- Americans work longer hours, retire later, and take fewer vacation days than their counterparts in the rest of the industrialized world.
- America is the only advanced nation that doesn’t guarantee paid vacation, parental leave, or sick leave.
- Between 1950 and 2013, real-wage income in the United States for the bottom 90 percent of workers has grown by 70 percent. This might seem impressive until you compare it to other nations. Over the same period in Italy and Great Britain, wage growth jumped by 150 percent over the same period. In France and Germany, the increase is 250 percent.
- Technology didn’t kill middle class jobs, government policy did. And the solutions from BOTH parties are SMOKE SCREENS.
- Republicans call for fewer regulations and lower taxes.
- Democrats call for more college education.The harsh truth is that 99 percent of the U.S. population no longer has political representation.
The real solutions are not rooted in regulatory or tax policy, or education. The solutions are political and as was clearly evident during our last election, the Democratic Party FAILED to run a candidate who was invested in political solutions. I mean, for crying out loud, her son-in-law is a hedge fund manager!
Please share widely!
Your very last clause was an uncalled-for ad hominem attack. Also, I believe many people who do get paid vacation days leave many of them on the table. Finally, one of the reasons I’m a Democrat is BECAUSE we believe in helping as many as possible advance themselves through education; it is the great equalizer.
My last clause simply illustrated how corrupt the Democratic Party has become, infested with the likes of hedge fund managers and their ilk; parasites on the wealth created by the working class.
You believe that education is the great equalizer,…..and yet the data proves otherwise.
And there is this:
Massachusetts has most educated workforce in nation, new report finds!
Economic growth is not translating into wage and income growth for most workers and their families. Since 1979, median household income in Massachusetts has barely budged, growing only half a percentage point each year after adjusting for inflation. By contrast, among the highest-income one percent of households, income has risen by 4.3 percent annually.
Education is clearly NOT the “great equalizer”…when it comes to the distribution of wealth.
Democrats need to STOP believing int that canard.
The “canard” is your own. I know of NO Democrat that has ever asserted that education has anything to do with the distribution of wealth.
The fact is that people with a college degree are likely to earn twice as much as people without one. I think you’ve cited this link before, and you distort its meaning here just as you have elsewhere.
There is no “canard” involved in observing the advantages that accrue to those who get a college degree. Your relentless opposition to making education available to working class men and women demonstrates that your supposed “support” of them has no substance whatsoever.
If you actually cared about working class families, you would join Democrats in striving to make education available to them. Instead, you join Republicans in attacking such proposals.
Let me introduce you to Christopher.
The data clearly proves that education is not helping the working class gain access to the wealth taken by the 1%.
It’s the great equalizer for those who take advantage of it. I never said people getting an education redistributes wealth to the working class.
Now you lie about Christopher and what he wrote (see his own response).
Nobody argues that the education would help the working class gain access to the wealth taken by the 1%. That’s not why education is advocated by those of us who advocate it. The “data” doesn’t “clearly prove” anything like what you say.
What the data says is that people without an education can expect to make about half as much as people with an education.
You propose to slash the wages of working class people by denying them an education.
But that’s a personal matter! You not only attack the son-in-law simply for holding a job which last I checked was legal, but in essence Chelsea for her choice of husband and Hillary for what – not arranging her daughter’s marriage to someone else as if we were in a very different time and place?
Your response might be better received if you understand that “ad hominem” refers to an attack against a single person, not the woosy political organization called the Democratic Party.
I’m pretty sure that Christopher is referring to the following (“your very last clause”):
I’m also pretty sure that the cited passage is a personal attack on Hillary Clinton.
It sure looks like “an attack against a single person” to me.
Exactly, the swipe at a personal characteristic which is irrelevant to the merits of the argument.
I downrated this by accident. I fail to see how a statement of fact about the previous nominee rates all the downrates.
The fourth and sixth bullets (“Technology …” and “Democrats call for ..” are at best incorrect and at worst outright lies (the last in particular).
The issue with “a statement of fact about the previous nominee” is that it is “immaterial, irrelevant, and incompetent” (to quote Hamilton Burger from Perry Mason).
The premise that the problem in the 2016 election was that Democrats “FAILED to run a candidate who was invested in political solutions” is immediately demolished by observing the candidate that the GOP ran (and who won).
Nobody — ABSOLUTELY NOBODY — who cares about “political solutions” could EVER vote for Donald Trump. His entire campaign was focused on attacking and derisively dismissing “political solutions”, politicians, and pretty much EVERYTHING associated with them.
What I see in this post as an utterly failed “conclusion”, preceded by an enumeration of obvious factoids (including two that are failed). The bullets have no relationship to the “conclusion”, the conclusion is an obvious fail, and the entire piece has nothing at all to do with labor or labor day.
That’s why I downrated it.
Trump saw how angry the working class is getting, after decades of being ignored by both parties, and he simply took personal advantage of that. Sure, the working class got screwed again, but this time, by an atypical politician.,
The point remains that Donald Trump was not “a candidate who was invested in political solutions”. Thus, your final claim that the Democrats lost because they failed to run such a candidate is false on the face of it.
Trump is our president because the Democratic candidate failed to adequately connect with America’s hurting and angry working class.
Period.
Maybe, maybe not. That’s not the claim you made in your thread-starter, though.
So that’s OK, especially since Dems have consistently fought for the working class?
There are better cases to be made vs. HRC vis-a-vis her policies than her family relationships. And if there aren’t, well, one should think about changing one’s mind.
Yeah but, those cases would have been downrated too, is my point. JTM could have avoided the topic of HRC entirely, but party leadership (a lot of it) is part of the problem.
Birds of a feather flock together and Hillary’s daughter met her future husband only because their parents were close pals.
So? That explains a lot of marriages. Chelsea’s mother in law was a US Rep. when her father was President. I am absolutely shocked to discover they knew each other!:)
It was a gratuitous out of context personal slap, especially from this diarist.
Punching at Ghosts
The Democratic Party has a number of failures we can point to, but it’s false to say it only focuses on education as a way to uplift people. That might have been true in the 1990s, but it’s not the case now.
From a Better Deal:
This sounds a lot like Hillary Clinton’s proposal:
(I uprated John’s post).
Agreed. IF only Hillary had run her campaign on:
1. Break Through Washington Gridlock to Make the Boldest Investment in Good-Paying Jobs Since World War II
2. Make Debt Free College Available to All Americans
3. Rewrite the Rules to Ensure That Workers Share in the Profits They Help Create
4. Ensure That Those at the Top Pay Their Fair Share
5. Put Families First by Matching Our Policies to How Families Live, Learn, and Work in the 21st Century Economy
And NOT:
Elect ME because I am a WOMAN and Trump is a Bad man……
She’d be president.
But then, we all knew she was a weak campaigner with poor on-on one personal skills with working class people…..
I agree she has to bear some of the blame for her campaign. It was a lousy campaign that over-relied on demographic identity rather than issues, a view that both Gore and Kerry followed to their detriment. But our times are extraordinary. The media also deserves a lot of blame for not knowing how to address Trump’s shenanigans and focus on the issues.
Let me be clear:
I fully support EDUCATION
I fully support RECYCLING
I fully support FLOSSING
I fully support EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK
I fully support LOVE, PEACE and HAPPINESS
But NONE of the aforementioned has ANYTHING to do with the plight of the WORKING CLASS WAGES in Massachusetts of the USA.
Bullshit.
This comment shows the contempt you hold for each.
I expected this reply from someone like you. You got yours…..so screw the rest. The motto of the Democratic professional class….
How about unions? Since you are posting on Labor Day.
I’m not a big fan of labor unions as they have evolved in the USA. They have become very adversarial. There are far better alternatives to labor unions that do not share their history of corruption and/or adversarial nature.
A tax code/labor policy that encourages/rewards profit sharing and employee owned companies would result in an economy that is is truly shared by all in a more egalitarian nature.
– Opposes making college available to working-class families
– Opposes legislation making gender-based wage discrimination illegal
– Demands that we ignore the racism, bigotry, and misogyny of our current administration and its local collaborators
– Opposes unions and organized labor
– Lies about, misquotes, and distorts the arguments of those who disagree with him
These are the positions of a Limbaugh Republican, no matter what party affiliation he now claims
Who the heck are you talking about? This is getting strange Tom.
I’m talking about your comments. Strange?
Fact: Wages of men and women with a college degree are about twice those of men and women without
Fact: Black men and women, with or without a college degree, earn about half of their white counterparts
Fact: Women, with or without college, and regardless of race, earn about 20-30% less than their male counterparts
Fact: A large number of young men and women from working class families are unable to attend college because they can’t afford it
Fact: The Democrats strongly support making college affordable (or free) for working class men and women
Fact: The Republicans oppose these measures
Fact: You argue loudly and relentlessly against these measures at every opportunity.
The effect of your arguments here, if they were adopted, would be to:
– Deny college to working class men and women for whom affordability is the only barrier
– Harm blacks far more than whites
– Harm women far more than men
We had similar exchanges here a year ago when you argued against the Massachusetts pay equity legislation, making it harder for employers to discriminate against women in wages, compensation, and hiring. You argued against that legislation (claiming it would hurt white men) just as you argue against education now.
There is nothing “strange” about all this — including your steadfast denial of both what you advocate and of the implications of what you advocate.
See, the truth is that I am not opposed to making college available to all, not opposed to equal pay, etc.
But you have no use for the truth. You have an agenda and so you lie and engage in personal attacks, much like our president.
Likewise, those of us who promote education are not opposed to a living wage for all jobs requiring all levels of education, single-payer health care, and a fairer tax code, yet you seem to imply that we are to the point that it starts to sound trollish for the number of times we’ve had to remind you of that.
The fact of the matter is that the wealth divide in this nation is at the root of so many of our social ills, and why Trump is the president….and education has little to do with this.
Yes, education is a good thing and we all ought to seek it throughout our lives….just like flossing our teeth, it’s important. But it will not solve our growing wealth divide.
Single payer will help, as will a fairer tax code, but education will not.
Unless, of course, your assertion is that Trump, his brood, his pals like DeVos are as wealthy as they are due to their superior education.
In short, an education will make one more economically competitive within the working class but it has been demonstrated to be almost worthless in competing economically against the wealthy class, nor has an education been proven to make one more economically competitive within the wealthy class. If Trump is not proof of that, I don’t know what is.
@ the truth is …: The truth is that in your commentary here, you relentlessly oppose proposals to make college available to all. You don’t just oppose it, you do so with sweeping and categorical contempt. You opposed equal pay the same way a year ago.
Perhaps privately, in your innermost heart of hearts, you do not oppose making college available to all and equal pay.
In your public commentary here, you relentless attack each and every such proposal as well as those who make the proposals.
And THAT is the truth.
Nope.
Anytime you want to have a discussion about equal pay, I am ready to give you a free education on the subject.
I thought you had said something like that but I couldn’t find it. I generally don’t comment on what you say because a Pro-labor/anti-union position is a contradiction in terms, and it makes it hard for me to take anything you say seriously.
I’m not “anti-union”. I simply favor relationships/systems/remedies that are better.
I have examined the data, seen alternatives, and believe that there are better alternatives, as any open minded person would do.
In other words — “I oppose unions”, even while claiming that you’re not anti-union.
And you offer this on Labor Day.
I am not anti union, but I am (unlike you) pro working class and unions are not the best option for working class people.
I simply want what is best for the working class, unlike you.
If I had it to do over again I would still join a union instead of whining about how Chelsea Clinton’s marriage ruined my life.
Union members do not own a stake in the enterprise they labor for. Their lives and livelihood hang in the balance as hedge fund managers and their ilk do as they please with the property and assets THEY own to amass even greater fortunes and ever more so extravagant apartments in NYC.
But if that is your choice, maybe she will invite you to her next dinner party.
Few single (if any) reforms would put money into working class pockets faster than equal pay for equal work. To argue that that doesn’t have anything to do with the plight of the working class is ridiculous and proof of a wildly distorted vision of what the working class actually consists of.
Oh really? Please explain how that would work?
Been waiting two and a half hours……no reply, and I think I know why.
First, not everyone is here as often as some of us. Give it at least a day before you start griping. Second it should be obvious that equal pay will help those who previously have not been paid as much and should have been, and many of the households which would benefit are working class. Third your adversarial style with those who should agree with you is not conducive to engaging.
The irony is we need to do both. Train people who don’t want or aren’t academically able to go to college to do jobs that pay well. We have a massive skills gap no fight for $15 is going to address. Strong two year vocational schools like Ben Franklin or community colleges give a lot of C and B students a solid pathway to a middle class life they wouldn’t get at a four year liberal arts college.
There are still a lot of great union jobs in ironworking, plumbing, electrical work, and even some IT jobs you don’t need a four year degree to get. My brother is making way better money than I ever will thanks to the latter while a few friends are making good money in the former. Not to mention alternative programs like Launch Academy which take 6 weeks and end with good jobs. Why the state can’t sponsor scholarships for that is beyond me, a ton of friends got hired on the spot when they were done.
We have to end the fiction that everyone belongs on the quad. It diluted it’s value beyond repair and given the rise to a lot of subpar coursework and institutions taxpayers continue to subsidize.
And on the flip side, anyone who has the aptitude and desire to get a real liberal arts degree should be able to do so regardless of cost. Free tuition for community colleges allows them to finish their gen ed requirements and transfer to a four year degree program. Innovative programs like the Middlesex-Regis AD-RN program should be copied for every profession. Paralegal certificate schools are still largely for profit and expensive. Adding those programs to community colleges or even high school is a gateway to a 35-45k a year job without the debt of a four year degree.
But sure, those of us who pursue BAs and Masters should be given way more help. Fighting over which path deserves government support and is the best path is pretty silly. John’s idea of the economy is 50 years old. The days where you punch in at a plant are dead. Tom’s idea is also 20-30 years old. The days when the BA got you a great job are also dead. It’s time for us to create a far more nimble and less indebted workforce. And there are hundreds of pathways to middle class jobs. Our job as educators should be to direct our students to the best one for them and our job as a society should be to invest in ALL our kids and the path they choose.
Just a quibble, along with my uprate.
I’ve never said that “the BA got you a great job”. What I said, instead, was that those with a BA on average get about twice the wages of those without. Two times a small number is still a small number, and it is certainly true that a BA is no longer a guarantee of a great job. Nevertheless, those with a BA are likely to on average earn as much as those without.
OTOH, people graduating with a BA from Northeastern are STARTING their careers with companies like VMWare at salaries of $120K/year. I’m certainly not saying that everybody can do that.
What I am saying, instead, is that there are young men and women who do have the ability and desire to get that technical degree from Northeastern and who are currently denied that opportunity because they and their families can’t afford it. That is a tragedy that we can and should prevent.
No government program can solve these problems for everybody. No government program will ever substitute for the hard work, discipline, and commitment needed get any BA in any field.
Men and women (of any age) who have the desire, ability, and motivation to pursue education beyond high school should never be blocked by simple economics.
Ok, why?
Since you say you fully support it, there’s no need to get into the the problem of equal pay itself- but apparently it needs noting that there are many women who are members of the working class, I wouldn’t be surprised if women were a majority of the working class. Many are the primary, or even sole, breadwinners in their families. Equal pay would be a boon to them, and therefore the working class.
Unions and the Working Class
Maybe it’s because I’m partly a union activist, but I take criticisms of the unions personally. Are some locals problems? Yes. Teamsters 25, for example. But locals are not unions, they are affiliates.
Actual unions do, in fact, support the working class. In fact, unions are the only organizations with any power or money that represent working people’s interests.
My example: the Massachusetts Teachers Association. Without our participation in Raise Up, a coalition of unions, religious and community organizations, Massachusetts would not have increased the minimum wage or gotten family leave in 2014
Without us, the $15 minimum wage would not be on the ballot. Paid family leave would not be on the on the ballot. The Fair Share Amendment/Millionaire’s Tax on the ballot. The MTA couldn’t do this without being part of Raise Up. The rich and powerful have money and influence. We have some money and we have members. Together we work to change things.
Unions do work for the working class.
I’m proud of the work we do, and I’m proud to do it for the good working people and for the betterment of our communities.
You don’t have to be part of a union to join Raise Up, go here and see what you can do: http://raiseupma.org
And even local 25,– whatever anyone wants to say about them–when they went into Bradlee’s, my mother went from working for pocket change to earning a decent living.
Non-union workers benefit from the presence of unions in a myriad of ways. From the 40 hour workeeek, to the weekend, to workers comp laws, to the idea of employers offering benefits, to the minimum wage, fair trade laws, and OSHA to name just a few benefits all workers can thank unions for whether they are in one or not.