5 ms·

> the campaign planned to “shy away from the characterization ‘middle class’ — because, her advisers say, the term no longer connotes a stable life This should

> the campaign planned to “shy away from the characterization ‘middle class’ — because, her advisers say, the term no longer connotes a stable life This should infuriate everyone who reads this. Somehow being an average, in the middle of the income scale, means that the majority of Americans should expect an unstable life. That seems so wrong on so many levels.

ProAm 11y ago
No really, middle class for our parents sat smack in the middle of being able to achieve the "American Dream", house on a cul-de-sac, 2.5 kids, etc.... Now that sentiment does not ring true with most 'middle class' citizens.
- WildUtah 11y ago
  The Summer Of Love happened in SF because a working class family could get an affordable mortgage and buy a home there in 1967. Nineteen year olds working as shop clerks could get a decent apartment on their own. Now homes cost $1.5MM+ and nineteen year old Americans can't even get jobs without a college degree; entry level jobs go to immigrants willing to take under minimum wage and live four-to-a-bedroom.
  - Apocryphon 11y ago
    SF isn't the entire country, though. Surely there are cities worth living and dreaming in beyond this bubble. Silicon Valley ideologues always preach the concept of "exit." Well, maybe it's time to exit Silicon Valley.
    - poof131 11y ago
      The problem is you can exit silicon valley, but you can’t exit the silicon valley mindset. Where can you go work where you can believe that your employer has your best interests at heart, where you don’t have to worry about them outsourcing your job to increase profits by a couple percent. In the quest for ‘shareholder value’, business leaders have taken an overly cut-throat and self-centered approach to employees and their obligations to the country. Politics is the only way to reign this in and that is exactly what’s happening.
      - nostrademons 11y ago
        That's not the Silicon Valley mindset, that's the Wall Street mindset, which was unfortunately exported to Silicon Valley sometime between the dot-com boom and the mid-2000s. Corporate raiders started dismantling the labor/capital social contract in the 80s. I would also be very skeptical of any politician who claims to be the solution to this. They're using you; economically frustrated masses are a very good way to gain power. The people I know who actually manage to cobble together fulfilling lives today usually do it by thinking locally: developing local friendships, local business relationships, consumption preferences that reflect what they want, and then opting out of the national conversation.
        poof131 11y ago
        nostrademons, love your name and comments but disagree with a few points. >>> That's not the Silicon Valley mindset Having grown up in the heart of the valley, Palo Alto, traveled the country and the world in the military, and now back working in tech, my observation is that this mindset is more SV than people give it credit for. It’s better packaged as meritocracy and innovation but the results are fairly apparent in the disparity of economic outcomes. I like a lot of aspects of the SV mindset (engineer focused, innovation focused, risk and failure tolerant) and know a lot of good people in SV, but I wouldn’t imbue it a purity above Wall Street, or Hollywood, or D.C. or any other power center. All are fairly dismissive of flyover country and self-assured in their wealth, power, and status. >>> skeptical of any politician… They’re using you; I got used by the military for a decade and assume everyone is using me. Haven’t seen much change in SV. But I’m also a sucker for trusting people. Life ain’t easy. >>> Economically frustrated masses are a very good way to gain power. Yes, but they are also the primary internal way to change power structures. And democracy allows us to do this in a controlled fashion through law. >>> thinking locally… opting out of the national conversation While I agree with the ethos of thinking locally, to the extreme it can also be taken as, "Don’t worry about the big things, leave that too other people. Don’t worry about what the hirer-ups are doing, just do your job. Don’t worry about the country, you can’t change anything” As a Veteran, I disagree with the attitude of total disengagement. I got sent to war by politicians. Only two presidential candidates are saying the Iraq war was stupid. That gets my vote. These decisions are life and death for people.
    - jqm 11y ago
      SF isn't the entire country. True. Large swathes of the country it is very difficult to find any work at all. Never mind work with pay one can exist on.
      - Loughla 11y ago
        >Large swathes of the country it is very difficult to find any work at all. That's not true at all. It's just that all the jobs are now temporary and part-time. . . sorry, I meant to say contract and flexible scheduling. This is an added value! People value flexibility in their employment, and millennials don't want to be tied down by full-time employment. Problem solved!
WildUtah 11y ago
I don't think you understand. It's better for the billionaires, Wall Street bankers, and venture capitalists this way. Therefore sacrificing a middle class country and way of life is worth it. There are still lots of options for the former middle class: we could have autocracy like China or grinding poverty like Bolivia. But broad prosperity just wasn't working out for the big money donors and had to be abandoned.
- gnu8 11y ago
  That's missing the point. Everyone knows the middle class has been gutted to benefit the one percent. The problem now is: how does a national political campaign appeal to the vast population without referring to them as the middle class, or as something realistic but depressing, or with some sort of hollow and transparent euphemism like "everyday Americans"?
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    Whenever "everyone knows" something so complicated, you can be certain it's a religious belief, not a fact
    - ffnewfkjewf 11y ago
      According to who?
    - auntyJemima 11y ago
      Are you crazy or in denial? Are you not aware of the many publications released about how we are no longer even close to the prosperity of the 1940s-1970s as regular Americans?
      - refurb 11y ago
        Properity measured how? On average Americans are far better off now than in the 1970's if you think about income.
sp332 11y ago
It's not nearly as simple as being in the middle of an income scale. The rest of the articled describes what "middle class" might actually mean.
TaylorGood 11y ago
Known sales guru Grant Cardone continually makes the point there is no middle class. It was a marketing campaign post-war to entice consumption and sell homes. His stance is that you're either rich or poor.. there is no in-between.
- arebop 11y ago
  The post-war middle income people had and continue to have legitimately comfortable lives and could afford higher education, single family homes, annual vacation, etc. Today's middle income people can barely afford to raise children and have neither retirement savings nor the promise of future pension. They have miraculous pocket computers and unlimited streaming entertainment, but they're only a paycheck or two from desperation and they feel powerless to make real decisions in their lives. Maybe today it's a hollow marketing campaign, but in the 1950s there really was a group of people who had a significant degree of choice about how to spend both time and money. They were better off than the poor and worse off than the rich, a true middle class.

ProAm 11y ago

No really, middle class for our parents sat smack in the middle of being able to achieve the "American Dream", house on a cul-de-sac, 2.5 kids, etc.... Now that sentiment does not ring true with most 'middle class' citizens.

WildUtah 11y ago
The Summer Of Love happened in SF because a working class family could get an affordable mortgage and buy a home there in 1967. Nineteen year olds working as shop clerks could get a decent apartment on their own. Now homes cost $1.5MM+ and nineteen year old Americans can't even get jobs without a college degree; entry level jobs go to immigrants willing to take under minimum wage and live four-to-a-bedroom.
- Apocryphon 11y ago
  SF isn't the entire country, though. Surely there are cities worth living and dreaming in beyond this bubble. Silicon Valley ideologues always preach the concept of "exit." Well, maybe it's time to exit Silicon Valley.
  - poof131 11y ago
    The problem is you can exit silicon valley, but you can’t exit the silicon valley mindset. Where can you go work where you can believe that your employer has your best interests at heart, where you don’t have to worry about them outsourcing your job to increase profits by a couple percent. In the quest for ‘shareholder value’, business leaders have taken an overly cut-throat and self-centered approach to employees and their obligations to the country. Politics is the only way to reign this in and that is exactly what’s happening.
    - nostrademons 11y ago
      That's not the Silicon Valley mindset, that's the Wall Street mindset, which was unfortunately exported to Silicon Valley sometime between the dot-com boom and the mid-2000s. Corporate raiders started dismantling the labor/capital social contract in the 80s. I would also be very skeptical of any politician who claims to be the solution to this. They're using you; economically frustrated masses are a very good way to gain power. The people I know who actually manage to cobble together fulfilling lives today usually do it by thinking locally: developing local friendships, local business relationships, consumption preferences that reflect what they want, and then opting out of the national conversation.
      - poof131 11y ago
        nostrademons, love your name and comments but disagree with a few points. >>> That's not the Silicon Valley mindset Having grown up in the heart of the valley, Palo Alto, traveled the country and the world in the military, and now back working in tech, my observation is that this mindset is more SV than people give it credit for. It’s better packaged as meritocracy and innovation but the results are fairly apparent in the disparity of economic outcomes. I like a lot of aspects of the SV mindset (engineer focused, innovation focused, risk and failure tolerant) and know a lot of good people in SV, but I wouldn’t imbue it a purity above Wall Street, or Hollywood, or D.C. or any other power center. All are fairly dismissive of flyover country and self-assured in their wealth, power, and status. >>> skeptical of any politician… They’re using you; I got used by the military for a decade and assume everyone is using me. Haven’t seen much change in SV. But I’m also a sucker for trusting people. Life ain’t easy. >>> Economically frustrated masses are a very good way to gain power. Yes, but they are also the primary internal way to change power structures. And democracy allows us to do this in a controlled fashion through law. >>> thinking locally… opting out of the national conversation While I agree with the ethos of thinking locally, to the extreme it can also be taken as, "Don’t worry about the big things, leave that too other people. Don’t worry about what the hirer-ups are doing, just do your job. Don’t worry about the country, you can’t change anything” As a Veteran, I disagree with the attitude of total disengagement. I got sent to war by politicians. Only two presidential candidates are saying the Iraq war was stupid. That gets my vote. These decisions are life and death for people.
  - jqm 11y ago
    SF isn't the entire country. True. Large swathes of the country it is very difficult to find any work at all. Never mind work with pay one can exist on.
    - Loughla 11y ago
      >Large swathes of the country it is very difficult to find any work at all. That's not true at all. It's just that all the jobs are now temporary and part-time. . . sorry, I meant to say contract and flexible scheduling. This is an added value! People value flexibility in their employment, and millennials don't want to be tied down by full-time employment. Problem solved!

WildUtah 11y ago

I don't think you understand. It's better for the billionaires, Wall Street bankers, and venture capitalists this way. Therefore sacrificing a middle class country and way of life is worth it. There are still lots of options for the former middle class: we could have autocracy like China or grinding poverty like Bolivia. But broad prosperity just wasn't working out for the big money donors and had to be abandoned.

gnu8 11y ago
That's missing the point. Everyone knows the middle class has been gutted to benefit the one percent. The problem now is: how does a national political campaign appeal to the vast population without referring to them as the middle class, or as something realistic but depressing, or with some sort of hollow and transparent euphemism like "everyday Americans"?
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  Whenever "everyone knows" something so complicated, you can be certain it's a religious belief, not a fact
  - ffnewfkjewf 11y ago
    According to who?
  - auntyJemima 11y ago
    Are you crazy or in denial? Are you not aware of the many publications released about how we are no longer even close to the prosperity of the 1940s-1970s as regular Americans?
    - refurb 11y ago
      Properity measured how? On average Americans are far better off now than in the 1970's if you think about income.

sp332 11y ago

It's not nearly as simple as being in the middle of an income scale. The rest of the articled describes what "middle class" might actually mean.

TaylorGood 11y ago

Known sales guru Grant Cardone continually makes the point there is no middle class. It was a marketing campaign post-war to entice consumption and sell homes. His stance is that you're either rich or poor.. there is no in-between.

arebop 11y ago
The post-war middle income people had and continue to have legitimately comfortable lives and could afford higher education, single family homes, annual vacation, etc. Today's middle income people can barely afford to raise children and have neither retirement savings nor the promise of future pension. They have miraculous pocket computers and unlimited streaming entertainment, but they're only a paycheck or two from desperation and they feel powerless to make real decisions in their lives. Maybe today it's a hollow marketing campaign, but in the 1950s there really was a group of people who had a significant degree of choice about how to spend both time and money. They were better off than the poor and worse off than the rich, a true middle class.