Tag: Working Class

Posted on

“The Mirage That Led Democrats Astray in 2024”

Distracted and heart sick as we are by the shit show that is the second Trump presidency, we must remember that we lost the election because of immigration and the border, and, more importantly because of the misery of the working class. Misery to which affluent center-left people like me were blind. Misery that was ruthlessly exploited by the MAGA noise machine. 

For a deep dive, please check out Eugene Ludwig, Voters Were Right About the Economy. The Data Was Wrong. Here’s why unemployment is higher, wages are lower and growth less robust than government statistics suggest (Politico, Feb. 11, 2025).

Mr. Ludwig writes,

­­ What we uncovered shocked us. The bottom line is that, for 20 years or more, including the months prior to the election, voter perception was more reflective of reality than the incumbent statistics. Our research revealed that the data collected by the various agencies is largely accurate. Moreover, the people staffing those agencies are talented and well-intentioned. But the filters used to compute the headline statistics are flawed. As a result, they paint a much rosier picture of reality than bears out on the ground.

Take, as a particularly egregious example, what is perhaps the most widely reported economic indicator: unemployment. Known to experts as the U-3, the number misleads in several ways. First, it counts as employed the millions of people who are unwillingly under-employed — that is, people who, for example, work only a few hours each week while searching for a full-time job. Second, it does not take into account many Americans who have been so discouraged that they are no longer trying to get a job. Finally, the prevailing statistic does not account for the meagerness of any individual’s income. Thus you could be homeless on the streets, making an intermittent income and functionally incapable of keeping your family fed, and the government would still count you as “employed.”

I don’t believe those who went into this past election taking pride in the unemployment numbers understood that the near-record low unemployment figures — the figure was a mere 4.2 percent in November — counted homeless people doing occasional work as “employed.” But the implications are powerful. If you filter the statistic to include as unemployed people who can’t find anything but part-time work or who make a poverty wage (roughly $25,000), the percentage is actually 23.7 percent. In other words, nearly one of every four workers is functionally unemployed in America today — hardly something to celebrate.

Ludwig goes on to analyze the flaws in other indicia, including earnings averages, inflation measures. “The resources required simply to maintain the same working class lifestyle over the last two decades,” he writes, “have risen much more dramatically than we’ve been led to believe.” Moreover,

the aggregate measure of GDP has hidden the reality that a more modest societal split has grown into an economic chasm. Since 2013, Americans with bachelor’s or more advanced degrees have, in the aggregate, seen their material well-being improve — by the Federal Reserve’s estimate, an additional tenth of adults have risen to comfort. Those without high school degrees, by contrast, have seen no real improvement. And geographic disparities have widened along similar lines, with places ranging from San Francisco to Boston seeing big jumps in income and prosperity, but places ranging from Youngstown, Ohio, to Port Arthur, Texas, falling further behind. The crucial point, even before digging into the nuances, is clear: America’s GDP has grown, and yet we remain largely blind to these disparities.

Take all of these statistical discrepancies together. What we have here is a collection of economic indicators that all point in the same misleading direction. They all shroud the reality faced by middle- and lower-income households. The problem isn’t that some Americans didn’t come out ahead after four years of Bidenomics. Some did. It’s that, for the most part, those living in more modest circumstances have endured at least 20 years of setbacks, and the last four years did not turn things around enough for the lower 60 percent of American income earners. …

In an age where faith in institutions of all sorts is in free fall, Americans are perpetually told, per a classic quote from former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, that while we may be entitled to our own opinions, we aren’t entitled to our own facts. That should be right, at least in the realm of economics. But the reality is that, if the prevailing indicators remain misleading, the facts don’t apply. We have it in our grasp to cut through the mirage that led Democrats astray in 2024. The question now is whether we will correct course.

Posted on

A Sense of Being Treated Unfairly Is Not the Same as “Zero Sum Thinking”

I want to take issue with one implication found in the Guardian piece quoted in my most recent post, Rage in the Rust Belt.

The author implies that the good folks in the Rust Belt are thinking in zero sum terms: if Blacks or Gays are getting some benefit, that must mean that good old working class white people like me are being deprived of that benefit. In other words, there’s only so much to go around, and if your tribe is getting more, that necessarily means my tribe is getting less.

Now, I am sure that a lot of working class white folks do feel exactly that way. And I am sure that Orange Jesus and his supporters and enablers have done everything they can to whip up such zero sum thinking. 

But … but … but …

As a matter of fact, and as a matter of logic, it’s entirely possible that you can legitimately complain of being “left behind” without thinking, fallaciously, that the reason you were “left behind” is that someone else got a benefit. 

In other words, resentful thinking—a sense that you’re being treated unfairly—is not the same thing as zero sum thinking. 

Zero sum thinkers are likely to be resentful, but not all resentful folks think in zero sum terms. 

Posted on

Knock! Knock! The Center for Working Class Politics Would Like Your Attention for a Moment, Please!

Dustin Guastella, The left’s best defense against Trump? Ditching limousine liberalism: An effective fight against the president-elect requires a struggle that takes the frustrations of working-class voters seriously

Mr. Guastella works for the Center for Working Class Politics, an institution not previously within my radar screen, but one that probably should be within our awareness.

The article is published by the Guardian, so you can read if for free. Its message is broadly consistent with a theme that I have been pushing: that we progressives need to listen to the non-college-educated working class once again, hear their concerns, and form a coalition with them to advance our common interests, versus the ultra-wealthy business elites. ­

After damning the Democrats and Kamala Harris for not embracing the working class, Guastella writes,

OK, so Harris represented limousine liberals, that still doesn’t explain why blue-collar voters would choose an uber-wealthy playboy like Trump, not to mention his billionaire henchman Elon Musk, over her. And, according to analyses from the Center for Working Class Politics, working-class voters did prefer Trump. But we don’t need some description of “false consciousness” to understand why this might be. The fact is working-class people do not have a genuine political home in our new Gilded Age, they are forced to ally either with billionaires in the Republican party or Democratic liberal elites in hopes that someone will allay their concerns. Fixing this requires a politics that confronts both. …

Almost all of the content of American politics – the candidates, the policies, the priorities – concerns the top 20% of the income and wealth hierarchy. Remember, less than 2% of members of Congress come from working-class backgrounds. Working-class candidates face immense political obstacles because they have neither the money, nor the credentials – won in the halls of elite schools, conferences and institutions – needed to break into the fortress of American government. Many voted for Trump in the hopes that he could take a wrecking ball to the whole thing.

Having made these important points, Guastella then segs into the argument that Democrats must reverse course not only on economic issues but also on non-economic cultural and values issues:

Though, it will not be enough for the left to protest the billionaire economy. An honest assessment of progressive liabilities is in order. Those on the left must confront the cultural elite that has pushed the party away from workers on all sorts of non-economic issues. While Trump and his billionaires won’t be able to adequately represent the economic interests of the working class, liberals must recognize that their party doesn’t represent their values. The Democrats captured by highly credentialed clerics has led them to embrace the cultural values of an aristocratic elite. From crime, to climate, to gender politics, and the border, mainstream liberal opinion is much further from the views of workers than many liberals are willing to admit. And this too is a class story.

Well, Knock! Knock! I Have Two Important Things to Say About Embracing Alleged Working Class Culture and Values.

First important thing: Yes, yes, it’s high time to reconsider some issues. For example, lots of minority people feel that aggressively pushing DEI can make them look like “token hires”—not the accomplished, fully deserving people they are. 

Second important thing: But while we’re doing all this cultural/value reconsidering, let’s insert a step: think carefully about what is the right thing to do, not the thing to do that might improve your messaging.

And here is why we need to actually consider the right thing to do: because, ladies and germs, the right thing to do will probably, at the end of the day, also be the politically expedient thing to dol. 

Posted by Ron Davis, Dec. 21, 2024

Posted on

The Immigration Surge Under Biden

N.Y. Times, Recent Immigration Surge Has Been Largest in U.S. History: Under President Biden, more than two million immigrants per year have entered, government data shows.

This follows up on my Dec. 10 post on immigration. On Dec. 11, the New York Times published the analysis I have just cited. It’s long and it’s meaty. If you want to know what’s actually going on, I highly recommend it. 

Two things stood out for me.

Thing One: The Immense Scope of the Immigration Surge Under Biden

The Times writes,

Total net migration during the Biden administration is likely to exceed eight million people. That’s a faster pace of arrivals than during any other period on record, including the peak years of Ellis Island traffic, when millions of Europeans came to the United States. Even after taking into account today’s larger U.S. population, the recent surge is the most rapid since at least 1850.

And, by the way, 

About 60 percent of immigrants who have entered the country since 2021 have done so without legal authorization, according to a Goldman Sachs report based on government data.

The combined increases of legal and illegal immigration have caused the share of the U.S. population born in another country to reach a new high, 15.2 percent in 2023, up from 13.6 percent in 2020. The previous high was 14.8 percent, in 1890.

Thing Two: The Effect on Working Class Wages

According to the article, 

The Congressional Budget Office has concluded that wage growth for Americans who did not attend college will be lower than it otherwise would have been for the next few years because of the recent surge. On the flip side, higher immigration can reduce the cost of services and help Americans, many with higher incomes, who do not compete for jobs with immigrants.

Bernard Yaros Jr., a lead U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, a research firm, described the recent increases as “something that we really haven’t seen in recent memory.” Mr. Yaros said that they had “helped cool wage growth.”

Posted by Ron Davis, Dec. 14, 2024

Posted on

Why Political Realignment is Essential

Tyler Austin Harper, Is This How Democrats Win Back the Working Class? Embracing populism could help the party build a lasting political coalition—if the Republicans don’t do it first.

N.Y. Times, The Upshot: How Some Voters Moved from Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump: For some young men in particular, the populist pitches from Mr. Sanders and Mr. Trump aligned with their attitudes about the ruling class.

By “political realignment” I’m referring specifically to the need for economically comfortable,  college educated people to wake up and smell the coffee, to inform ourselves about the realities of working class life in America, and align with persuadable working class voters to oppose the continued dominance of the super rich. 

If you can, you really need to read and digest both of the articles I cite. The Times piece provides a lot of helpful information on the attitudes of young working class men. The other article, from The Atlantic online, works off an interesting but problematic premise: that Republicans and Democrats are in competition to form a “lasting political coalition” with working class voters. Read it and see what you think. 

As for me, here’s what I think. I think the incoming Trump administration is going to be dominated by billionaires with a tax cutting, regulation slashing agenda. 

I think that if this tax cutting, regulation slashing agenda were to produce big economic gains for working class people, then lots of those working class people would decide that fascism works for them—and our country would well and truly be in deep doodoo.

I also think that if my grandmother had wheels, she could ride on the railroad tracks. 

Plus, if my aunt had balls, then she would be my uncle. 

Posted by Ron Davis, Dec. 13, 2024

Posted on

What the Hell Do We Say to Esther?

In seven minutes, Paul Solomon of the PBS Newshour tries to summarize “Why so many Americans are dissatisfied with the seemingly solid economy.” For a seven-minute discussion, Solomon and his guests lay out the issues fairly well.

Please take a hard look. Maybe watch it a second time, because the situation is a little complicated.

And then answer this question:

What the Hell Do We Say to Esther?

Let me give you four alternatives. Which message is most truthful, and which message is most likely to help us take our country back? Which will it be—A, B, C, or D?

A. The Identity Message

“Listen up, lady—and take a look in the mirror. Racism and misogyny still run rampant in this country. And you have just missed a chance to vote for a highly competent person, Kamala Harris, who is, like you, an African-American woman. What a shame! Clearly, you are not a credit to your race.”

B. The Me-Or-Your-Lying-Eyes Message

“As the saying goes, who are you gonna believe: me or your lying eyes? 

“For God’s sake, woman, you’re an accountant. Don’t you read the Financial Times? Don’t you read the Wall Street Journal? Don’t you know that we have had a great recovery under the Biden-Harris administration? Don’t you know that inflation is coming down?

“Instead of reading legitimate news sources, you must have been duped into reading the wrong Facebook pages. Get a grip on.”

C. The Just-You-Wait Message

“You say you’re concerned about inflation. But your man Trump has three signature policies that are bound to increase inflation and make your life more miserable: massive tariffs and trade wars, mass deportations that will disrupt the economy, and tax cuts for the wealthy that will overstimulate the economy and drive up prices. 

“You thought the last four years were bad? Wait till you see how things are going by 2026!

“We’ll see you at the polls in the next election. Until then, we don’t really have anything to say to you.”

D. The Let-Us-Listen-and-Engage Message

“In the last election, a lot of people were blindsided by the failure of the demography-is-destiny theory of American politics. We were blindsided by the fact that so many people did not understand the threat that Trump poses. And we were blindsided by just how bad things are for a lot of working class people.

“Well, on reflection, we’re glad that you have decided to weigh your perceived economic interests over your ethnic and gender identity. In that regard, you set a fine example for some white people who grieve for the loss of some of their privilege—and for some toxic males who are feel threatened by feminism.

“Now, let’s sit down and have a really serious discussion about the everyday economic difficulties you face, and about how government can make things better. Let’s develop a real economic program to run on in 2026.”

Posted on

Democrats and Working Class Voters: Facing Reality, Biting the Bullet

Dana Milbank, Democrats don’t have a working-class problem. America does: Extreme income inequality and unchecked corporate power gave rise to FDR’s New Deal—Democrats should be no less ambitious now

Milbank lays it on the line. He writes,

Working people no longer vote their interests as “workers” but cast ballots for all kinds of different reasons. They shifted several points away from Democrats between 2020 and 2024 — but so did many different groups across the electorate, mostly because they were unhappy with the Biden administration’s performance on inflation.

The reductive analysis of working-class voters abandoning Democrats is particularly maddening because it misses what’s actually happening to those voters, which is a crisis much bigger than the temporary fortunes of a political party. This is less a Democratic problem than an American problem — but Democrats have a fresh chance to try to fix it.

For nearly half a century, and particularly over the past two decades, corporate America has plunged workers ever deeper into job and income insecurity. Employers, benefiting from weakened labor laws and lax enforcement of those that remain on the books, have been forcing workers into erratic schedules, hiring them as contractors or temporary or gig workers and stealing their wages. It’s no coincidence that all this happened while labor union membership, which peaked at one-third of the workforce, shriveled to the current 10 percent.

With the decline of unions and collective bargaining, pay has stagnated and pensions have disappeared. Wealth inequality has soared, earnings have become less dependable, and most workers report that they feel stressed, unappreciated, disconnected and distrustful of their employers. They are surveilled on the job, sanctioned for expressing themselves and subjected to dehumanizing workplaces. “Here most of us are, toiling under the authority of communist dictators, and we do not see the reality for what it is,” wrote University of Michigan philosophy professor Elizabeth Anderson. The financial collapse of 2008 and the coronavirus pandemic only deepened the insecurity and misery.

Voting patterns, not just this year’s but this century’s, reflect the discontent and instability. In nine of the past 10 federal elections, one party or the other has lost control of the White House, Senate or House. Voters, desperate for a fundamental change, punish the incumbent party and then, inevitably finding no relief, punish the other party two years later. Politics has become a depressing game of ping-pong, with no enduring wins.

“We’ve never had a period since at least the late 19th century where there have been so many knife’s-edge elections,” Podhorzer [the former political director of the AFL-CIO] told me. “So, coming out of every election, Democrats assume all we need is fine tuning, because we barely lost. We have to get past thinking we’re going to message our way out of this moment. It’s so much bigger than that. And it ignores the fact that, for all of the 21st century, we’ve been seeing that voters just want a different system, a more profound change.”

Even some on the right have begun to argue for a revival of labor unions and New Deal-style government intervention to undo the damage of the past half-century of neoliberalism, the era of the unfettered free market that began with President Ronald Reagan. The conservative writer Sohrab Ahmari argued in his 2023 book, “Tyranny, Inc.,” that the current “domination of working and middle-class people by the owners of capital, the asset-less by the asset-rich,” has “drained the vigor and substance out of democracy, facilitated massive upward transfers of wealth, and left ordinary people feeling isolated and powerless.”

In the short term, Democrats could change nothing and they’d still probably do well by default in the 2026 midterms as disenchanted voters once again punish the incumbent party. President-elect Donald Trump doesn’t have much of a popular mandate: The latest figures show he got below 50 percent of the popular vote, Harris lost by about 1.6 percentage points, and Democrats may have actually gained a seat or two in the House. And he’s already overreaching with outlandish nominations and announced plans to start a trade war with Canada, Mexico and China.

But in the long term, doing nothing would be a huge mistake — for the party and, more important, for the country. We are, in some ways, back to the extreme income inequality and unchecked corporate power over workers that gave rise to the modern labor movement in the 1930s and the New Deal’s government-regulated capitalism, which led America to three decades of broadly shared economic prosperity after World War II. What’s needed to relieve workers’ pain this time is no less ambitious.