Getting Ahead

Our conservative friends (not that we have very many) are all opposed to social welfare because they view recipients as simply lazy people who prefer free-loading versus making a real living. Many of these people experienced hard times themselves back in the '40s and '50s when they were just starting out and they worked their way out of it. The problem is that you could do that in the '40s and '50s. But today there is a Great Wall that keeps people poor. The conservatives love to believe that America is still a land of opportunity. But they have no understanding of how little opportunity there is for very large numbers of people in America today. 

The cost of living today is staggering and ordinary wages simply have not kept up with it. I can remember moving to Berkeley in order to attend graduate school in the late '50s. I brought with me $300 in savings and my stipend for being a teaching assistant was going to be $3000 per year. I had a Ford which had cost me $150. I rented a nice room with kitchen privileges for $50 a month. My mother had taught me to keep a journal of income and expenses so I can prove that I spent little more than $30 per month on food. Actually, I lived quite well for three years in Berkeley and even got married and supported my wife through the final year. When I took my position as assistant professor at Harvey Mudd College in 1961, my salary was $6200 per year. My wife and I rented small houses in Claremont for between $150 and $350 per month; my wife attended Pomona College; and we began raising two children. A family could live on a single person's income.

Almost none of this is true today. Even a room goes for $900 per month or more. And then there is transportation, fuel, insurance, clothing, food, and entertainment. If a person is making under $20,000 per year, he/she is in poverty, which means that assistance is required just for survival and there is no getting ahead. Repeat: there is no getting ahead. This person is locked into that situation for good. The only way out is to get better employment but how will he/she do that when there is neither time nor money to invest in improvement.

Furthermore, when we look at the distribution of wealth in this country today, what we see is even more staggering. The amount of wealth possessed by the upper 20% is so huge compared to the lower 80% that commerce and employment are affected. The 20% simply cannot spend enough of their wealth to support commerce; and the 80% don't have enough to spend. The American economy is now in a situation that is very close to the economy of France prior to the French Revolution. Profitable business cannot depend upon a middle or lower class that has nothing so it depends only on providing lavish goods for the highest wealth. But that does not go very far toward creating a real economy. 

Unfortunately, the 1% of Americans who possess ridiculous wealth also possess the power of government and prevent any attempt to force them to pay more in revenue. Hence, wealth will not be re-distributed in America for a long time to come, and that means that the American economy is likely to remain stagnant for decades. The whole notion of a "national economy" is essentially meaningless when the distribution of wealth is divided so radically as it is today.