General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy the candidates are always for middle class but never address the issue about poor people?
They need help too!
PSPS
(13,599 posts)Many people tend to think that, if they're employed, they're a member of the "middle class." While that was fairly accurate 40 years ago when people were paid a living wage (and only one household income could at least reliably house, feed and clothe a family,) this is the reality today:
Median household income in the US: $52,000 (US Census 2013)
$52K Income percentile (all filers): 56% (indicates $52K is higher than 56% of the rest of the country.)
But politicians seem to like using the figure of "up to" $125K as a definition of "middle class."
$125K Income percentile (all filers): 84%
JI7
(89,250 posts)some think if they aren't out in the streets they are middle class.
the same is true of some middle class and a bit higher classes who think they are part of the 1 percent but not even close to it.
Joe Chi Minh
(15,229 posts)pitch their articles as though at someone in the class immediately higher than the one of the people they are actually addressing.
JustAnotherGen
(31,828 posts)Don't realize they are the working poor.
Someone gave the $52K median income as middle class per the census.
I can see that for a family of four in Nebraska where housing costs less.
In Central NJ where a two bedroom apartment or 3 bedroom duplex starts at $1600 - $52K makes a family of four the working poor. That's why the NJ 7th is so red. Many of these "$50K families" think Trump is talking about people in Newark even though they will be stopping bu our food bank when I'm there this morning.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)Class is used as a comparative to others. That's why so many people earning far below and far above the median income think of themselves as middle class. I grew up in a very low income neighborhood. The few home owners thought of themselves as middle class, even though their earnings were barely enough to keep their families above the poverty level. At the other extreme I remember a college classmate from a wealthy New Jersey suburb describe her family as middle class because they lived in an older area with smaller houses than the rest of town. Her father's income was modest in comparison to others in that town.
And then there's the issue of using a national median income as a proxy for middle class. As 50K doesn't go far in metro NY, it's a better than average income in many small towns around the country.
I try to avoid using class as a label and use income levels instead.
MiniMe
(21,716 posts)Action is what counts
CTyankee
(63,912 posts)for free. they say the poor get welfare, food stamps, health care -- all things the "middle" class says they "work hard for." And the republicans do everything to promote that belief along so they can get the "middle" class vote.
brer cat
(24,567 posts)The republicans are masters at pushing that narrative and the ignorant lap it up.
CTyankee
(63,912 posts)whenver we need the front walk snow shoveled and other help for us oldsters -- even she says this. I know she's a republican but it's hard for me to reconcile this belief with her personal niceness. I don't think she says it with malice. I think she just believes it...
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)And blame them for their own misfortune.
Even your OP underscored the subtle sub-consious manipylation. "They need help too". The poor are the only ones that need help and helping them STILL provides the more indirect benefits to the middle class.
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)b) Most people like to believe they are in the middle class whether it is true or not (or if it even exists)
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)There are rarefied exceptions among the comfortable middle (the ones that show up at food banks to work for example) and a nearly extinct few among the upper classes, soon to be an extinct specie I think.
But for the most part, if you are poor, have been poor or have grown up poor and escaped it temporarily (often only to become poor again once your body gives out as in my case), you quickly learn that the only people willing to help you are other poor people.
We take care of each other as best we can, but the rest consider us a burden on society to be ignored, ridiculed or abused. We are growing in number exponentially and are invisible, except when we are targets.
Few in politics appear to realize that there are far more poor people than those that are not at this point, most of whom do work and always much harder and longer hours than their comfortable white collar betters that the politicians cater to.
The only politicians that ever cared about the poor were the Socialists and for a time the FDR type Democrats (another nearly extinct specie) - From a pragmatic standpoint the party lost the poor vote when the party began attacking us with welfare reform and cuts to social programs and began to ignore us in earnest. As a result of this voter turnout is quite low for such a large population and politicians believe it best to ignore the poor because they do not vote.
I understand the cold pragmatism of the centrist Democrats that ignore us because we don't vote, but don't understand how as human beings they do not care how many of us and our children are living in cars or in boxes and most do not have enough to eat let alone the comforts of life enjoyed by the "middle class".
I am the rare poor person that does vote, largely to keep the knife at our throats (so close to our jugular) slicing at a slower pace in the hopes that someday things will change in politics before we bleed out. The knife was taken from our throats once by FDR and his ilk and I do realize it was largely to protect Capitalism from an inevitable rise of Communism with so many desperate people having become so poor and running out of options at the time. But it did happen and out of this grew the middle class that was once strong and could even be reached by the poor because upward mobility was still possible.
If the poor vote were ever had, the one that had it would win because we are legion now even if the country pretends we do not exist, perhaps Bernie can get that vote, perhaps he can redo what FDR did, it will take a revolution and he is the only one in a very long time willing to lead that revolution as FDR did so long ago.
One thing is known to me beyond guesswork, if that does not happen soon via Bernie's movement or some other peaceful revolution there has only ever been one other outcome in all of history, a different sort of revolution with blood and a very poor chance that after such a revolution things would improve, because often after those sorts of revolutions the new boss is as bad or worse than the last. So the comfortable middle that can still be seen should take that in consideration rather than simply worrying that their own threatened comfort is now at risk and start caring about the poor that you now ignore and their interests as well.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Marketing, marketing....
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The new Narrative:
Don't mention the poor.
So no one thinks about the poor.
Therefore the poor are no longer a problem.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1997/03/the-worst-thing-bill-clinton-has-done/376797/
Recursion
(56,582 posts)So a politician who wants to win needs to address the top three quintiles.