There
are two things growing simultaneously in America
that do not make sense when they’re viewed together: the
poverty rate and the ranks of the Tea Party and their cheerleaders
in Congress.
Granted,
the government is beleaguered and the economy is in turmoil
- jobless rates are holding steady at about 10 percent (officially)
- and, without intervention that benefits wage workers,
the economy is ready to take another dip.
Although
experts and pundits and people on the street ask the question,
“How can the poverty rate be as high as it is in the greatest
country on earth?” the question itself shows an ignorance
of the state of the American people who are at the low end
of the economic ladder.
The
simple answer is: We’ve always had this kind of poverty.
It’s just that, for the most part, nobody was looking, or
looking in the right places.
There
was a stab at ending poverty as we know it, back 50 years
ago, or so, at the time of Michael Harrington’s book, “The
Other America,” which was widely regarded as the spur to
governmental action that resulted in the “War on Poverty.”
But, that war was derided by those of right-wing persuasion
as “throwing money at the problem,” without ever acknowledging
that there were positive results that few cared to study
or build upon. They fought against it with everything they
had. Then, the Vietnam War pretty much brought the “war
on poverty” to an end.
The
struggle of the powerful against the poor never let up and
eventually even President Bill Clinton got in on the act,
to “end welfare as we know it,” ripping a page from the
Republican playbook and taking one of their absolutely favorite
issues right out from under them. They
had to find another issue and there were several from which
to choose.
So
far, no one has been able to track all of those on welfare
in the 1990s, who were thrown off the welfare rolls and
into the “job market.” For sure, some of them found work,
but it wasn’t long before the period of adjustment began
to show its ugly side. A large percentage of those thrown
off the rolls were women with children and they were entering
the job market at the low end of the pay scale.
A
clash of two views of society ensued: every person should
work for his or her keep and every parent will provide for
the children in an “appropriate” manner.
Unfortunately,
the mothers newly thrown off welfare had to take whatever
job they could to provide housing, food, health care (when
possible), and clothing. Also unfortunately, there was not
enough money on a $9-an-hour job to pay for childcare. It
has not been widely reported how many of the mothers left
a 12-year-old child in charge of younger siblings while
she worked and subsequently was charged with endangering
the welfare of those same children and hauled into family
court, usually sending the whole family into turmoil.
The
social disruption caused by the lack of services to struggling
families - whether “intact” families with a mother and father,
or single parent - is incalculable. In fact, the results
are not viewed in that light, except for a few academics
who care about the general status of families in disruption
caused by the lack of services that most developed nations
provide for their people.
As
of about a year ago, the U.S.
poverty rate stood at 14.3 percent, with 43.6 million living
in poverty.
How
did this happen? All of the brilliant ones seem to be puzzled
about the problem of “the-richest-country-in-the-world-having-some-of-the-poorest-folks-in-the-developed-world.”
They just can’t understand how that could happen.
The
formula is relatively easy to understand when one gets a
handle on the way American capitalism works: one maximizes
profits by moving production to wherever the labor costs
are lowest, first around the country, then around the world.
Secondly, one struggles very hard against the onslaught
of the poor, who are demanding that you pay your fair share.
The rich always have been very successful at getting their
taxes relieved.
In
practical terms, those in power in America
eventually took manufacturing and heavy industry out of
the country and, with that move, took the heart and lifeblood
of the relatively healthy economy with it and sent millions
of workers to the rolls of retail and service “industries,”
which are low-wage and without health benefits or pensions.
And
they wonder why the poverty rate is growing. Or…maybe they
don’t.
The
millions of jobs that paid well and provided benefits and
pensions are not coming back. We are on the threshold of
a new economy, possibly a “green” economy, which will provide
jobs (maybe not as highly paid as the lost jobs) in ways
that will be environmentally sound. That is, if one believes
that environmental degradation is causing problems in the
human and natural worlds. Just have a look at the state
of public health and the diseases, maladies, and syndromes
that we don’t have a way of describing, yet.
Over
the last hundred years, or so, the American people have
been subjected to a barrage of propaganda, public relations,
and advertising, to the point at which they are prepared
to believe that there is no such thing as human-caused climate
change, massive deforestation, the loss of the world’s potable
water, mass extinctions of wildlife, the death of our oceans,
and general economic decline. The deniers have created the
political gridlock that keeps us from solving our problems.
And
the tea partiers believe. They are willing to believe
that more of the same thing will be the solution to most
of the problems, even if it harms them and their families.
If
the top 1 percent of Americans controls 34 percent of the
wealth and the bottom 80 percent has control over just 15
percent, that’s okay. We want to return to that, they say.
“Take back our country, take back our economy,” say the
tea partiers. Clearly, they have not noticed that the country
has not moved much from where it was 35 years ago, in terms
of their relative place in the scheme of things, except
that, now, we are seeing the greatest gap in wealth between
the top 1 percent and the rest of us.
To
most people, that 1 percent would constitute an “elite,”
yet the right-wingers continually rail against the “elite”
and never define what they mean. The tea partiers don’t
have a platform, nor do their heroes and those they put
forward as leaders. We have yet to hear about what they
would do to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.,
and we’re not likely to hear such a plan. Instead of addressing
immigration reform, which looms heavy over the country,
it seems they would rather cleanse the country of every
undocumented alien. How they would do that is never addressed.
Tea
partiers and many Republicans talk in terms of “values,”
without describing what those values are, and they want
a return to “constitutional principles” in government, as
well as (never-defined) freedom. In Psychology 101, a half-century
ago, this kind of rhetoric was described as “glittering
generalities” - all talk and very little substance.
The
folks on the right have come to believe in $20 million golden
parachutes. And, if someone takes $100,000 an hour as “pay,”
well, that’s okay, too. They say, “That’s free enterprise
and capitalism, and that’s what has brought us such a high
standard of living.”
Try
telling that to people who live on Indian reservations,
where unemployment has hit 70 percent, or urban ghettoes,
where the unemployment rate is at 20 percent for some and
is probably much higher. What are the congressional leaders
on the right and their Tea Party supporters going to do
about those problems? They don’t say.
Elites
in America don’t live the way
wage earners live. They’re too busy chasing campaign money,
if they are in elective office. Or, they are too busy finding
safe ways to travel from one gated community to another,
if they are the elites of Corporate America.
Those
are some of the reasons that poverty is growing in America, and a lot of tea partiers are negatively
affected by the actions of those elites. That’s why they
are mad as hell - they can see themselves going the way
of millions of others, counting not only every dollar, but
also nickels and dimes.
Tea
partiers and others on the right would do well to find out
who the “elites” they speak of really are. If they think
that Rep. John Boehner, Newt Gingrich, Rep. Mike Pence,
Senator Jim DeMint (who sells “Freedom Fighter” tee shirts
on his campaign website), Michele Bachman, and a host of
others like them are not part of the elite, indeed they
will suffer the fate they fear.
Knowing
who your friends are and why you are in the straits you
are in are important. Not wanting to know what’s going on
in the “reality-based” world is dangerous to your own well-being
and the well-being of the nation. Even though it might be
unfair to a percentage of tea partiers, it’s why some refer
to them as the “new Know Nothings,” not because they don’t
have the capacity to understand what is happening in the
“reality-based world,” but because they choose not to understand,
and that is likely to make them all the poorer.
BlackCommentator.com
Columnist, John Funiciello, is a labor organizer and former
union organizer. His union work started when he became a
local president of The Newspaper Guild in the early 1970s.
He was a reporter for 14 years for newspapers in New York State. In
addition to labor work, he is organizing family farmers
as they struggle to stay on the land under enormous pressure
from factory food producers and land developers. Click here
to contact Mr. Funiciello. |