Americans do. Things are terrible on Main Street, but on Wall Street, Pennsylvania Avenue, and K Street, they don't look so gloomy. How else can we explain why everyone in Washington was talking about deficit reduction (at least until they decided to blow another hole in the budget), even while polls show that Americans ranked it way, way below fixing the economy?
It's not clear which is scarier -- that our leaders don't think they can lead, or that they don't want to.
Either way, the middle-class economy keeps falling, and no one is there to hear it.
Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson are the authors of Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer--And Turned Its Back on the Middle Class
Richard (RJ) Eskow: Bipartisanship vs. Democracy: The President and the Third Way Fallacy
Huff TV: Roy Sekoff: Obama 'Just Not That Into' Taxing The Wealthy
The Bono Act was intended to benefit the owners of hugely valuable old films, music and books, but it applies just as well to works of little commercial value. Because it applies to all published works, it means that reprinting many old works is a practical impossibility, given the difficulty of finding the authors or heirs. An practical example is the dearth of illustrations in Wikipedia for people and events since 1923.
Pelosi earned "The Most Productive Public Servant of the Year Award" for passing the most legislation in U.S. History designed to benefit the American people.
***********************************************************************************************************
"The Most Compassionate Americans of the Year Award" goes to Keith and Ed of MSMBC for collecting funds for clinics and uninsured Americans.
Doing insult to injury, American 'financial heroes" would rather use the money they borrow from America's children to create jobs overseas, than to invest in their own nation.
When enough Americans realize this and decide to do something about it, there will be a backlash, and with most of the military overseas , and police being laid off, the 'financial heroes" are going to have to fend for themselves. Now, that's entertainment!
E. Scrooge
if one can turn on the tv or pickup a newspaper, one is aware of the dire straits faced by millions.
if they cannot be bothered to know what's going on in the country, then their governance is really incompetence.
if they are aware and continue to behave as many legislators have over the past several years, then they simply don't care, if they don't care, then they do not have the interests of their constituencies in mind
Those that are not onwed by giant corporation have financial relationships that they do not wantto jeopardize. Even this media is not immune.
Both seem to put the responsibility at the feet of our puppet leaders. What about the puppeteers?
1. A group of unaccountable private bankers (The Fed Reserve System) that has the power to print money and to lend to their fellow bankers and to select companies including media outlets without oversight (no annual Audits), and which profits from deficits (Treasuries), and
2. A military industry that is in bed with our politicians and the Pentagon and which desires war to grow their profits.
Gen Smedley Butler
The real problem now is we elected these prevaricating "big government" haters and they are making sure that "government is NOT here to help" .
Annualized Growth Rates
Clinton
1993 to 1996 Real GDP = 3.44%
1993 to 1996 Real GDP per capita = 2.22%
1997 to 2000 Real GDP = 4.44%
1997 to 2000 Real GDP per capita = 3.26%
1993 to 2000 Real GDP = 4.01%
1993 to 2000 Real GDP per capita = 2.81%
Bush
2001 to 2004 Real GDP = 2.62%
2001 to 2004 Real GDP per capita = 1.68%
2005 to 2008 Real GDP = 1.75%
2005 to 2008 Real GDP per capita = 0.79%
2001 to 2008 Real GDP = 2.31%
2001 to 2008 Real GDP per capita = 1.36%”
This is a three dimensional issue - there is no easy answer to it.
A. (Indifferent)
B. Where it hurts. They're far too silly and should work harder and do more to preserve tradition, decency and justice. Monty Python.”
You're assuming three things -- First, that the (white) voters are well-educated; second, that they employ critical thinking before casting a vote and, finally, that they actually had a real choice in the booth.
You give white people far too much credit, and stop short of saying that the elected representatives sold out to K street.
What if we're just not paying attention in the first place?
Please believe in the change, or next election you will get someone from the other 'side'' who will do EXACTLY the same thing. It is so important that you support your president that won't support you
Have a look, George Carlin on voters...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk&feature=related
George Carlin was my all-time favorite!