‘The middle class is picking
up the slack for both tax cuts and privatized public services’
Chuck Collins
8
It is unfortunate when intellectuals of Warren and Tyagi’s
caliber have to construct their own myth in order to make important
points about the pressures on working families.
Warren and Tyagi group
the villains in the credit-card industry and their legislative allies
with progressive thinkers who are trying to articulate a critique of
materialism and consumerism that puts individual choices in the
context of wage stagnation, globalization, and environmental
sustainability. Juliet Schor, Robert Frank, and others don’t
deserve to be lumped together with Orrin Hatch.
Dismissing
the elements of truth in the over-consumption “myth” also fails
to pass the common-sense test. Have the authors visited a shopping
mall lately? Have they talked to 11-year-olds who have gotten into
knife fights over iPods? Have they interviewed people who have
declared bankruptcy and confessed that profligate spending was the
cause?
I heard many such stories when I spoke recently at a course
on “wealth building” that was sponsored by an African-American
church in Providence, Rhode Island. Forty people gathered in the
church’s basement to discuss opportunities for saving and home
ownership. Among the assembled, it was a given that there was a
combination of personal and structural barriers to these goals. The
altar call was when people came forward to cut up their credit cards.
The conversation went something like this: Do some people
make bad choices? Yes. Is there an element of personal responsibility
underlying the declining savings rate and the bankruptcy boom? Sure.
Does this justify the disgusting bankruptcy bill that Congress
passed? No way. Is it a distraction to continually focus on
individual faults? Yes, but to deny some element of personal
responsibility furthers the distraction. Should we do everything we
can to talk about the structural economic forces that pressure
working families—and about a political program to address it?
Let’s get on with it!
Warren and Tyagi do an exceptional
job of explaining which costs in the family budget are staying
constant or rising. Their discussion of housing costs is critical
to our understanding of the structural economic pressures facing
middle-income households. They astutely unpack the underlying
concerns about safety and high-quality education that drive higher
housing costs.
As investment leaves cities and public services,
those who are able to privatize their services and security do so. As
the rich withdraw from society, taking their tax dollars and
political stake in the commonweal with them, it is rational for
middle-class families who can also escape to join them.
But
for most middle-class families, it is very expensive to purchase
homes in stable neighborhoods or affluent suburbs and to privatize
their education, transportation, recreation, and security expenses.
As Warren and Tyagi discuss, long commutes require two cars. In
addition to local taxes, a family may also pay for private security
and neighborhood-association fees. This increases the fixed costs in
the family budget, necessitating multiple income earners and
accelerating the economic treadmill.
I know a family in Lexington,
Massachusetts, that earns over $110,000 a year—twice the median
income—but they still feel that they are barely surviving. Their
house was expensive to purchase, so their fixed monthly mortgage
payment is steep. Property taxes are high to pay for the high-quality
public schools and public services. To sustain this spending, both
parents drive long distances in opposite directions to earn their
professional paychecks. As a result, their expenses for child care,
after-school programs, and enrichment opportunities are very high.
When vacation time arrives, they splurge for winter in a warm climate
and summer by the sea. These are expensive adventures, but they feel
that they owe it to their kids to get away from their harried lives
together. As a result, they save no money and carry their credit-card
balances forward month after month.
Does this family make
spending choices that might be excessive? Perhaps, but most of their
choices are rational given their other options. Underlying this
family’s condition is the declining quality of public goods and an
erosion of community services.
Warren and Tyagi mention
rising taxes as a stress point on the middle class. But they
carelessly fail to put this into context, potentially contributing to
the anti-tax arguments of the extreme right. (This does not mean, of
course, that the authors are supporters of the Bush tax-cut agenda or
that they should be lumped together with anti-tax zealots like Grover
Norquist.) There is an increased tax bite on the middle class. But it
is a result of the radical right’s anti-government “shrink,
shift, and shaft” tax agenda. For two decades, congressional
tax-cutters have shifted the tax burden off wealth and onto wages,
off corporations and onto individuals. The middle class is picking up
the slack for both tax cuts for the hyper-rich and privatized public
services. Some of the increased fixed costs of stressed-out working
families are thus a direct result of the disinvestment in public
goods.
A wider framework that includes disinvestment from
the public sector and from private institutions that build common
security has implications for the political program that Warren and
Tyagi describe at the end of their analysis. I would add “defending
and expanding the progressive tax system” as a means to reverse the
tax shifts onto the middle class and to pay for the robust public
investments that they advocate in education, health care, and
disability insurance.
It is easy to blame the government and rising
taxes for hardships. But we also need a better accounting of all the
ways in which the private sector and corporations “tax”
consumers. Bank fees, surcharges, credit-card interest, roaming
rates, and late fees are just a few of the dozens of ways that
corporations nickel-and-dime working people and chip away at the
family budget.
It is also important to include
an analysis of wage stagnation in this picture. Thirty years of
wage stagnation and income inequality have been masked by three
important and unsustainable changes: the increasing number of
hours that families spend in the paid labor force, growing personal
debt, and over-inflated home values that encourage people to think
that they are richer than they really are. When the mask is removed,
we find some even more stressed and stretched working families. <
Chuck Collins is
the co-founder and associate director of United for a Fair Economy.
He is the author of several books about economic inequality, including
Economic Apartheid in America: A Primer on Economic Inequality
and Insecurity.
Click here to return to the New
Democracy Forum “What's Hurting the Middle
Class.”
Originally published in the September/October 2005
issue of Boston Review
|