3 ms·
I don't think the issue is material comfort as much as it is worsening conditions and insecurity around employment. A 1950s employee wasn't subjected to credit
by badsock 11y ago
I don't think the issue is material comfort as much as it is worsening conditions and insecurity around employment.
A 1950s employee wasn't subjected to credit or other background checks to get hired, zero-hour contracts weren't around, and neither was the culture of working 60+ hours a week just to keep up appearances.
I see the rise in income inequality primarily as a reflection of the power dynamic between the wealthly and those that work for a living. The lower quintiles are getting the screws put down on them, and they're just taking it.
- jdmichal 11y agoYou also missed the huge transition from one-earner to two-earner households.
- bko 11y agoYeah, the 50s were great. Unless you were black, gay, female or an immigrant.
- rsync 11y ago"A 1950s employee wasn't subjected to credit or other background checks to get hired, zero-hour contracts weren't around, and neither was the culture of working 60+ hours a week just to keep up appearances." 1950s employees were subject to skin color and gender tests to a much, much greater degree than today. Further, family structure, church attendance, sexuality ... all of these were fairly stringent tests at that time.
- badsock 11y agoOh totally, I'm not defending the 1950s, and I'm certainly not defending the social values of that time. But it seems like the sort of employment insecurity that was heaped on the non straight-male-WASPs has been extended to cover more people rather than eliminated as it should have been.