Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to NewsvineDaniel Larison continues the discussion on elitism:
Of course, one man’s condescending elite is sometimes another man’s principled speaker of important truths, because the kinds of “elitism” that people care about depend greatly on the spheres of life in which they believe they have the most at stake. Thus social conservatives tend to get exercised about corporate elitism only when corporations overtly promote or sell things that strike the conservatives as profane, lewd or immoral, but they will reach for their guns if someone suggests that it is the concentrated wealth and power of corporations and the heavy economic dependence on them that make them effectively unaccountable to the community.
Yesterday at the newspaper, several of us met with a group of religious-left activists who came in to discuss some of the organizing they'd been doing, or intended to do, around the subject of income inequality. They were filled with ardor over the shrinking middle class, and mad about the fact that people are working longer and not getting ahead. It's hard not to share their concern, and in fact I do share it. But their idea for fixing it, as far as I could tell, came down to soaking the rich with taxes, and redistributing the wealth via the government. While I wouldn't mind seeing the ultrawealthy shoulder a higher share of the tax burden, that hardly begins to account for our condition.
I brought up the role of globalization and the decline of manufacturing and, in turn, of trade unions as a critical factor. I also raised the idea of cultural shifts driving this dynamic. If you speak against Wal-Mart in many places, you will have claimed a cultural marker that identifies you as an "elitist," because Wal-Mart is where many, many Americans from the poor through the middle class go to buy cheap goods. Who wants to be in the position of telling people who don't have a lot of disposable income that they're wrong to bargain-shop? Yet the reason Wal-Mart can offer so much stuff cheaply is because the overwhelming majority of it is not manufactured in the United States, but rather in China and other overseas locales where costs are much cheaper.
So: who is the real elitist, the man who denounces Wal-Mart, or the man who supports Wal-Mart? Is it so easy to tell?
Isn't it the case that most American political fights are about culture because the economic arguments lack definitive lines, and are harder to think clearly about?
Subscribe
Comments
Mike Brown: If the American middle-class would simply accept the same quality of life as our parents and grandparents (smaller houses, smaller televisions, fewer cars, college as a luxury and not a right, etc), we would not have to work so many hours and sacrifice family for lifestyle.
College isn't a "luxury." I have a friend whose daughter has Type 1 diabetes. For her, college is an absolute necessity, because if she does not get a job with health insurance, she will be seriously in trouble. She won't be able to buy a policy on her own. Some day her parents won't be around to help her out. This critical situation is repeated time and again. She can't wait for things to turn around to the "good old days' when you could pay a doctor or even a hospital bill out of your own pocket. There are a lot of people who need expensive medical care *every day* to stay alive - and that means a middle-income job *with* health insurance. Education is the path to getting one.
Re: housing. Back in the good old days of our grandparents, discrimination in housing was legal. Go back far enough, and so was school segregation. Kids with special needs were not allowed access to public schools in many districts. Our grandparents benefited from these situations. They lived in low-crime neighborhoods; sent their kids to school with other kids "just like them" who did not have serious social and behavioral problems. The supposed "stability" of those past eras (really, before 1965 or so) was paid for with the price of severe racial, sexual, and housing discrimination.
bam in ri I suppose thin slobs are OK? Or fat slobs at the local gourmet food boutique?
Posted by: stefanie | April 21, 2008 12:15 PM
You don't have to go to college to get a job with health insurance.
I employ about 30 people. None of them have a college degree. All of them have health insurance. All of them have company-sponsored 401k plans. Again, none of them have college degrees.
You don't have to go to college to make a good living.
Oh, by the way, I'm hiring. I can't find enough good people. It's darn-near impossible to find decent employees who will show up and work and keep their nose out of trouble. Not such a bad economy for the ordinary American, huh?... no education beyond 10th grade math and no experience, and I'll hire you and offer you health insurance, vacation, retirement benefits, the whole works, and pay a wage that is sufficient for a family of four, without a second income.
Posted by: Mike Brown | April 21, 2008 6:20 PM
Mike, there's just one "problem" with your testimony: you demonstrate a concern for the welfare of your employees that is not shared by the vast majority of employers.
To be fair, another thing implied in your post is that your business is lucrative enough for you to make a good profit. Too many small businesses do not have that "luxury", especially when they are competing with big box stores and (inter)national franchises.
Don't get me started on big companies... :-)
Posted by: Franklin Evans | April 22, 2008 9:42 AM
My point is that those jobs exist. I offer them, and know of dozens of open positions with similar benefits. If people would start filling those jobs, then the big guys would need more people and offer better benefits.
Supply and Demand applies in the labor market as well as in the market for goods. When there is a shortage of good employees available (such as now), benefits and compensation will improve if everyone is behaving rationally.
I'm under no illusions that life is easy for people right now. My point is just that college is not required to have a good career and job. As soon as we stop wasting so much money sending people to college who shouldn't be there (either due to ability or necessity), we'll be in a much, much better place as a country. Part of the reason that things are hard right now is because people are (and have been) making terrible decisions - no one saves, everyone racks up debt, people buy more house than they need or can afford, people pursue college educations (and take loans) that they can not afford in order to get jobs that will not pay off the loans (as if they're entitled to whatever their dream job is, even if it won't pay enough to justify the investment), on and on. A great deal of the problem with people's current financial crunch are the people who are being crunched.
For the record, as far as being a lucrative business, it is not. All of my employees have had 3 raises since my last one, and I'm still working well below my market value. This isn't because I'm a saint or because I'm a particularly generous person - it's because I have to pay well to get good people in order to eventually be profitable.
Finally, the problem isn't just with corporate America. Working-Class America is largely lazy and has a high degree of an entitlement mentality (thanks "Great Society"!). I never cease to be amazed at how content people are to come in and do just enough to not get fired, and then behave as if they have some kind of divine right to lots of money, endless benefits, and a job that can never be taken away.
And, now, I'm prepared to get flamed for that last paragraph, because no one is allowed to criticize the saintly working-class American. One must only criticize big companies.
Posted by: Mike Brown | April 22, 2008 11:19 AM
You won't get any heat from me, Mike; don't let anyone convince you to stay silent. You are an honorable man, and more precious for being one of the few I've encountered in dealing with employers. For the record, before I changed career paths I was the guy you retained to administer your pension plan and keep it and you in compliance with the ever-changing laws (that being why I left it). I've had a ringside seat for business decisions in companies large and small.
Be well, sir.
Posted by: Franklin Evans | April 22, 2008 11:36 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?