I spent the holidays reading "The Price of Everything," a new economics-for-the-rest-of-us book by Eduardo Porter of the New York Times. Call this part economics or philosophy or religion -- whatever it is, it's the part that stopped me cold:
American happiness remains peculiarly impervious to progress. Between 1946 and 1991 income per capita in the United States rose by a factor of 2.5 -- ownership of consumer durable from TV sets to cars soared, education attainment jumped, and life expectancy at birth climbed. Still, Americans' average happiness measured by surveys fell slightly. The United States was one of only four industrialized countries -- alongside Hungary, Portugal and Canada -- where life satisfaction fell between 2000 and 2006.
Porter unpacks a couple of theories for why America is richer but Americans are unhappy. The first is that most of the income growth has been concentrated among the very rich, who keep getting richer even as the bottom half of the population has seen wages grow by .5 percent a year since the early 1970s. The second stems from the first: With income stagnating, we're working a ton of hours these days in order to keep up, more even than the famously overworked Japanese.
A third possibility, a natural consequence of the first two, is that as we're earning less, we're buying and renting homes farther and farther from our jobs in order to afford the middle-class life style we're supposedly toiling away to get. Sprawling suburbia is bad for us as individual humans, as members of families, as families that make up communities. Sacrificing free time and family time for hours spent slogging our way to jobs has become the norm (pdf map), long commutes a new necessity for the American dream.
When we talk about the failure of trickle-down economics, it's not just the abstract failure of Republicans' favorite idea to make American life better. It's you, in your cubicle, in your car, in the one life you have.
(Image: Momcat14c)
Leave a Comment:
Well said.
This is not "well said." It's probably the antithesis of "well said." How did this guy actually quantify "American Happiness" again? Polls, was it? If you think "trickle-down economics" is abstract, try "American Happiness." The first puerile conclusion is that "most of the income growth has been concentrated among the very rich." This can be dismissed by anecdote. If the productivity of an average household is measured by the consumption of durable goods, then even the poorest Americans have made insane strides against the purchasing power of previous generations. The second conclusion is as irrational as the first. We're working a ton more hours these days? Again, think back to your parents... I work a lot less and earn a lot more than my parents... am I alone? The third conclusion supposes that this "decline or stagnation" of happiness is due to the quality of our work and/or commute. I'll admit that this may be a poor choice for some... but a choice it remains. Living farther from our places of work (for those who do) is a fact of life that is most probably the *best* solution for those in the long commutes.
It's hard to comment *much* on this topic because the postulate is absurd. Of course, I'll reconsider when this economist-for-the-rest-of-us can quantify happiness in any meaningful way. It seems that someone got a book from the bargain bin.
True for you and therefore true for everyone? So all of those unemployed and who lost their homes deserved it somehow? Your compassion and insight are palpable.
Not sure how you got that from my response... but if you're asking if people create their own financial turmoil, I'll say "maybe." Do people who eat a steady diet of fast food, smoke like a 77 Ford, and never exercise deserve heart disease if they get it? Not sure I can "yes" or "no" to that in all honesty. I can say that they "deserve" it as much as anyone else.
?
JB ~ I don't know what planet you are living on, but it truly can't be the 3rd rock from the sun unless you have been hibernating for the past decade.
"even the poorest Americans have made insane strides against the purchasing power of previous generations"
I suppose that is why we have so many homeless, hungry Americans today; all due to the "insane strides" they've made over previous generations!
"I work a lot less and earn a lot more than my parents... am I alone?"
The obvious answer is "hell, yes". My step-father worked 3p-12a period; no O.T., no mandatory extra hours, no weekends; the same for my uncles. It allowed them time for their families, for vacations, for weekend camping trips. Things completely unheard of for working class families in this day and age. I myself, log no less than 60 hours a week and have a home office set up as well; I am no youngster, I have been on my job for 30+ years and the demands have increased with the years on the job.
"Living farther from our places of work (for those who do) is a fact of life that is most probably the *best* solution for those in the long commutes".
Not the fact that the housing markets have priced inter-city apartments and properties completely out of the reach of the working class individual? Or the fact the there are literally no funds available for inter-city schools thereby forcing individuals who want to achieve a halfway decent education for their children out into the "burbs' where the schools are better equipped as a result of community bond issues, etc.?
"trickle-down economics"
This doesn't even deserve a response it is so laughable!
@ Jamie Browning Hard to take you seriously either though since you seem to base all you assumption on your personal experience. I guess you just may be "alone." LOL Nice try though, I would think before making such a sweeping assumption of this book you might consider reading it rather than using this quick blurb about it to try to in essence defend "Trickle Down Economics."
ahhh... yes. I suppose homelessness is brand new problem. For the sake of argument and keeping in theme of the thread, we're talking about those who actually work. Not those who don't. Anyway, how many generations of Americans have seen a domestic population of over 300M? Ceteris Paribus doesn't apply in *my* reality, hibernating or otherwise.
I will reiterate, I do not have to work as long or as hard as my father before me. Whatever job you have, with your 60+ hours, is not the type of job I have or have ever considered. It doesn't sound like a typical middle class job... or even the truth. Anyway, why aren't you toiling away right now? Whatever it is you do... you are either being rooked or lying through your keyboard. Either way, I'd say you are doing just enough to sustain your lifestyle. Change your lifestyle or change your job.
Oh, there are loads of reasons that inner-city apartments and properties are unlivable... depending on the city. I'd say rent control and rampant crime are bigger factors regarding the habitability of the inner city than 'fair market value.' Cry me a river about the shoddy inner-city schools... people like you have created that monster...
Nightbreeze: I know eh?
I reiterate - true for you, true for everyone? It's everyone else's fault if they are unemployed and have lost their homes? What does that have to do with smoking and poor eating habits?
JB - As to why I am not "slaving away", currently I am sitting in front of both my work as well as my personal laptop...multi-tasking away!
Leave my job, never! I have spent 32 years in the defense industry assisting the military ensure the freedoms that allow even the blind such as yourself to speak your mind without fear of ramification.
Is it a typical middle-class position, no; it started typically enough, but it has been quite an exciting life experience...one however, I would not trade for yours.
Is it the truth, YES. My mother didn't raise liars or fools.
Am I doing enough to sustain my lifestyle, YES. Mine and several charitable organizations...............how about you?
JB has been a trouble maker around here in the past...I thought they had banned him...give him a minute they may yet.
trouble making = dissent, which shall not be tolerated.
No...as long as you don't make personal attacks I find your posts to be sometimes interesting as you are articulate and obviously educated, however I may not agree and you do tend to unravel off thread.
It's when you start the ad hominem remarks and demeanor that make your posts not worth reading.
I actually try to avoid ad hominems.... I find them desperate and generally unmoving.
I personally try not to put on pants, but ya know.
Exactly MM...
What was that??? "desperate"?
"The first puerile conclusion is that "most of the income growth has been concentrated among the very rich." This can be dismissed by anecdote. If the productivity of an average household is measured by the consumption of durable goods, then even the poorest Americans have made insane strides against the purchasing power of previous generations."
JB - This argument falls apart when you consider that pre Reagan most middle income families were sustainable on 1 income and now 2 barely even cuts it.
Not to mention the record deficits that Reagan rung up, the wholesale destruction of the social safety net, and the stock market crash of '87. Mmmmm! Smells like sound fiscal policy to me! Thank you sir, can I have some more please!
oh yes, the mighty "Reagan record deficit"... but riddle me this, oh economists... what PERCENTAGE of GNP was this record? Less than 3%. Oh, and for those who actually care about the difference of "deficits" and "national debt", Reagan left office with a national debt percentage lower than ANY subsequent president. Still not moved? Well, I'm not one to hang an economy on a president, be it Obama or Reagan, but consider the following: On average, Congress spent 2.8% more than Reagan requested for ever fiscal year he was in office, while the cumulative (yearly compounding rate) was around 24.5% more. If the budget in 1989 had been 24.5% smaller (i.e., 280 billion dollars) there could have been a surplus of about $130 billion dollars instead of a deficit. This is equivalent to a constant compounding increase of 2.8% every year during the 8 budgets above and beyond the previous year's spending.
Whatever you people think about Reagan, one thing he *wasn't* was a fool. Is that enough for you? Anyway, you need to learn the difference between a "crash" and a "correction."
When the firewalls are still in place and it doesn't throw the country into a Depression, you can call it a correction. When they have been removed, as they have since Reagan, you call it a crash.
We are also neglecting the arms race and selling weapons to Iranians who who returned hostages on the day he was inaugurated because they loved him so much. Everytime someone talks about bombing Iran Reagan is crying in heaven, how can you Republicans be soo ass-backwards in your foreign policy toward Iran? The Gipper will never forgive you! Where was I, oh yes...the arms race. That was a huge chunk of the deficit,wasn't it? And the wars in Central America. But of course they don't hurt the economy if you keep them off the books yeah? That is why Bush the Younger left our nation in the best financial shape it had ever been. BECAUSE HE LIED!
Try this caviar, sure it tastes like manure, looks and smells like manure, but if you call it caviar and try REAL hard, you can actually pretend its caviar. And Corrections are a sign of a successful economics policy are they?
That's simple. It's a "crash" if your party isn't at fault, and a "correction" if it is. Same way as a "recession" is when the other guy is out of work, and a "depression" is when you are...
I'd just like to say anecdotal evidence is not really viable. If you have solid statistical evidence of something, okay.
There's a whole lot more to it than this, but this is part of it. Millions of Americans have sold their souls to corporations, given up their lives for a "job" and a "pension." We are finding out more money and more junk will not make us happy. Our society is making a very large turn here, and large turns take time. Rampant capitalism is dying a slow death, but not giving up easily.
who gets pensions anymore? Only the first place I worked for a few years after college in 1975 had them.
all government (including non-military) and a major percent of state workers get pensions---- and their pensions are probably either figured into the (national budget)--- or--- (our taxes) are paying for them
Diana B
(national budget)--- or--- (our taxes) are paying for them
This would be the same thing
Despite progress, Americans are unhappy for the same reason people listen to Morrissey records: some people just like to be sad.
There are things that should not only make people sad, they should make them stark raving mad. "Peggy" is no joke, calling a help desk and getting a foreigner ( no offense ) is NOT at all funny. I called directory assistance on my cell phone looking for a local number, I was talking with a native from India. Getting the drift here?
There's more.
There is an ad that comes on every Sunday night during the NFL games. What is it? The ad for the Dodge Challenger. They claim in the ad that America got two things right, Freedom and Muscle cars ( not sure about the order ). The problem is, and what should make people Stark Raving Mad is that the Dodge Challenger is not made here.
We consume as a nation more than we produce and that needs to be banged over the head of 308 million people. It is an unsustainable economy.
People are sad because they WANT to be?
No, not really.
It is sad. I got an e-mail yesterday from a good friend, who lives in Sacramento. He is a friend that I will always keep in touch with. His e-mail had a sad note. He said, "Christmas was great. I filed bankrupcy because my house is worth less than 50% of what I originally paid. These bankers think that home values are really ever going to go back to what they were??" He then added, " these big corporations could care less about you. We have to work 3 jobs just to keep up, drain and live off of our retirement savings, and have no medical insurance"---- and his wife is now pregnant with twins.
It will be very interesting to see how the (tax cuts) for the rich, 2 years from now, will improve the economy?? If politicians are smart, they will (save) the (John Boehner voice--and threat bites) for the tee vee.
Diana B
don't hold your breath
What amazes me is that the American people send those who promote this trickle down scam back to power. It seems like a deadly addiction - Trickled Down doesn't work so lets send the same party back to see if they can make it worse. And they do. And the new batch of Republicans is even more determined to make it worse for all of us.
It's beyond amazing...it's reckless and stupid...how they just keep sending those arrogant jerks back to office to do nothing productive...I tell you the mindset of the south is pitiful....just pitiful....
It's because too many Americans don't vote, and too many of those who do vote have been terrified into voting against their own interests. I know this is kind of a talking point, so conservatives disregard it as liberal propaganda, but it's true.
Actually...and somewhat uncharacteristically for me...the next election cycle may well bring good tidings to us liberals and progressives. The mid-terms are always dominated by older and more conservative voters, and yes we did lose the House of Representives. But the very thing that had enervated Obama's supporters (to weaken as opposed to invigorate,) his lack of action on key legislation and the domination of the party of "NO!" was reversed in the lame duck session. That gives us alot to feel good about. It puts distance on the initiatives that the Republicans with their midterm "mandate" have to run back. And the voters who will turn out for the next election will be far less sanguine about giving up what they had worked cried sweated and bled to get passed.
In other words, grab the popcorn. This is going to be fun to watch.
Part of the problem with our government is that people think "Well I've voted, now I can sit back, grab the popcorn & watch what happens". After the 2008 election, the progressives & democrats who elected Obama & crew went to sleep. Not so the republicans & teapartiers. They organized, took over town meetings, dominated the media. How did the so-called left respond? John Stewart, who equated the lies & distortions of the right (especially Fox Noise), with the ideas & declarations of the left. Okay, Keith Olbermann does rely on hyperbole, but it's not the 1984 tactics of a Glenn Beck or the celebration of shrub's book which if the "fair & balanced" (LOL!) Fox Noise talking heads were true journalists, they would've pointed out the lies & distortions that were printed.
The lobbyists don't take a break. There buying up both sides of the aisle. In the UK, political ads on TV are illegal. Lobbying is illegal. Their politicians don't have to crawl to the rich elite so some Madison Ave hack produces some worthless fluff or distorted attack ad that does NOTHING for educating the electorate on which candidate is better. Remember, Constitutional Amendments trump all, POTUS, SCOTUS, etc.
As Howard Zinn wrote "The Constitution gave no rights to working people; no right to work less than 12 hours a day, no right to a living wage, no right to safe working conditions. Workers had to organize, go on strike, defy the law, the courts, the police, create a great movement which won the eight-hour day, and caused such commotion that Congress was forced to pass a minimum wage law, and Social Security, and unemployment insurance....Those rights only come alive when citizens organize, protest, demonstrate, strike, boycott, rebel and violate the law in order to uphold justice." More info at http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/11/02-2. PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE!!
The dems & progressives had their chance to push through a continuance of tax cuts for those making less than $500K, right after Boehner said stated that such a policy would be impossible to prevent last fall. What did Obama, Reid, Pelosi do? Did the dem/progressive base organize mass email/telephone campaigns to push this through? No, a golden opportunity was lost! If the situation had been reversed you KNOW the pubs & reactionaries would have pounced.
I think part of the problem is the belief that all we have to do is elect those officials who tell us what we want to hear. Democracy is a "full contact' activity. For Howard Zinn, democracy was one big public fight and everyone should plunge into it. That's the only way, he said, for everyday folks to get justice - by fighting for it.
It's because we stopped using horses for transportation.
No, really. Back in the 1890s, before Mr. Ford and his jalopy, the system was known as "horse and sparrow" economics-- the idea being if you give the horse enough oats, eventually some will be left behind on the street for the sparrows.
A nice earthy metaphor, and one that exactly sums up the effects of trickle-down for the average American, I think. It's a shame that the metaphor was lost.
something in the old testament about leaving some crops at the edge of the field for the others to have?? we have to rely on more than a trickle down that may or may not work.
I agree with all of those factors, but I think there is a fourth factor. There is a sense of entitlement that Americans have that says we should all have HDTVs, Blue Rays, etc. People overextend themselves on credit trying to emulate the American dream and then are unhappy and confused when they can't pay off their credit cards. People need to learn to live within their means and focus on inner happiness.
I have to agree with you Heidi.
Who tells these people that they have to have the latest Wii game or big screen TV. We are paying for these devalued items with time we don't have to give away. We have to STOP buying so much stuff!
When we are on our death bed, how many of us will look back and will wish we had bought a bigger tv set or house and how many of us will wish we had spent more time with family?
Agreed.
When people are unhappy they spend on themselves to compensate. Downward spiral.
Sounds good in theory but doesn't hold much water where I come from. I don't have an HDTV. I have a 20 year old TV that struggles to turn on and whose color is now separated into a nice rainbow across the screen. I have a 15 year old car with 130,000 miles on it that is rusting apart. It needs new tires and muffler but I don't have the money to buy them. I don't have a WII and my computer is so old, I can't upgrade the software because it can't handle it. I don't have the latest of any kind of technology. Most of what I own is at least 5-10 years old or refurbished versions of earlier models. I don't go to movies or out to dinner. I only buy clothes when the ones I have have become too threadbare to be worn in public.
What do I spend my money on? Food, mortgage, utilities, as well as doctor and dentist bills, things my employer's insurance doesn't cover (which, it turns out, is quite a lot). It's a struggle to make it from one paycheck to the next. There are no raises at work and certainly no "Christmas bonus". We were told we were lucky to still be employed.
And I'm not alone. Most of my friends are in a similar boat. One friend had to have an auction to sell off things she and her husband had spent decades collecting (like antique furniture) because lay offs had left them both unemployed and they needed some kind of income to pay their mortgage and buy food. And, sad to say, we're the "lucky" ones. I know people who are living in far worse situations than these. Some folks I know can't even afford their own computer and have to go to a library or community center to use one. They are often one step away from being homeless and on the streets.
For myself, I have seen my spending power diminish with each new year. Companies so strapped that the don't give raises, they don't give bonuses and they increase your out of pocket expense for medical and dental coverage. Add to that the increase in taxes and general economic inflation and the same job ends up bringing home less and less for me to spend on the day to day items.
While there are those whose desire for "stuff" (which they've been brainwashed by corporate America into believing they "need") plays a significant role in their economic issues, I don't think you can place that great an onus on that as a factor for the problems being faced by most Americans. You can be frugal in your spending and eschew the fancy gadgets and still not be able to make ends meet.
Hey, I found this thread so compelling that I made a post for it.
It IS a good 'un. Any response Browning? There are alot more people like him than there are of people like you. Please tell us again how good for us this present state of affairs is.
Dear Dawn: I lived during the time when there was no such thing as a credit card and we only purchased goods when we had the funds. Then, after World War ll when jobs became more plentiful, we still did not buy anything we could not pay for in cash. I worked my whole adult life, saved what I could on my small salary, never went into debt, and had the opportunity to pay into a pension fund. I was lucky in that my husband was a builder and we built three homes for cash (our first home took 7 years to build, we lived in it while it was being built, and it was l00% ours without a mortgage). During that period of time, our friends were buying everything they wanted and we had just the few pieces of furniture we could get by with. We were not jealous of our friends, because we knew we at least had no debts in case of hard times. That is what has happened currently, because people wanted everything NOW and did not think of the possibility of hard times.
Now, I am a widow, live in a home that I own, and live on my small retirement, no debts, and am managing because I know how to live without going into debt. I may not have a lot of fancy new electronic toys, but I venture to guess that I am happier than a lot of people who have "everything" but have a mountain in debt. Life is interesting and is a great teacher !!!!!!
Thereb, I take my hat off to you.
Admittedly I like toys as much as the American consumer...though given the reality of my financial state, its rare that I get any.
Really, the problem isn't necessarily consumerism. Though that is a huge factor. The old Buddhist dictum: "Pain is attachment, desire is suffering." True. But that isn't the biggest problem right now. Right now, there are far too few jobs to go around. Even with educations, degrees are devalued. People who had invested in their homes find themselves under water, or kicked out of their homes, or have it sold out from under them with no recourse. The problem is that wealth is not distributed on a curve, but flows freely upward. The people who make their money making American goods prosper from manufacturing overseas while factories remain shuttered in the inner city, and Conservatives debate the wisdom of rolling back the national minimum wage.
Your wisdom is an inspiriation to us all...but few if any ever had the means to save, much less buy neat toys. It is an evil of our economic system that luxuries are treated like necessities, and necessities treated like luxuries. It may sound trite, but it is true.
I think it was RFK who said: "GDP measures everything that is not important to American families."
As long as Americans continue to vote their "morals" instead of in their own best economic interests, this situation will continue to worsen.
Well said, PT!
I agree PT Chaney! and--- the next presidential election will include these factors, I am sure
We need a (liberal tea party) movement!!!
Diana B
I just wanted to say--- BTW, I am white!! but I think that FOX and the Republicans will also re-visit this anti-black (and that is what it is) campaign---
Kicking the (secretly Muslim, secretly commie, secretly not-born-in-America, secretly wants to destroy America) President out-of-office.
seriously--- we need a (liberal tea party)!!
Diana B
There kind of is one.. The Coffee Party. Just not as crazy, so not as popular I guess.
http://www.coffeepartyusa.com/
The coffee party is too tepid. They are looking for moderation, not for true change. I respect it as a start, but it's definitely not the revolutionary movement I'd like to see.
Actually, the Coffee Party only seems tepid. They are not the 'Anti-Tea' party. They are not
even "rebel-rousers". But, their agenda, in my opinion, is excruciatingly ambitious. It asks
people to get off their asses and actually work for our democracy. And that's where they
start losing me, when they say if you want to have freedom and fairness you have to put
in some time and effort to make it happen.
Their audacious plan is to organize all Americans of whatever stripe,class, party, or race
to set about making 'real' changes, like a constitutional amendment to have public
financing of political campaigns, for example. Yes, this would sever the ties between
Special Interests and Representatives, and, of course, it's needed, but dang, a freaking
constitutional amendment! That's what I call ambitious.
Some of us have realized his words...we were just less eloquent at putting them in text. Bravo Mr. Porter!
Free-speech is our dearest amendment and it makes us who we are as Americans, but it also allows people to lie to us. They have the right to convince us that the best path for us is their path, when it clearly isn't.
Basically, until you can put the brakes on foxnews and the like, they will continue to convince a large % of the population that the republicans are trying to help them, when clearly they aren't.
Perhaps if we reverse the supreme courts decision that corporations have the same rights as citizens, we can hold them to a higher standard than the drunk at the end of the bar, until then, we just get to listen to the drunk rant and know that unfortunately: some take him seriously.
Frankly, I'd rather listen to a real drunk at the end of the bar....
Our economic system is set up for continued growth expectations, but the US economy is slowing down, as we send our wealth elsewhere - buying foreign-made goods, borrowing for wars, outsourcing our jobs. This has been happening for awhile, but the PTB have distracted us with culture wars and real wars. It's time to assess what we really need in life and what has been sold to us by advertisers. We've lost our ability to define happiness.
Nailed it. Exactly right.
Who are you? and will you consider running for president in 2016??
Agreed.
There exists a terrible syndrome in our country to always have to do better, so American workers are pushed to constantly exceed those who came before them or even themselves, each year. It's not enough to maintain or, God forbid, experience peaks and valleys with a cycle that may end in a valley. This has seeped into our lives, too. Many of us have the need to constantly improve our standard of living through accumulation of more goods that we may or may not need. Knowledge, education and skills, especially in areas that do not result in a financial gain, are not valued in our society by and large.
Thanks for pointing out what seems obvious to me. THIS is what's become of the American Family. These necessary lifestyles make humans very compartmentalized. Add to that, children are growing up more related to their devices than their parents and family. Disconnection disorder is what I call it. Objectification of self and others.
We can learn about how this works, and we'd better, because we're in a great social experiment. But can we doing anything to change it? Can humanity continue to grow up this way?
Poking away at a keyboard 40 hrs a week may pay the bills, but there's no satisfaction in it. When you make something, actual creation, something you can look at and say, 'yeah, I built that' that's when you'll feel the sense of accomplishment and satisfaction.
How about waking up to go to a job you love? Why is that so foreign to most Americans? Because we don't make anything. We've been outsourcing the manufacturing sector of our economy since the late 60s/ early 70s. The new "hi-tech economy' is a red herring. If Americans want to be happy and have a viable economy that works for everyone, we'll bring back manufacturing to the U.S.
Doug, I sit at at terminal 40 hours a week and I used to love my job. However, in the last few years the company has sent most of the jobs overseas to unskilled workers. Less of us with more work so now it's turned into nothing but stress. Just wanted to make my point that I loved my job in IT. I'm good at it and I liked it. Now it's horrible and I'm stuck trying to find a job I like that will support my family.
I haven't had a full time, permanent job for the past two years, though I've been doing temporary and consulting-type stuff to get by. I'm currently looking for work that can satisfy as well as feed me. I cannot be satisfied working for corporate America and its anti-humanist tendencies, and I can't afford to start a business on my own, so I'm trying to look for the right alternative. I want to be part of a movement towards a saner America.
FWIW, I'm a lawyer, but I recently spent several days subcontracting as a helper to a family member who is an indoor construction-type contractor. Boy did I feel great at the end of those days. I worked hard, did interesting work, felt something "got done" and slept well after exercising much of the day. More of that feeling, please!
I disagree about finding satisfaction behind a keyboard. The work I do can be challenging and very creative. I've accomplished things I didn't think I had the skill level to do. The kind of work I do (technical writing, graphics, web design), may not interest you but for me, they make going to work each day worth while. I would likely be bored out of my skull in the field of manufacturing. There is no one size fits all. We need diversity in the work force. Each person doing what he or she is best at so we all can benefit. The hard part is finding what it is that floats your particular boat.
For Forty years, my husband commuted three hours ( at least) a day to be partner in a New York law firm. He felt we would be better off in the exburbs for schools and space for gardens and dogs ( FOR THE DOGS!!!).. WE NOW REALIZE WE DID NO ONE A FAVOR - Our son, who is a TV writer, would have loved new york, i would have been happy to be near the place where I grew up and where interesting things happened, and we could have had one less dog.
regrets, i have a few!!!! Don't live your life for the the needs you imagine your children have or for animals or some idiotic idea about school systems. He went to Private School anyway - . there is always a choice, but the one choice you ought not to have is how to spend your family time. It is the only family you will ever have. And the jersey Turnpike is not the place you really want to be. Even if you have to trade down in luxury or amount of living space don't give up people for driving hours a day.
One of my favorite sayings of late: That's why it's called TRICKLE down economy...by the time it gets down it's just a trickle, and why are we OK with that?
Nailed it! Cannot understand why people just don't see this. It's as if being told it isn't happening by someone they think they can trust is more valid than what's actually happening in their lives. Thirty years of trickle down has created a huge lower class, a tiny upper class...and apparently never the twain shall meet.
It is very frustrating that people are not responding to this reality with the appropriate political approach. Not to beat a dead horse, but sending the Trickle-down capitalists back to Washington is not the answer. We need to "buck up" and stick to a process that may take a while, however will ultimately have us all feel better and realize that we are living together...too many U.S. citizens think that they are the rich ones...it is great to aspire to wealth, but it is another thing to vote like you already are. I am not saying the government should step in and take wealth away from others, but the taxes that are due the government should come from the wealthy(who may claim that they are not recieving a comensurate benefit, which I would argue they are...) in greater proportion to their wealth. I think it is time for capitalism with a small "c" to make it's way forward...
I have to think we dug our own grave. #1 Americans always have to keep up with the Joneses AND we let the television tell us what is hot, what to buy, what to do and we let the people in DC think of themselves as celebrities.
If you have a job, a roof over your head, food to eat and are healthy, I say SHUT UP! Money is NOT the root of all evil...the pursuit of money is!
jenjen: AMEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mammon. Its Mammon. We saw eleven humans sacrificed to Mammon during the BP Disaster (and yet no-one recognizes it as a fundamentally criminal event) as well as an entire eco-system, countless jobs and the health of fishermen, tour guides, spill response teams (OSHA, EPA? where are you?.)
You can serve money or you can serve God...but despite their protestations the tables of the money-changers are in the Temple of the People in every branch of govt. What would Jesus do?
Americans have been earning Working Class wages, trying to live the Middle Class life and making up the difference with credit. It's finally blown up. In the vacuum of what it is and what the fear mongers say it is supposed to be will come the evil. See "Fair Game" about the Valerie Plame affair. Joe Wilson said it best in an interview with Bill Maher. He said, these people (Cheney, Rove etc) are not Republicans, they're extremists and Fascists. That's the evil that is coming.
Important to remember that the happiness index was recorded between 2000-2006, long before the crash in 2008. Interesting that Canada's satisfaction also fell... although we mirror our neighbours, albeit to a lesser extent, in adopting the philosophy that things will bring happiness. And if they don't, more things will bring happiness. I believe we Canadians have now surpassed Americans regarding amount of personal debt as a result. Both nations' peoples need to look for happiness elsewhere than cheap (and not so cheap) "things", the "perfect wedding," the annual holiday that only racks up more debt. It would also help if people would vote in/out politicians who cater only to corporations and the rich, at the expense of the disappearing middle class. And for Americans, campaign financing reform is sorely needed; too bad that that wasn't the top priority when both chambers were in Dem control, then it might have had a chance of succeeding!
In my view --and this is where the Muslims and Buddhists are dead right about "the west"-- we are unhappy because we search high and low for better stuff to provide our happiness.
We have so convinced ourselves of our own exceptionalism that we ignore the precepts of other cultures which evolve people who know how to be happy with less, rather than unfulfilled by more, more, and more stuff that is designed to be used up and/or break. It has made us shockingly, almost brutally greedy, convinced that we are entitled to ridiculous wealth (when compared with the rest of the world's realities about mere survival), and ready to make war upon others to maintain our untenable lifestyle. This "walk over your grandmother to get what you want" attitude is what is basically, deeply flawed about western democracy --in America particularly.
We're desperate to be blithely wealthy the way suffering addicts are desperate for their next blast. We're too deep into that world to back away and recognize other ways to be happy, other traditions of self-respect and fulfillment, kindness, generosity, sacrifice, golden rule style morality; I'm really expecting that the only way we'll be able to find that kind of contentment now is to be forced into it, kicking and screaming --and completely mystified about why.
Excellent point!
Our expectations are what cause our unhappiness. when I was a child (way back in the dark ages of the 50s), we had a B&W Tv, a two bedroom home, with no garage, my Mom was a SAHM and my Dad took the only car to work. Our vacation was a trip to the lakes for a few days. We had no AC in the summer, this was in Iowa, so the winters were horrid. People drove rear wheel cars in deep snow unless they got out the chains. Watching House Hunters on HGTV, people want the $700,000 home with four bedrooms, a media room, a huge kitchen with granite, the pool in the backyard, etc. so everyone assumes that's normal? Then they say, "This is so outdated, we'll have to pull out the whole thing. " I can't speak for everyone, but i had a very happy childhood, living in a small town, going to a small school, and the only rich guy in town raised sheep. The expectations have changed. People pursue more and more because they feel that is the middle class. Some of these houses they are buying would have been castles 40 years ago.
You are right. What we see, what we are surrounded with we tend, we tend to take for what is normal. I hate most commercials. When my wife and I first bought our house, her first instinct was to remodel, change out the counter tops etc. I had to remind her that we didn't have a remodelling, new counter budget. Now its distinctly ridiculous to see all of these new house shows when some many houses are underwater, being foreclosed on, and the housing industry is still cratering.
People who have the luxury of finding a house that is just right with all the amenities are not "typical." Typical people are having a hell of a time keeping their heads above water.
Willow, your 1950s - 60s childhood sounds pretty much like mine, with the only difference being that I came up in a small New Mexico town, in which we WASPs were definitely in the minority!
Glad to see this reality, long-recognized in the urban planning world, is finally getting some national attention. One thing the NOT rich can do - support higher density, infill development and mass transit transportation options, even if is in your neighborhood or next to your home or business. The longer we stay NIMBY's, the fewer options will be available to rescue us from our suburban prisons.
What's the problem with the economy? Read Jeremy Rifkin's The End of Work. We are on a "fast track" to another economic system that will push the majority of us to poverty and the "few" to dictators.
Nice piece, Ms. Conaway. I'm going to sound like I'm on some hippie transcendental trip by saying this, but our country is dependent on contradiction. We philosophize about how buying stuff does not bring happiness, but yet we depend on people buying things to keep the economy going. It just so happens that it's the people who can barely afford to buy things who do most of the buying of the day-to-day stuff that keep the supply and demand cycling. It would be nice if we actually made the stuff we buy here in America. It's rather disheartening when you go to a place like the Smithsonian in D.C. and cannot even find one souvenir that is not made in China. Something's gotta give, I agree with that premise. But how and when and how acute the change will be is a rather scary thing to think about. No one wants to see their communities go belly up. So the cycle of buying stuff continues.
As for me, I think experiences are more satisfying than things. You can take away my TV and laptop but you can't take away the memories I've captured during my life from the places I've been, people I've met and things I have seen.
well it makes perfect sense if you think about this theory, I know that I have heard, that what makes people unhappyness is thinking of everything that they do not have. A farmer in South America could live in squalor by american standards but be the happiest man on earth because he has enough food to feed his family this year. Americans are inundated with things that they cannot afford. We strive to get them but the reality is that only the few of us can actively attempt a pursuit of happiness. Even if we ate a good meal today, we cannot have the iphone 4, or a new car, or even retirement. These are thoughts that do not cross the South American farmers mind, what is retirement to him? Becoming older and having a son that can take on in his place, the pinacle of his happiness would be a failure by American standards which require that the child does something new and better then their parents. This is consistent with porters theory about striving, it is an epidemic that we all strive instead of be happy to be alive.
And here's the problem - a capitalist economy in an advanced state such as ours, for all its strengths, relies on people wanting what they don't have.
I'm not a socialist (though I believe in reasonable government controls as most people do), but people will say that because I have criticized our advanced capitalist, marketing-driven economy, I must be a socialist. Nope. I'm a capitalist who realizes that capitalism becomes unreasonable when it is more about making money than it is about satisfying customers; it is dangerous when it is more about creating desires than it is about satisfying needs.
Susan, I guess I could be identified as a Socialist. The Socialism idea is not Communism or Faschism, it is an economic reality in many European countries and they are doing very well. Single payer health care, good retirement, good unemployment, child care cheap and decent, good transit systems in cities, cheap utilities (because they are all nonprofit), etc. If we had single payer health care, our manufacturing companies could compete globally. If we had good retirement, child care, transit, cheap utilities, we would live far cheaper than we do right now. A friend of min in NZ put her Mom in a beautiful assisted living home--for free. Because they all feel that their parents paid their taxes all those years and it should be paid for. Sure the Socialist countries, Sweden, Norway, Finland, the Netherland, etc. pay a lot of taxes. But what do they get for their taxes that we do not receive in our capitalistic society. Our economy is run to assist the richest get richer. Socialistic countries are run to help the poor and middle class, and even their rich are happy with their taxes.
Well then, I guess I am a socialist. Willow, the difference between their system (Scandinavian countries) is their taxes work for their PEOPLE (free dental, medical, days off, paid schooling, etc) while ours work for business and a huge military industrial complex. I get mocked all the time for saying I would gladly pay an extra 15% in taxes if I knew I would be getting services that I pay for. Clearly, America and it's people would be better off w/ a system like Finland and Norway but the greedsters won't allow it.
Oh if only everybody were as crazy as you are fishgirl. Count me in. Our nation is going to hell precisely for the reasons you've given.
Well, to be strict about it, the I believe it's correct to say the Europeans have a hybrid system - they still of course have a system of free commerce, but they have more consumer protections and market controls, which are socialist in intent if not in method. And of course, some services, like health care, are truly socialized. I, too, am a socialist in the European sense. Maybe I would refer to it as limited capitalism.... sound right?
Under that definition, I'm a limited capitalist too. The annoying thing about the term "socialist" is that it's so vague- technically, anything apart from 1800's style robber baron capitalism could be called "socialism"
My disgust with the abuses of the capitalist system which makes us indistinguishable from 3rd world banana republics has made me consider myself a pinko commie. Socialism or Hybrid Capitalism sounds entirely reasonable. Necessary in fact. I've been advocating in these blogs a return to a manufacturing economy as enjoyed by Germany...which was the direct result of the Post-WW2 Marshall Plan. Sorry. I think about this too much.
Its cool, I majored in econ so I can never bring myself to shut up about this stuff either. I think most people believe in hybrid capitalism to some extent- the difference is to what degree.
That makes me feel better.
FTR most of what Europeans employ is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democrats
It's also a really good idea, if you want to get a better understanding of socialism, to read through the entire entry on socialism. There are many different forms of socialism and it's practiced in some ways all throughout the world. Wikipedia actually has a very good compilation of information on socialism (which is probably the only time you can say Wikipedia is reliable for information lmao).