(Today we welcome Robert Frank, author of “Falling Behind: How Rising Inequality Harms the Middle Class.” Please join us in the comments — jh)
We hear a lot about income inequality these days and if you’re like me, you probably wonder, other than the fundamental unfairness of it all, why this matters. After all, life isn’t fair — get back to work and stop lallygagging.
As it turns out it matters a great deal, and that sense of dissatisfaction and anxiety so many of us feel is a direct result of the conspicuous consumption of the fabulously wealthy overclass trickling down through society and making it necessary for people to constantly buy more, even as they are earning the same. According to Frank, it’s not just keeping up with the Joneses or class envy or any of the other things that people usually attribute to those who live beyond their means. It’s a natural, human response to the context in which they live. Frank makes a compelling case that measuring yourself against your neighbors, co-workers or whatever, isn’t just a matter of “keeping score.” It’s the way we make sense of the world. And that measure is affected every day by what the super-rich are buying.
In a delightfully droll passage, Frank describes going shopping to replace the battered $89.00 bar-b-q he’d used quite happily for years, until all his repairs finally failed and it fell apart. He sees this amazing Viking grill extravaganza with burners for stir frying and rotisseries that practically cook the food itself and deliver it to your table. It costs $5,000. But, boy is it awesome. He reluctantly turns away and contemplates a different model with some of the same features, but now that he’s seen the top of the line, it just isn’t as impressive. But being a responsible consumer he realizes that he can’t be that extravagant and he considers buying this more basic model — for $1,160. It’s so improved from the banged up old $89.00 model on which he’d happily grilled for years they might as well not even be called a bar-b-q, but in spite of that, he feels a vague sense of disappointment at what it doesn’t have compared to the fancy Lamborghini level grill. Buying it would feel positively frugal, even though it’s ridiculously expensive on its own terms. I’m sure you’ve all been there. You have no idea what’s out there, but once you see something with all the bells and whistles you subconsciously compare everything else you see to it. And something that you would have found to be an amazing improvement over what you once had, suddenly becomes a compromise.
For the record, Frank settles on a $250.00 Weber and felt extremely frugal buying it — though it cost three times what his other grill had cost. But you can also tell by the loving detail with which he describes those more expensive models, that they made a lasting impression. He went back a year later to look at them again and the top of the line model was now $13,000.00 — and that $1100.00 model now looks like a worthless piece of junk by comparison.
This is the mechanism by which the extremely wealthy change the context of our everyday lives in ways we aren’t even aware. And in a society that ties such fundamental community functions such as schools and public safety to property values and perceptions of power, it is almost a matter of necessity that the middle class keep reaching for the bigger house and the bigger car in order to maintain a stake in their community. It is perfectly understandable that people want to have their kids educated in good schools and live in safe neighborhoods.
Neither is it counter-intuitive that if you need to be taken seriously by people who have money, you have to appear that you have money too. I remember being confused when I first started working in a business where there were always a lot of recent college grads in entry level grunt positions driving very fancy cars and dressing in designer clothes. It took me a while to realize that they were all children of wealth. As a result of their ability to give the properly successful appearance, those of us who didn’t have money spent far more on such things than we had any right to, merely to even be in the running. I suspect this gets worse every year as America continues to shed the last vestiges of Puritan social restraint against the flaunting of extreme wealth.
The problem is that middle class American incomes are not even close keeping up with what they need to spend in this kind of environment and haven’t been for more than two decades, while income gains for these super-rich have been stratospheric. That’s what’s making everyone feel the squeeze: the middle class are working themselves into an early grave and taking on more debt than they can manage not because they are foolishly trying to keep up with Paris Hilton but because they have to in order to hang onto the place in society they already have.
Frank discusses in some detail the costs of this striving and I think we all can imagine what they are in terms of health and satisfaction. This is a sick little merry-go-round we’re on. Fortunately, he has a novel solution that I would hope the powers that be would consider: a progressive consumption tax that would give an incentive for the rich to think twice about this reckless extravagance that’s dragging everyone else down. It would encourage saving among the rest of us, which virtually all economists agree is sorely needed, and if nothing else would force the super-wealthy to at least kick in something for the public good while they’re running themselves ragged shopping for expensive gew gaws.
This is a very accessible little book, written in easy to understand language that gets to the heart of the problem for average people who are just trying to make a living and raise their kids and find some way to leave this world a little better than they found it. It gives us some real insight into how we actually find our place in the world around us and well, pursue happiness. That important knowledge leads to how we might change policies to actively encourage that fundamental American value.
Please welcome Dr Robert Frank to the FDL book salon.
Related posts:
- Baucus’ Budget Impact is “Voodoo Savings” Achieved by Taxing the Middle Class
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Robert H. Frank, The Economic Naturalist’s Field Guide: Common Sense Principles for Troubled Times
- The Max Tax: Baucus’ Plan Would Benefit Big Med and Shackle the Middle Class
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Hillary Rettig, The Lifelong Activist: How to Change the World Without Losing Your Way
- Obama Denies Insurance Mandate Taxes Middle Class, Diminishes Public Option





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Welcome Dr. Frank!
zed
Welcome Dr. Frank!
I’m going down to get the others…
Loved your video!
Already done.
The Buddhism it’s often called the Hungry Ghost.
musicsleuth @ 1
Many thanks for the fine introduction, Digby. I’m delighted to have this chance to share thoughts with FDLers on what is, to my mind, the most pressing economic issue of our age.
Thanks so much for being here today, Dr. Frank.
To commenters: Please keep Book Salon thread on topic. If you want to go OT, please feel free to do so in the previous thread.
as una sailable wealth the middle class suffers, shrinks disapears and we devolve into a robber baron economic system
the new economy brags about becomeing “global”
what does global really mean?
it means export jobs to countries that cost pennies on the dollar, import those goods at obcene profit, shrink the middle class where no small bussiness can compete
jefferson had the right idea, he knew aquired unasailable wealth would be the ruin of a government by the people and for the people
there is nothing wrong with exporting jobs, however it MUST be done to coutries that have collective bargaining
a community of laborers must be able bargain for the market price of their product
just as every supplier bargains for the market value of their product, labor must be able to do the same
if that becomes the rule, then the globe will benefit and the world population will share the wealth of growth
A progressive consumption tax certainly sounds like the kind of class war I can endorse. We’d better brand it — the “Paris Hilton” tax? — before the other side does.
Welcome Dr. Frank and hugs to Digby. *s*
Mike Huckabee arguably won many straw votes yesterday because of his push for a flat tax. Perhaps this will be an opportunity to promote progressive taxation in rebuttle to his proposal which will surely get additional air time soon.
I am astounded to the degree to which we have submitted to the venal Reaganite line that the economy improves to the degree that resources are channeled to the most ultra-wealthy among us.
The exact opposite should be the common sense solution — we should be proud of the degree to which our nation’s enormous, astounding productivity should be going to its 50 – 70% working class majority.
Yet I’m terrified that this tremendous opportunity we have sitting right in front of us to remake our economy in a green and alternative energy model in a more just fashion, will instead be once again largely lost to have a few sputtering billions shunted to the ultra-rich once again.
TeddySanFran @ 9
we should brand it;
“robber baron prevention tax”
Bob,
Thanks for coming. I can’t tell you how much I enjoyed the book. Your insights into how we see ourselves among our brethren were a real revelation to me. I had not previously realized just how affected we all were by the ever rising standard of living among the very rich.
I live in a very wealthy place, and have always considered myself rather impervious to such things, but after reading the book I recognized certain behaviors in myself that I hadn’t considered. Very interesting stuff.
Is there any chatter among the economist/political types about this progressive consumption tax?
Dr. Frank,
As a 41-year-old, I’ve seen the workscape completely transform since I left high school.
Without a consumption tax or other corrective measure, where do you see our economy 20 years from now?
Why have a progressive consumption tax instead of just rolling back the Reagan Bush progressive income tax cuts?
I am in my 50s. I grew up in a middle class family – lower middle class, to be sure. Now, I don’t have much money. I don’t have kids, and I’m single. I had to cash in my modest IRA. No 401k plan, no career-type job. But I can read complicated stuff and when I try hard, I can talk pretty. And I have a computer. What am I? Am I economically lower class but educationally middle class?
Oh wait. Woman in her 50s – maybe I don’t even come up on the radar.
But seriously – the disconnect is weird.
TeddySanFran @ 9
I think we should reserve the name “Paris Hilton tax” for the estate tax, the one GWB has been trying so hard to repeal.
When Sam Nunn and Pete Domenici introduced a bill calling for a progressive consumption tax in the mid-1990s, they called it the Unlimited Saving Allowance tax, probably a better name from a marketing standpoint.
Oops – sorry: a gracious good afternoon to you, Dr. Frank!
marcie @ 15
good idea but the last thing we should do is call it a roll back of tax cuts
what we need to call it is;
“the return of middle class wealth to the middle class”
continue with;
recovered from the the wealthiest people on the planet that were recipients of middle class investments aquired over generations, given to the wealthy by the wealthy as if it was theirs to give”
Eureka Springs @ 10
I agree completely. I was on Diane Rehm’s radio show a few weeks ago discussing inequaliity with several other guests and was delighted that a commentator from the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute actually endorsed a progressive consumption tax.
Dr Frank -
How can the disatrous effect of globalization on the American labor pool be addressed?
Must we go back to a system of tarifs and protectionism? Or is there another way to reinvigorate the American middle class?
Hi Dr. Frank-
I’m enjoying reading the discussion. Thanks.
Canada put into effect a new ‘goods and services’ tax in the 1980s I believe. Do you know how that extra tax affected middle class Canadians?
It makes sense to me to tax those more who have more disposable income. I think it is a way.
Digby, you rule.
Dr. Frank, keep on fighting the good fight.
The US is at the bottom for education in the world; infant mortality rates; cost of living; quality of life, and other criteria. Countries like India and Brazil mirror the US in those same categories, with large GDP figures that eclipse most Scandinavian countries, but are considered 3rd World countries simplt because their GDP per household is low, and the US is dangerously close to that.
I hail from a mid-level city in the Midwest, and when I travel back to visit relatives, I am appalled at the number of large residential developments on old farm land, big-haired blondes and balding, tanned-golf too much crow-magnum types driving large SUVs, tailgating me at every turn, turning into these houses, living largly on leveraged debt so they may look like “they are well-off” but their actual income versus debt actually makes them lower middle class, but they are under the assumption that they are fooling everyone. That has got to change.
Digby @ 13
When I proposed this tax in an article in 1997, I got a nice letter from Milton Friedman enclosing a 1943 article he’d published in the American Economic Review. In the article he called for exactly the same tax as the least painful way to raise revenue for the war effort. Now we can call it the least painful way to raise revenue for universal health care.
Dr Frank – is a progressive consumption tax seen as a tool more to modify consumer behavior for healthier psychological wellbeing of communities or is it intended to promote purchase of products that have more concrete benefits such as better efficiency and decreased pollution? If the concrete advantages of innovation are more expensive, I can imagine a scenario of opposing goals being created in some instances.
sangemon @ 21
we need to tariff any country that does not have collective bargaining for their work force
no unfair playing flelds
if a corporation pays less for a laborer we need to tariff that corporation the differance
Dr. Frank,
Thanks for coming. I wonder if you’ve read Kevin Phillips’ The Politics Of Rich And Poor, which he wrote roughly eighteen years ago? You’d think that by now we’d have gotten the message that these are disturbing trends, and yet we still seem to have not internalized this lesson.
Bob,
Just as an aside, when I was reading the book I kept wondering what to make of this extreme inflation in CEO salaries. How does that relate to your thesis?
sangemon @ 21
The thing that economists like about freer trade is that it makes the total economic pie larger. The bad thing about the trade for the US is that the gains from trade are very unevenly distributed. Those at the top gain a lot and unskilled workers actually fall behind. But closing the borders wouldn’t be the right strategy, even if it were feasible. When the pie gets larger, there’s enough for everyone to get a larger slice than before. What we need to do us use tax policy more aggressively to redistribute the gains fron trade. If we have the political power to shut down trade, surely we have the political power to do that.
Hi Dr Frank.
My name is Cassie and I am 15.
We don’t buy much stuff new. Usually used or we don’t buy it or we use someone else’s. We are trying to get back INTO the middle class. My panties and socks are always new but most stuff isn’t. And that is fine.
I have friends who have lots of new stuff and everything expensive, and I don’t think it makes them happier. The giant flat screen TV’s are cool, but we don’t need one.
How about the “Paris Hilton dog-purse tax?”
Hi,
Thanks Dr. Frank and Digby.
Dr Frank: In terms of the ‘keeping up with the super-rich” I have to say the one thing I really want these days, is just some peace and quiet, to be able to walk through a clean neighborhood in the morning on the way to work.
It seems in the big cities (on the West Coast at least) there are quite a few younger people who many in America would consider rich, or doing really well. And yet, we find ourselves living in next to treatment centers, in ‘up-and-coming’ industrial neighborhoods, etc.
This isn’t just by choice of people trying to be cool and urban. This is where we can afford to live.
How far, and how fast, has what was once considered a “middle class” lifestyle driven out of reach of everyone except the truly wealthy?
Cujo359 @ 27
This message was near the top of the political agenda in the late 1990s, then disappeared for reasons you know in 2001. But now I think we’re beginning to focus in on it again. With a few more seats in both houses of Congress and a change of occupants in the White House in 08, we’ll be in a position to start dealing with the problem.
snarKassandra @ 30
You make an important point. No one needs fancy stuff to be happy. But most parents want their kids to live in safe neighborhoods with good schools. And it’s the spending by the super-rich that has launched an expendiure cascade all the way the income ladder that has made housing such neighborhoods so much more difficult for middle class families to afford.
Robert Frank @ 30
Thank you.
But this raises another question. If the size of the pie just keeps getting bigger, what happens to the planet? The growth of the world economy translates to the growth of the use of the Earth’s resources, and we are all living in a finite system.
How can the pie just keep getting bigger? Isn’t that just another form of the old pyramid scheme?
TeddySanFran @ 31
Terrific!
Robert Frank @ 35
But if you work hard and study you can be in the honors classes at the regular school.
Do you think a really populist message is best for Democrats to win the White House next year? Are Americans tired of leaders who’ve infinitely enriched their cronies?
Welcome, Dr. Frank. Very nice to have one of the most innovative economists visit this blog today. As an econometrician, I am thrilled.
Hope I’m not out of line suggesting that anyone interested in economics check out his prevous books and intro economic texts (don’t be afraid, he is a good writer IMHO).
I think you’ve done very innovative work. Rare to have welfare economic ideas developed with such potentially rich empirical and policy content. So, I hope some of what are considered to be his wild ideas catch on like, oh, Akerlof’s or Engle and Granger’s. I’m not a tax expert at all, so will just listen but had to say I am very glad you are here.
TheGris @ 32
Here’s a rough description of the expenditure cascade process that has made decent middle-class housing unaffordable. Top earners have more money, so they build bigger mansions. The middle-class doesn’t care, but the new mansions shift the frame of reference that defines what people just below the top consider desirable or necessary. (Perhaps it has become the custom in top circles to have one’s daughter’s wedding reception in the home, rather than in a club or hotel. Or maybe the big mansions at the top provide cover for those who secretly wanted to build bigger all along.) So people just below the top build bigger. Their spending, in turn, affects others just below them. And so on, all the way down the income ladder. As a result, the median size of a newly built house in the US is more than one-third larger now than in 1980, even though real median family earnings have scarcely risen since then. Of course, middle-income families could vow to limit their spending on housing to what they could comfortably afford. But in that case they’d pay another, steeper price. Like it or not, there’s a clear link between neighborhood house prices and neighborhood school quality. A family that buys a house whose price is below average for its area will also end up sending its children to below-average schools. And so most middle-class families work longer hours, save less, borrow more, and commute longer distances in order to meet community standards on housing expenditure.
There seems to be a nexus of corporate, media, and governmental benefits to keeping us all scrambling for a certain standard of living. Keeps all the adults in a household working more hours; then they are too tired to pay attention to political issues that are expensive to business constituencies (environment, workplace safety, health, child care, etc.)And of course fuels an economy less dependent on manufacturing and more on distribution and services.
??
Digby @ 28
I know this is addressed to the dr. but I’d like to add my 2 cents
contrary to common belief, the price of a product has very lttle to do with the cost to manufacture the product
the price of the product relies mostly on what people will pay
if nike can get 100 dollars for a pair of sneakers and that’s the price that gives the best return vs. investment, it doens’t matter if those sneakers only cost 3 dollars to make, they still charge 100 dollars.
when a corporation finds a prodcut that the public is willing to pay a certain price, they get that price, then they shop to manufacture it for less so they can make mroe money
when they can manufacture it for less money they cost analyse, if they lower the price will they sell enough more to make more money then if they continue selling it for the original price
they also have to consider marketing impression…for instance piere cardin oversold their product and they became worth much less by lowering their brand image
so, when a corporation finds the right ballance and they make that much more money they simply give themselves bonuses to make up the differance…they do not return those profits back to the consumer and they don’t re invest it in the company unless they are force to re invest
this is why windfall profits taxes are so important…when properly executed windfall profit taxes force corporations to re invest their profit back into their bussiness and therefore the economy
we need windfall profit taxes properly designed and we need progressive income taxes that make it unatractive to award golden umbrellas with more value then entire countries
TeddySanFran @ 38
I do think the electorate seems receptive to realistic proposals for easing the financial squeeze on the middle class.
Bob
Wondering if you had a comment on the Canadian G $ S tax.
wesgpc @ 39
Where should I send your check?
When we moved from the city center closer to the airport (to be closer to work), I quickly became familiar with the size of newer homes and how this affect the bottom line. You can hardly find a home built in the last 10 years that doesn’t have 3-4 bedrooms and 2.5 baths (one of which is larger than a bedroom).
It was quite the culture shock moving from our 100 year old house that used to hold a family of seven and only had one bathroom. Both homes (new and old) are in good school districts, but the consumption expectations are completely opposite — at least in terms of the house.
How do you address this phenomenon?
Milan River @ 44
The GST is a national sales tax, which means it is highly regressive. The Canadians and the Europeans make up for that regressivity by having highly progressive benefit programs like national health insurance. But why not start with a progressive tax in the first place?
Robert Frank @ 47
well, a value added tax would eliminate the gray economy.
everyone who bought something would pay into the system instead of “cash” bussineses being virtually imune from income tax
I think you would still need a tax return system in order to keep it equitable…it would still be a progressive tax if it’s designed correctly I think
Dr. Frank,
I like the idea of a progressive consumption tax. However, how would you account for the lag effect it would have on the US economy, where 2/3 or more of the economy is based on consumer consumption? If you propose to limit that (which I am a fan of, irregardless of the short term hit on the economy), where can the hit on the economy be made up?
perris @ 42
I don’t mean to trivialize this discussion, since increasingly large homes are a very good gauge over time. Another bellweather is the vastly expansive and expensive weddings featured on Life/Style teevee channels. This expenditure has seeped down the ladder as well. I am shocked to hear about young brides who expect four or five showers, with large staffs attending to their whims on their special day. This is, unlike a home, not an investment but simply outlandish one-time consumer spending.
A similar argument can be made, I believe, about automobiles in American culture. It’s hard to find a car without power windows today, which was not the case when I first starting buying cars.
Hi, Bob.
I’m a tax lawyer.
What’s your take on the alternative minimum tax?
It’s beginning to kill middle class families in high-tax states like New Jersey.
It raises so much revenue, both parties in power are addicted to it.
Get Tough @ 49
There is no rule that 2/3 of total spending should be consumption spending, For the last two years our personal savings rate has been negative, which means we’ve been spending more than we earn. This can’t go on. If we saved more, there would be less consumption but more investment. The jobs created by investment spending are just as valuable as those created by consumption.
TeddySanFran @ 52
My daughter refuses to buy a new car. Why buy a new car, she says, when there are so many perfectly fine already-built cars in existence already.
I’m so proud of her!
Jonathan @ 52
Get rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax. There are many better sources of revenue that a tax that leaves the wealthy alone but clobbers the middle class.
Howdy:
How do we get back to that downhome, frugal, practicallity of our depression-raised parents?
Pay cash for everything, stay out of unnecessary debt, buy and keep working appliances and vehicles for their lifespan, spend money on real important things like education and healthcare.
How do we resist this KOWTJ mentality and appreciate an environentally sustainable lifestyle?
If we did, would it be adverse to the current way the economy works?
Robert Frank @ 41
Thank you for that answer. I have to say, I’ve seen this firsthand with people I know with kids. They move to the suburbs, commute, work long hours and while they’re clearly stretched, they buy new minivans at the first opportunity.
At which point, it’s one more payment to make each month. The cycle continues.
It also seems that the big companies use their benefits packages to great advantage. People feel they can’t leave a job because of their “great” (i.e. “I have one”) health care package.
As Gordon pointed out above
Gordon @ 42
It may not be an overt conspiracy (or is it?) but the confluence of consumer spending habits, corporate health care, and tax policy here in the US sure seem to work well for the super rich. And nobody else.
sangemon @ 54
This ties in with Digby’s earlier remarks about how standards escalate without our even being conscious of it. A friend wanted to build a two bedroom house. His real estate advisor talked him out of it, say no one would want to buy it when it came time to sell. So he built one with four bedrooms.
James @ 57
That is how we live. We don’t even have a credit card. If we can’t afford it, we don’t buy it.
But we don’t know all the ways of growing food and making our own jam and salsa and stuff.
This is a topic near and dear to my heart for many reasons.
What do you think of a return to more local,small business based economies? I feel like one huge problem is that we don’t make alot of our own stuff in America anymore. My big peeve is food,I’ve felt for years that it’s not smart to outsource most of a nation’s food supply. It leaves you at the mercy of too many variables.
James @ 56
The economy would work just fine if everyone paid cash for everything, except perhaps for a first house.
Dr. Frank,
Welcome to the Firedoglake Book Salon. I was on two weeks ago discussing my new book, THE TRAP (which you were kind enough to blurb–thanks!). I hope you’re enjoying the intellectual—and touch-typing—work out.
To what extent do you think the middle-class feels it’s falling behind because of the spike in middle-class necessities like healthcare coverage and higher education? I love your Weber grill example, but haven’t lots of other consumer goods have become much less expensive in recent decades (an airline ticket to London, a polo shirt at Macy’s, etc.)? Isn’t it the necessities that matter most–even if a Weber grill can take a toll psychologically?
Robert Frank @ 59
Not so long ago, that was three bedrooms. Thanks to that rule, I have an extra room to store all the junk I no longer use.
There’s probably a lesson in all that somewhere.
anangryoldbroad @ 60
There’s a lot to be said for buying from the producers who can produce products most cheaply. But part of the costs of things we buy don’t show up in their price tags. Shipping food across the country creates a lot of additional congestion and pollution, yet the consumer doesn’t see those costs in the price of produce. So there’s strong economic logic behind the movement urging conbsumers to buy food produced locally.
James @ 56
That would be nice. Totally agree. How about regulating television adds, where the majority of people who watch television shows with an over-abundance of commercials are more likely the same people who can’t afford to buy the products advertised, prohibiting banks from issuing credit cards to people with too much debt to pay off their existing debts, regulating big pharma and eliminating drug adds for boners, leg cramps, sleepless nights, irritability, restless legs (my favorite) and the culture that do what you want, and buy a pill when the “do what you want” has become too much. I’m ranting.
The most conspicuous consumption in which our country engages is buying toys and services for its war mongering. Why not put the tax increase where it really belongs, on the industries who are profiteering on wars?
Then we could have good, government funded health care, education and housing.
I’m now living in Venezuela where President Chavez is using his oil profits for the benefit of the health and welfare of the people. Admittedly, that’s a wholly un-American concept, but its great to live here!
Are any presidential candidates talking about a progressive consumption tax in their platforms?
It’s funny, in the book Dr Frank offers a thought experiment in which you are offered one of two “worlds”. In World A you can live in a house that is 4,000 square feet while others live in a house that is 6,000 square feet. In world B, you can live in a house that’s 3,000 square feet while others live in one that is 2,000 square feet. Which would you choose?
I guess I am unusual because I would have picked World A — but that’s because I currently live in a tiny beach style cottage and yearn for a lot more room. The funny thing is that 3,000 square feet would be a great improvement too — I guess I’m just greedy. But then I also am used to being the smallest house on the block.
It’s an interesting question. It kept a dinner party entertained as we all discussed the variables that would drive that decision and the property tax and public safety aspect seriously played into this for people with young kids. I was less concerned, but did wonder whether I wanted to be the nicest house in the slum.
The next thought experiment was about leisure time in which in World C you would have four weeks and others would have six weeks and World D in which you would have two weeks and others would have one. Like those in the book, everyone at the (rather boozy by this time) table agreed that we would take the four weeks in a second because …. damn, who gets four weeks in this country?
TeddySanFran @ 51
I have to wonder two things: first, has this excess truly permeated the culture? How deep does it go? It’s also true that increasing numbers of people are not getting married, or are living together. Second: let’s say a not especially wealthy family does put on an extravagant wedding. Let’s say for them, “extravagant” means $15,000.
See, I think that sometimes people blow unreasonable amounts of money on things like this because in their hearts they simply don’t believe they are ever going to amass the money required to put three kids through college and buy a nice house, and fund their retirement. But the wedding (or the plasma TV or the iPhone)is within the realm of the possible. It’s not stupidity, it’s just acting on a desire to have something special and delightful, something that makes you feel like you are, however briefly, part of the perceived mainstream.
It’s not a good idea, but we get the constant hard sell, and also, I can understand the desire. So far, I can resist it (it helps to have cancelled my cable TV service), but I don’t have kids wanting weddings, either.
Robert Frank @ 58
I’m an amatuer economist–I work in the field somewhat tangentally, so I know the ins-and-outs, but probably know too much to be dangerous–Speaking of home sales, how do you see the current real estate bubble shaking out? Good for lowering housing prices, or just good for the hedge funds to sell short on the market right now?
It took me too long to write my last post, so I read your reply after I already re-asked a question… sorry!
There are so many side effects to new/used big-ticket items. For example, moving from our 100 year old house to an newer one twice as large (with better insulation and higher-efficiency HVAC and appliances) actually reduced our gas and electric bill. Similarly with cars, newer ones are generally safer and have better fuel-efficient options with their hefty price tags.
What kind of economic incentive is there to encourage the manufacture of cars and homes with the same safety and energy efficiency of the monster cars and houses for sale today?
TeddySanFran @ 68
Not that I’m aware, and maybe it’s too complicated to raise as a discussion point at this stage. Obama and Edwards have been particularly clear about their plans to repeal the Bush tax cuts for top earners, and that’s a good start.
Why are people so down on apartments? Why do they think houses are better? Not all houses are nicer or even bigger. But people look down on you if you live in an apt instead.
musicsleuth @ 72
Al Gore’s proposed carbon tax would be a great place to start. Use more energy if you must, but be prepared to pay the full social costs you impose by doing so.
Robert Frank @ 73
It’s been said that the tax cuts that should really be repealed are the Reagan tax cuts.
Cujo359 @ 63
See George Carlin’s wonderful rant about “stuff”. :)
As an American expat in Canada, I can tell you that the GST/PST does put a drag on the economy. It encourages a grey-market economy (especially in services, where everyone who can subverts it by paying in cash). And with the US dollar going this low, it’s increasing the incentive for people to shop over the border as well, which takes that money out of the local economy.
It is indeed a regressive tax that falls too heavily on the working classes. It needs to be replaced by something else; but, if anything, those kinds of changes happen even more slowly here than they do in the States.
Generally, though, moving to Canada has been a major downshift for us, precisely for the reasons Dr. Frank states. We live right next door to the richest neighborhood in Canada (West Vancouver); but the level of overt opulence, even there, doesn’t hold a candle to what you’d see in a similarly affluent neighborhood in the US. There’s very little in the way of high-end designer stuff. People don’t wear bling. The houses are indeed getting bigger; but the lots are very small, and density is high.
We’re enjoying having less pressure to Buy Stuff. Canada — and particularly BC — was largely settled by Scots Presbyterians who were extremely thrifty and modest; and that ethic, I think, is still evident in people’s attitude toward material wealth here. Yeah, there are people who go in for the ostentatious. But there’s plenty of cultural support yet for those who don’t want to follow their lead.
And even more support for those who go ostentatiously small, which seems to be a gathering trend here. We traded in the BMW on a Prius. I weeded my wardrobe to the basics, and am sewing my own again. As soon as the kids are gone, we’ll be downsizing the house, too. And even the richer people in town seem to see the virtue of this. To me, this says that reversing the upward consumption cycle is possible.
snarKassandra @ 74
Apartments are great. Manhattan uses less energy per capita than almost any other city and no one there looks down on apartment dwellers.
snarKassandra @ 74
You have to live in the right neighborhood to find one. If you’re in the boonies, it’s kind of tough. Also, the trend in our area is to renovate them and turn them into condos.
How do we know that any taxes collected for anything will not just go to pay for the Iraq war?
Digby @ 69
Well, that depends now, doesn’t it? For me, World A is better – I get a bigger house and my neighbors won’t be so inclined to drop by.
Others may have different priorities, but it’s hard to believe anyone would take Worlds B or D.
Dr. Frank,
There are many different social systems and taxing policy combinations used by countries around the globe.
Give us your analysis of these 2; the best and the worst.
It’s so difficult to get a good sense of the magnitudes of wealth involved in our economic system. I have never in my life (I’m 40) read a decent budget story. I’ve been on something of a crusade to get better budget stories written. Anyway, Americans often have a good idea of their own budget and their net worth, but they have almost no realistic idea of what the US fiscal picture looks like. What role do you think our ignorance of basic economics plays in this problem?
sangemon @ 76
Good point on the substance, but with Bush polling in the 20s, it’s probably more effective rhetorically to go after the Bush cuts.
snarKassandra @ 74
What I get a lot of is that I’m “throwing my money away.” The debacle of the housing bubble dampens that one a bit, I imagine.
I live in an apartment because I can’t countenance “owning” property – while still perpetrating the myth of property by paying a landlord/”owner,” at least I count as a victim rather than a perp…
musicsleuth @ 80
I live in Texas and where we are every subdivision has apartments next to it and then stores next to the apartments. But mostly it’s college kids or immigrants or newlyweds in the apts, and kids at school think it’s weird that I have to give a building # and an apt # if someone wants to find me.
sangemon @ 76
Robert Frank @ 75
I think that’s a great principle in many areas, not just carbon. Of course, we pay higher insurance premiums for some of our bad habits, but I don’t think corporations pay anywhere near enough for theirs.
Robert Frank @ 85
Yes. It’s a start. :)
Cujo359 @ 81
Don’t some people want more than their neighbors, though?
And as to Prii, when at the Toyota dealer recently to help a friend buy a new truck, I saw several, interiors stripped out, waiting for their luxurious leather to be installed. So there is a way to consume conspicuously while appearing green.
Daniel Brook @ 63
Hi Daniel,
Great so see “The Trap” getting so much attention.
I agree, it’s the necessities that are causing the real trouble for the middle class. Middle-income people aren’t struggling because they’re trying to buy Gucci handbags and Prada shoes. They’re struggling because they can’t meet their mortgage payments on a house in a safe neighborhood with good schools. But the ultimate reason for that struggle is the expenditure cascade launched by higher incomes at the top.
sangemon @ 90
A cynic might suggest to just call them both the Bush tax cuts. They certainly come from the same place, and most folks wouldn’t know the difference.
Dr Frank,
Here in South Africa , we have both progressive Income Tax and VAT on everything except basic foodstuffs.We also have something like 30% unemployment.Something that really hurts us Third World countries are agreements like GATT or when USA gives their sugar farmers such huge subsidies that we cannot be competitive in price on the world market. How come this favoured thing called “globalisation” hasn’t done away with protectionism like that?
In reply to musicsleuth @ 72
So many of the affordable homes and cars are older — and therefore bigger energy hogs. Would this disproportionately impact the lower middle class, or is there a way around this?
I was shocked that my *total* energy consumption went down when we moved to a house twice as large as our last one.
Re James @ 57 – “How do we get back to that downhome, frugal, practicallity of our depression-raised parents?”
It makes me wonder if the answer is tucked into your question.
Even for those who are struggling to maintain access to quality education and safe neighborhoods, the very fact that there are many many people who do buy the flat screens, the new minivans, and take on a mortgage with little remaining wiggle room tells me that there is still room for things to get a lot worse.
Even though I don’t wish for it, sometimes I wonder if it will take another sustained crisis similar to the Great Depression – deeply affecting most everyone- to rearrange the scales and help re-crystallize those things that really matter in forming a sense of community and which are not defined by dollars.
.
Bye, Dr. Frank! Thank you. It’s been interesting and I’m gonna get your book. Now I must run off to one of my pleasant little service jobs. (I am not being sarcastic: I’m walking an elderly dog on a beautiful trail, and it’s a fabulous August afternoon. And I earn a few bucks for it.)
I’m reading here and thinking, my god, people (from Cassie on up) need to learn how to drop out and survive.
I won’t tell my own story; it’s too particular to who I am.
It is possible to drop out. And even make money.
You need to learn how to eat and take care of yourself.
Stop watching TV. Shop in thrift shops. Become creative in your own way.
what is a gray market?
I think Muzzy has a point here. All this focus on stuff has come a the cost of community. Perhaps, if circumstances conspire to force us to reduce our stuff, we’ll also be forced to invest more in our commonwealth (tangible and intangible) again.
Again, my experiences here in Canada would seem to confirm this possiblity.
TeddySanFran @ 91
I might choose world A, too, unless I had kids in school, in which case I’d definitely choose world B.
So, basically, happiness is an inside job.
Jonathan @ 98
And do stuff like operation princess for prom dresses and wedding dresses so that more girls can use the same one.
Suezboo @ 94
Our sugar tariffs and subsidies are indeed a scandal. Blame our campaign finance system.
A gray market is an under-the-table economy in which people exchange money, goods, and services beneath the view of the tax authorities.
The US has a very large one, thanks mainly to the huge pool of undocumented labor.
If you get a big house, it takes too long to clean it and you have to pay for AC in all the rooms even if you’re just using one or two right now. Small is better.
snarKassandra @ 99
entertainers, service who are payed mostly by tip…also illegal income like the drug trade
no recorded income, these people rarely pay their proportion if income tax
Now I’m confused about Worlds A and B. Wouldn’t World A, with me in a smaller home than my neighbors, provide better schools for my kids?
Mrs. Robinson @ 105
Oh, like barter and stuff too. We do a lot of that.
TeddySanFran @ 91
Some folks are more extroverted than I. Maybe they want their neighbors to visit more often. Just seems crazy to me.
Leather’s cold in the winter and hot in the summer, just like vinyl. If I’m going to cover a seat with a seat cover, I’d rather it was vinyl. If your seats are already fabric, you might even be able to avoid using a seat cover. But then, see my above comment. It’s pretty clear I think differently from other folks.
musicsleuth @ 95
On my web site (www.robert-h-frank), go to the Economic Scene page, where you’ll find a column titled “When to violate the two commandments.” In that colum I argue that it would be cheaper to give low income motorists enough money to buy a late model Honda Civic than to meet the air quality standards by exempting older vehicles and imposing stricter requirements on nbewer ones,
snarKassandra @ 60
Good for you. Credit can be extremely dangerous, an addictive substance for some people, and I know you’ll understand that point. If you can’t pay for it, it owns you rather than the other way around.
And on the matter of growing your food and making comestibles — heck, that’s the easy part, all you have to do is ask. There are a lot of us who’d be willing to teach you, and would love to encourage others to enjoy the fruits of their own labors.
I think that is an underlying sickness in this country as well; we have been sold repeatedly a bill of goods that is fraudulent, starting from birth, and it literally makes us sick. During a discussion yesterday with immigrant-now-naturalized-citizen women, we talked about how our society turned women my mother’s age away from breast feeding, encouraging them to use bottle feeding as more healthful and safe. And then using detergent-based cleansers with antibacterial agents on their babies and children and around their houses as more healthful and safe. There has been a constant, nagging pressure against anything natural for the last 50-plus years, to the detriment of our health in so many ways. Part of this effort devalued what we do to keep our homes; we’re supposed to use more chemicals to ease our labor and clean our houses more quickly, as if the effort itself was inappropriate.
And that applies to the foods we put in our mouths. Why is commercially prepared jam or salsa better than the stuff I nurtured in my garden and canned on my stove? It’s not. Only the value of what I am and do has been devalued, as if I am worth less than a faceless legal construct that cannot vote.
Welcome, Dr. Frank!
I live in MN — home of the brave and land of the fee.
We have been clobbered for six years with the notion that taxes are the root of all (capitalist) evil and that all that is required is to prioritize (read: rob Peter to pay Paul). We have done the shell game thing here for too long a time.
You know the story about our collapsing bridge. Cause and effect? Maybe.
But how does one/many reframe the taxing message in a state (country) that has been primed to believe that taxes are bad; in a society where conspicuous consumption is rampant. In other words, who is the credible truth-teller?
TeddySanFran @ 108
That would be right if everyone lived in a single school district. The implicit assumption in the thought experiment is that in world B, people who live in cheaper houses send their kids to worse school. That’s the way it is in practice in most countries,
snarKassandra @ 103
Kind of OT, but how can I find my local chapter? I just so happen to be trying to figure out what to do with a very slightly and recently used (and attractive!) bridesmaid’s dress.
Jonathan @ 98
I sympathize a bit. On Friday I cooked dinner with a bunch of friends. The woman in charge did the shopping at Whole Foods and though scandalized on many levels, I said nothing and pitched in my share. Today, I bought similar stuff at the local farmer’s market—it cost way less, the money stayed in the local economy, the merchant probably isn’t a libertarian nutcase like the guy who runs Whole Foods, etc.
But even if you’re good about limiting your consumerism, there are still ways you’re falling behind as a middle class American. I can find a bargain on red peppers—but I can’t seem to find a bargain on health insurance.
What say you Jonathan?
Jonathan @ 97
A word of caution, though. It requires some skill. The taking care of yourself part gets complicated. You’d better learn first aid and how to make everything from scratch, grow your food from seed and if you’re not vegetarian, dressing game is a big plus. (If you’re not a hunter…road kill can be made useful.) ;)
The income part works ok if you’re not invisible.
Robert Frank @ 101
Now I’m confused. If I’m the only one with a bigger or smaller house, what difference would that make? (UPDATE: Assuming, of course, that I have children.)
wini @ 115
I don’t know. We found out about it at school before 8th grade graduation dance, but my brother also had something from the army about it.
Robert Frank @ 111
Thanks so much for the link. Sounds like a worthy argument. I’ll have to read your book once I’ve left the world of Hogwarts… :-)
Dr. Frank,
How does your research and thinking on relative deprivation inform the situation for the truly impoverished in America? While your examples and scenario for relative deprivation make sense for people who have rough material (i.e. they can buy the same types of things as the super rich) and social parity with the extremely wealthy, does this vicious cycle you describe affect those who aren’t even in the middle class?
It’s hard to see a scenario for someone who’s mired in deep, structural poverty feeling the unhappiness and deprivation that you describe in buying grills – they don’t even have an 89 dollar barbecue to feel bad about. Are there any problems with looking at financial and economic problems through the lens of middle class and how they’re falling behind, relatively? Can an appreciation for the issues of absolute deprivation exist at the same time with a concern with relative deprivation?
Thanks Cassie.
Wini: You can find a lot of good resources online. Craig’s List. Kijiji. Freecycle. And, of course, eBay.
I actually do own a couple pairs of gorgeous Prada shoes (and a killer pair of green Guccis as well). But I got them on eBay for a fraction of their original price. I got high quality and high style — and paid only slightly more than I’d have paid for the middling stuff at the mall.
This world has an overabundance of stuff. I’m increasingly convinced that, no matter what it is you want (even that $13,000 grill, which will be moving for 40% less in September — or available second-hand for 60% less next spring) there’s always a cheaper way to get it. And the more “exclusive” the luxury good, the more this is true.
I guess I have one question. Do you think your policy proposals can be sustained politically. If relative status is an important part of most peoples’ perceived welfare, and policies are implemented to reduce the resulting wasteful externalities, won’t a lot of people feel vaguely crummier because the inequality of relative status is reduced. Perhaps more importantly, their hopes and dreams of gaining higher relative status will seem bleak.
Probably their real chances of achieving higher relative status won’t be any bleaker than they are now. But with policies explicitly targeted at preventing wasteful emulation races, there will be true public policy villian to target. And one will be, for example, a progressive consumption tax.
What do we know about peoples’ psychological reaction when relative status races are prevented?
barbara @ 113
Credit the right wingers with brilliant political rhetoric in the sercvice of their tax cut proposals: “It’s your money and you know how to spend it better than any bureaucrat in Washington.”
But it’s the wront way to frame the issue. As a community, we have only so many resources to meet our public and private needs. Unless the right wingers want to come out and say we have not important needs (like bridge inspections and repairs?), they’ve got to be willing to discuss how much tax revenue to devote to which public purposes. Because of budget deficits caused by tax cuts for top earners, the Bush administration recently cut the budget for the energy department’s budget to round up loosely guarded nuclear material in the former Soviet Union. For what? So the rich could build even bigger mansions. It seems to me that any Dem with a clear head ought to be able to make the wingers pay a political price for that.
Daniel @116
I’m the wrong person to ask.
I am not a shopper for health insurance. Sorry.
I believe good health starts and ends with physical exercise and a good diet.
Cujo359 @ 118
You’re not the only one. You’re part of a neighborhood in which all houses are more or less the same.
Robert Frank @ 125
I will read your book. But I have to tell you that the “any Dem with a clear head ought to be able to make the wingers pay a political price for that” does not comfort me. For reasons I can’t fathom, our most visible Dems seem to have fuzzy heads, impaired vision and lockjaw.
Robert Frank @ 51
I’m not convinced these guys are more talented. These salaries are only attracting (and rewarding) the most greedy and cutthroat people, with the biggest sense of entitlement. They’re also the kind of people to place their own wealth and the personal loyalty from others above the needs of the company. I ain’t never worked nowhere where I thought the management knew beans. But they do know how to be very very mean.
Ooops. It is PROJECT PRINCESS
http://www.princessproject.org/princess/
Project Princess (PDF)
Project Princess. REGISTRATION FORM. Registration forms are ONLY accepted from … I am eligible for the free or reduced lunch program: Yes No. I was referred by: …ywca.org/atf/cf/…/Project Princess-registration form.pdf -
wegsc asks: What do we know about peoples’ psychological reaction when relative status races are prevented?
Speaking only from my own experience, Canada’s much stronger social contract seems to put a natural break on the status-race cycle. There’s a strong sense that “we’re all in this together.” This offloads people’s sense of identity (at least somewhat) away from stuff and toward their community affiliations. That, in turn, makes people mindful of their place in the greater order, and seems to reduce the desire to lord their higher status over others.
Robert Frank @ 127
I’m still confused. Everyone in World A has a bigger home than everyone in World B. It’s just the relative size of my home that’s different. Seems like World A would have better property values, and I’d be living among my betters, so to speak. Seems like my (imaginary) kids would be getting a better education than they deserved given my relative economic standing.
Matt Zeitlin @ 121
Please see my response to Daniel Brook’s question.
Robert Frank @ 125
Most excellent.
Why is it that the 90% can’t figure out a way to make the 10% pay their fair share? That should be part of the frame, building on the universal value of fairness.
Cujo359 @ 132
NO !!!!!!
Everyone deserves to get a good education.
Even the kids whose family lives in an apt or a little house or a trailer or whatever.
Thanks again, Cassie.. and Mrs. Robinson. I will find a good use for a dress which I was capable of, but not thrilled to have had to, buy.
snarKassandra @ 135
Sorry Kassandra, I’ve been debating politics with Republicans most of the week. My sarcasm isn’t back in its holster yet.
wesgpc @ 124
No policy can change the fact that half of any group must be in the bottom half. Think of tax policy as a way of reducing the cost of the rat race to get to the top. Rules forbid Formula 1 racing cars from having engines with more that 2.4 liters of displacement. That holds cost down, even though people still compete vigorously to win.
Rayne @ 134
Now this is excellent. George Lakoff would applaud, I think. Me, too! *g*
wini are you in Texas?
http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/…..donate.htm
Audrey @ 117
Audrey @ 116
I don’t eat road kill, although I see it a lot here in CT.
By taking care of oneself, I mean becoming self-reliant. That doesn’t rule out buying organic stuff in my local IGA.
Not that it means anything, but I’m self-employed, and deliberately so.
snarKassandra @ 140
Minnesota
wini @ 142
Maybe call the women’s shelter or the foster care CPS people.
Dr Frank,
You have done an amazing job answering questions. I’ve done a few of these salons and I’ve never seen anyone handle so many.
I don’t want you to feel that you are a prisoner here, however, so feel free to stop any time you want! (And give yourself a nice pat on the back from all of us.)
These are going to be huge issues in the coming year as we get back to talking about economics in terms other than puerile tax cut slogans.
Thank you Dr Frank.
barbara @ 139
As her comment about the dv4000 from the previous thread shows, Rayne has a way of putting things in perspective.
BTW, I think that series of laptop is best used as a blunt instrument. I had the Compaq version – it barely lasted a year.
Cujo359 @ 132
If you pick B your kids go to good schools. If you pick A they go to bad ones.snarKassandra @ 135
Here’s a clearer version of the thought experiment.
World A. Some neighborhoods have 6000-sq-ft houses, your neighborhood has 4000-sq-ft houses.
World B. Some neighborhoods have 2000-sq-ft houses, your neighborhood has 3000 sq-ft houses.
If you pick A your kids go to bad schools. If you pick B they go to good ones.
Thanks, Dr. Frank. “The Trap” was already next up on my reading pile. Now, I’ll go ahead and order up your book, too. Digby’s right: this is going to be a critical topic as our economy begins to rearrange itself in the next few years.
Digby @ 144
Particularly for trying to answer bizarre hypothetical questions.
Sending your DonationBecause we have very little storage space, if you need to mail us dresses, we ask that you send them in January – April only to our P.O. Box (see below). If you would like a tax-receipt, please include a self-addressed stamped envelope, as well as your name, mailing address, and the value of your donation. If you are donating more than five dresses, please contact us to arrange shipping.
The Princess Project
P.o. Box 471045
San Francisco, CA 94147
Donation GuidelinesWe have established firm donation guidelines in an effort to streamline our organizational efforts and solicit goods that will reflect our core values and best serve our constituents.
Dresses MUST be from 2002 to present.
Dresses MUST be dry-cleaned and on hangers.
Dresses MUST be prom dresses, formal gowns, or fancy party dresses.
Accessories MUST be stylish, clean, and in excellent condition.
Robert Frank @ 147
Ah, yes, now it’s clear. Thanks.
Robert Frank says August 12th, 2007 at 3:39 pm:
I guess I am worried about the US getting the same cohesive social compact going as Formula I racing has managed to do! I think you made an argument earlier that changing regimes might be easier now than before because the middle class is sacrifcing important absolute levels of consumption (health care, for instance) that will psychologically outweigh the relative status stuff. And for something like health care, that is would be very important, since a new regime in health care that worked better than what we have now would be hard to break.
For consumer goods and housing, seems like there will always be industries with financial incentive to gin up desire for relative status, and jigger policy to allow self-defeating status races in consumption again. I am worried about how to deal with that politically over time. Against the right wingers, even the very mild post WWII US style social democracy has not done so well.
Cujo359 @ 151
But isn’t it a better question if you know how many people are in your family and how much space you need.
Jonathan @ 140
Oh, I assumed you knew what I was talking about. Just cautioning others who think it’s a good idea and want to try and suggesting they be prepared.
I was self-employed (still am I guess) but deep poverty for a woman over 50 makes that road to invisibility much smoother.
Digby @ 144
Many thanks for your kind words, Digby, and for hosting the event. It’s been fun! By my watch, I still have a few minutes left before I turn into a pumpkin.
Thank you Dr. Frank and Digby!
Robert Frank @ 146
Thank you, Dr. Frank. I was unclear on that as well. Makes sense now.
Dr Frank –
Economics is at the root of so many of our problms in today’s world.
Thank you so much for a really interesting discussion.
Robert Frank @ 78
Dr. Frank,
Thanks for being part of the discussion. Before you go, would you elaborate on your point is this comment?
Of course if it’s a question of renting either one it’s just a point of consumer snobbery to look down on the person who rents the apartment because they “have less.” But if the choice is between renting an apartment or buying a house (or condo) aren’t you still better off in the long run by buying the value of the property for yourself from the mortgage lender instead of buying it for a landlord?
Thanks,
Everyone interested in this subject should read “The Impact of Inequality” by Richard Wilkinson. I can’t do justice to the book in a short comment, but he shows, with huge numbers of health statistics, first that health is correlated with social class (higher class = healthier), and second that the higher the inequality between classes the worse everyone’s health, even those at the top of the scale. The cause of this decrease in health is the stress caused by inequality. PDF of a summary.
Many years ago, I was involved in an ecumenical gathering/initiative centered on just sufficiency. I’ve not thought a lot about that for a while, though we are trying to live more and more simply. Your book and this conversation are a stark (and necessary) reminder about jump-starting that again, at least under our roof and as far and wide as blogs et all will allow.
Thank you so much, Dr. Frank!!
snarKassandra @ 109
Another way is to do jobs for cash. I know several people over 65 getting Social Security who still repair cars, but they won’t let you give them a check. Strictly cash, so no Feds find out.
wesgpc notes: “…even the very mild post-WWII US-style social democracy has not done so well.”
It seems arguable to me that social democracy may, in fact, be a potent cure for the status-race problem. I have family in Sweden — the world’s model social democracy — who also have very reasonable, moderate consumption styles. It seems possible that a strong social democracy changes the mindset in ways that makes it harder to engage in status races.
Dr. Frank, if you’re still around, would you be able to speak to this?
crocodility @ 159
I wasn’t talking about owning vs. renting, but rather about house vs. apartment. It’s possible to own or rent either, and our tax laws do provide significant advantages for owning,
Dr Frank, Thanks for an interesting and timely discussion. I look forward to reading Falling
Behind.
Than you, Dr. Frank.
I appreciate your compassion.
sorry am getting to this so late. assume someone has mentioned the article in the nyt last week or so that focused on the millionaires in silicon valley who are singing the not-enough-money blues. in this new age of plutocracy, that song may get old, but it’ll be in heavy rotation. the times also had that jawdropping profiles of the superrich who actually believe they are self-made folk, and are superrich by the sweat of their brows — just up from the shtetl, really.
question: is it realistic to assume that government can pull tax policy back to something more recognizeable to the rest of us? it took the great depression to galvanize an earlier society, and world war II to jumpstart the economy into something most of us would agree had the right sensitivity toward class issues.
but there wasn’t the machinery and industry back then all set up to make only the pursuit of “more, bigger, another” seem like the only worthwhile objective in this consumerist culture. i worry about my kids — they are made to feel poor because they simply don’t have what others do.
i think it was oliver wendell holmes who explained to his wealthy compatriots that taxes are the price of a civilized society. when did those at the top of the economic pyramid forget that?
more important, how do we get them to remember?
SiliconValleyBrit @ 160
I, too, recommend Wilkinson’s book enthusiastically.Mrs. Robinson @ 163
What’s really different about Sweden is that post-tax incomes are far less unequal there than here, and the social safety net is far more comprehensive. It’s not that status doesn’t matter there, It’s that the race to earn it doesn’t deprive families of the basics.
dmg @ 167
I think the first step is to get politicians to frame the tax issue as “How do WE want to spend OUR money?”
Bob,
Thanks again for being here. I’ve had a ball, and it’s been very instructive.
For those of you who want to get this book, you might also consider buying Bob Frank’s other recent book called “The Economic Naturalist” which asks a bunch of very neat economic questions in a fun format. (I think it should be turned into a board game.) And, also, here’s the NY Times review of both books.
Again, thank you so much, Bob, for coming here. This is the kind of book that makes your arcane subject understandable to laymen as well as give us insight into how we perceive our world. Thanks for writing it.
Thanks to Robert Frank for coming here. I think the comments re social democracy and emphasizing the reduced cost of status races as are very good ways the frame the issue:
“What’s really different about Sweden is that post-tax incomes are far less unequal there than here, and the social safety net is far more comprehensive. It’s not that status doesn’t matter there, It’s that the race to earn it doesn’t deprive families of the basics.”
snarKassandra @ 153
I have a lot of old junk. (None of it prom dresses, I’m afraid).
But seriously, it’s a hypothetical question. In reality, either house is more than I need. What really counts, I think, is what that differential in property values and/or status means for you, and how you feel about that differential.
Take the other hypothetical pair of worlds – C and D. In C, I get four weeks vacation while most folks get six. It’s more than I get now, and more than most folks do, so it seems like a good deal. But suppose I didn’t know about that my alternative was World D. How would I feel about that? Spare time is something I value. I suspect I’d feel a bit put out that others got more than I did, even though I’m better off than I’d be in World D, I might not be any happier.
Robert Frank @ 169
thanks so much for your response — i think john edwards is working that way, though it remains to be seen just how much traction he gets with it (and how much note the other dems take of it).
and thanks VERY much for spending time with us here. your book was already on my list of mustreads — it’s just moved up to the head of the line.
A phrase that I remember from years ago was “aspirational politics”. The Republican’s had positioned themselves as the party of “the rich and the wanna be and gonna be rich”.
This was something that I know lots of my family back in the midwest got into. They wanted out of “the poor” aka Democrat, party. They didn’t WANT to associate with the working class. They wanted to be rich and that being rich meant not making it tough for the current rich or the wannabes when they (ultimately) arrive in the world of the rich.
When we look at who pushes these ideas I know that some of it comes from advertising, I also believe it comes from the neo-conservative right-wing radio. They want to rich like Rush, even when the policies of the Republican’s actually destroy them.
Is there a message that is positive that can be delivered to the “aspirational” people?
snarKassandra @ 135,
I’m glad you saw that too.
See, this is how messages like that get into our heads. Real sneakily, not by our own choosing. People have begun to believe that kids deserve good schools if they have rich parents. They hear that message over and over and over…
And just like you, I say NO!
Did Abraham Lincoln not deserve to learn to read and write because he only had wood and charcoal to write with? Hell no!
Hearth Moon @ 129
this is a great point dr. frank
we see ceo’s bringing bussinesses to their knees and they get folden parchutes
For those who are interested:
Stuff by George Carlin
http://video.google.com/videop…..4482448693
If you’re older, you might be better off renting. Talk to a financial adviser about the possible pitfalls in buying when you’re a “senior citizen”.
I’ll admit to buying a new car (five years ago), but I can honestly say that it was a good deal: the old car was more than 20 years old, and the new one is much more fuel-efficient (also, at this point, paid for.)
mr. frank- i heard the diane rehm show you were on……was a good show…..
my parents, who could afford the 13,000 grill replaced their grill with a large george foreman grill….maybe under 100….they do volksmarch walks, and at the end, they grill out and donate the proceeds to cerebral palsy……
they are responsible, not frugal…i come from wealth, had wealth in my work, but am now disabled…..
i live in a poor county, where people are resourceful and frugal…but also have friends with disposable income…….i am on a limited income….on dialup, no cable…new books aren’t in my budget..but i don’t feel like i am disadvantaged……i have my own home, and because of where i live, i have more home than if i lived in the city…..i only buy what i use that week….i don’t buy things i don’t need right now….that has been a revelation, all the things i used to buy of what i was ‘going to do next’……if you are responsible with your consuming, you are happy……you don’t feel like you are doing without……
when i go home, to the city, which is once a month, to help my mom and sister make pizzas for cerebral palsy fund raiser at my mom’s elks, i am in a different land, of wealth…..i never feel like i have less because they are responsible with what they have..they don’t throw money around…..they use their money to help others….mom donates all of the ingredients for the pizzas and does things directly in her community to help others….adopts 10 families at christmas, and man, she loads it out to them….including books for the kids, she’s a retired principal and reading teacher…both of my parents spend more money in their community than they spend on themselves, they are great…..dad is a retired corporate accountant, yes, an honest one with a conscience………but i can’t do that type of thing, my budget is strict and tight…….sure, sometimes i wish i could just go browse at the stores and buy whatever i want like i used to, but then i have this overwhelming sense of satisfaction that i already have what i need really, and anything i would buy, i don’t really need………..and i remember the first time that feeling hit me…….
i only have a computer because one of my best friends donated one to another friend who rebuilt it for me……..
so i see the consumerism on a level that i don’t think most see it as-as something you CAN do without…….don’t feed the need to supplant what is bothering you or that you don’t have with buying the newest bestest thing out there……..it doesn’t buy you happiness, that i can attest to.
around here, people are either well to do, or poor……there is no middle ground……i have learned that the poor around here have a sense of self-sufficiency that brings them more happiness than the better off have…….
and this comes from someone who grew up with and has every advantage…buy less, use what you already have more……
dmg @ 167
As a long-time resident in Silicon Valley with a history of working is startups, I commend the letter to the editor from Annie Godfrey, published the day following the Silicon Valley article. The spirit of the Valley is along the lines of “if you aren’t failing most of the time, you aren’t trying hard enough”. Since almost everyone who has been here long enough has several failures in their resume, its easier to recognize the huge element of sheer luck in the successes. After all, its the same people at the successes who were at the failures before.
The article is here.
spocko @ 174
Ugh. They want to be like a fat, soft, pasty slob of a man who can afford to fly to third-world countries and have sex with underaged prostitutes because he can’t land a woman of his own here in the States?
Just ugh.
How ’bout that message?
Rayne: Well you and I can say ugh, but of course they see just the money and the power.
I listened to Rush respond to the LVTsteel guy who had lost his health care. He was so heartless about it but I KNEW that my relatives back in the Midwest would not hear the heartless message but the “other people are getting away with something that I can’t” message. He sent the message that “I don’t expect benefits after I don’t work at a company any longer”
He did not talk about the way the deal was cut he went to the total false comparison. That the things that the union negotiated with a corporation in good faith could be thrown away because the corporation didn’t keep up their end of the contract.
spocko @ 182
I don’t know, spocko, wish I had the answer besides a return to the Fairness Doctrine on all publicly-owned airwaves.
The message Dr. Frank has to share is incredibly important, but people that cannot hear the entire message that the likes of Oxy-moron Limbaugh are propelling are not going to take the time to listen to him.
I can only wonder if we should launch a very simple ad campaign based on the question: Are you better off now? I can’t believe that Joe Sixpack thinks so after his wages have been eaten by adjustable mortgage rates on iffy loans, increased gasoline expenses and both heating and health care expenses.
SiliconValleyBrit @ 180
the second article i was referencing was a july 15 3,800-word opus by louis uchitelle, called AGE OF RICHES; The Richest of the Rich, Proud of a New Gilded Age
it had mostly to do with bank and financial-services types, sandy weill and the like.
folks in silicon valley at the very least create stuff that eventually changes other people’s lives presumably for the better. wall street? not so much.
How about.
30% Income tax. No Exemptions, No Deductions.
2% Property tax. No Exemptions
10% Sales tax. No exemptions.
Split the money between the government and a basic income given to all on an equal basis.
It is automatically progressive without treating anyone differantly, as the wealthy would receive the basic income as well.
The average person is unaffected.
This would also attack the tax avoidance industry and has no class warfare elements.
Digby @ 69
The best two years of my life I worked at a hotel overseas. I had a tiny room BUT housekeeping, laundry, and cafeteria service were included. Fewer cubic meters than where I live now, but a lot less cleaning to worry about. This would suit me fine. Upkeep and maintenance are the biggest drawbacks to living in the biggest of spaces.
Jonathan @ 141
The latest road kill…(no not the dog-purse)
Mortgage Originated Credit Crunch
MayJustBeBeginningMSM-fed folks have no idea what’s coming. I didn’t expect it to hit until Sept-Oct. but it is already here and it is much more massive than all the central banks put together can staunch. You think $350 billion is alot? Hah, it’s a drop in the bucket and it won’t be the last.
The only question — how much will it take to end the panic. Call it the 64 trillion dollar question. (Risk exposure multiplied by risk beta and you get a number in that ballpark. [Actually, the number is $17T x 6 == $102T].)
Gulp. (Plus road kill will be hard to find with almost nobody driving…)
But it might delay global warming for a few years, so who’s complaining?
Sorry I missed this while it was live, but a very good conversation. My (belated) thanks to Dr. Frank for participating, and to Digby for hosting it.
I wonder this:
If Bush had NOT pushed and gotten those huge tax cuts for the wealthy, and had instead invested those dollars in a much better manner (such as health care, intrastructure, homeland security), and didn’t squander the $500 billion or so on Iraq…
where would we all be today?
I was doing pretty good as a low income earner 8 years ago. I ate, could afford gas, and once a month we had a family night out. Now, I am hungry more often, gas for the lawn mower is too expensive to mow the grass, and ALL family nights have been off the table now for years.
And my friends say I’m crazy when I blame it all on Bush!
Great article Doctor Frank. They psychology of
that BBQ grill is so right on. I bought in a
new development in Arizona. I settled for a
tract about a 1/2 notch lower than the one I first looked at and liked. When I came back a second time a few months later, all the good floor plans and lots were gone. I continued to look and ended up buying where I am at as a
compromise. I have been unhappy almost since day one until recently. The market is so slow and i am not willing to take the type of hit I would have to take to move the house. I finally have digested this and realized that even had I of bought in the first development
I would probably be yearning for the next superior tract that is built. I decided to fall in love with my 3000 square foot home,
3 car garage, and pool, and quit being a spoiled brat American, always wanting more.
If you only offer people automobiles that run on gasoline, then you get in a bind when gasoline becomes $20/gallon.
Free Enterprisers often say “Competition is good” and then CEOs do everything they can to avoid it, so they can make more profits.
I say, let’s use government, not to regulate prices, but to ensure there are more competitions. Let’s make sure there are more kinds of cars on the road, so the public (through self-interest) can pick the best way. I say, let’s make sure there are sufficient variety of kinds of houses, so people can pick the right size, right price and right shade of “green” for them.
Instead of regulating people to death we ought to let people be relatively free and give them lots of choices (as Milton Friedman often said “free to choose”, but Republicans avoided) so in this vast economic democracy decisions are made which are better than any small unrepresentative government might make.
If done well there will be LESS (though not zero) need to break up large monopolistic corporations or to tariff international trade or to regulate industry.
Let’s test the theory of Competitive Enterprise.
To help introduce competetive enterprise we might use government to begin something and then spin it off into a private-sector (perhaps) publicly held company…just to start competition where it’s lagging.
Mrsanfran @ 190
And then there are people like me and my family that drool at the thought of eating a steak!
Robert,
After reading Digby’s discussion of your book, I found myself getting very curious about those expensive grills! I did a quick search, but so far the most expensive one I have been able to find is a Lynx Professional for about $9,300. They have all kinds of accessories, though, so I guess it might be possible to get one all tricked out with every gadget and extension and thereby bring the price closer to $13,000.
I wish I could say I was drooling over these luxurious grills, but to be honest I’m not one for cooking outside much. Not to mention that we can’t afford anything like that.
I suppose I could get excited over some computers and huge monitors, but I’m not sweating it. I don’t have that much longing for material things. But I do long for time and convenience and some nice, pretty place to live. That would be great. Yet I don’t think I’m much influenced by wealthy people. I’m probably an exception in that regard.
Now, as for status, that is something else. I have to confess, shamefacedly, that I am envious of status. I very much dislike being this way, and I try to suppress and hide such feelings, but then something will slip out occasionally when I’m talking, and I realize how bad I really am about being “bigger.”
This cursed longing for status seems to be embedded into my personality! Ugh. Maybe some day I’ll be able to clear it out of my head. It would be a great relief, but at the same time I don’t completely want to let it go. It’s sort of like an evil pride.
I hope my confession will not be considered off topic. This is an interesting subject, at least to me.
Bryan @ 189
Your “friends?” Does that make you pause?