It's curious that progressives are so unhappy these days. They have a lot to be proud of! Here's a collection of changes over the past decade in the condition of the poor:
There's been good progress almost everywhere. The only real dim spots (red bars) are in housing. This progress, needless to say, is due entirely to liberals, and they should be blowing their own horns about it more.
NOTE: I hardly think I need to say this, but all the metrics based on money are adjusted for inflation.
Kevin says trickle-down is working - people at the lower end are actually getting something from the large increases in GDP and national wealth over the last 50 years.
White Republican voters look nostalgically at say the 50's when non-whites, women and gays were kept in their places. Some liberals look nostalgically at the period from the bottom of the Depression (1933) to the 70's when economic inequality was decreasing and major strides were made in racial and sexual equality. Although Democratic politicians have contributed to the increase in inequality by buying into neoliberalism (which Kevin likes), shifting support to Republicans is certainly not going to improve matters for lower-income people. Those on the left who complain about lack of economic improvement and opportunity should not be tearing down Biden - things were no better under Trump and will get worse the longer Republicans are in power.
Many of the gains are the opposite of trickle-down:
- Minimum-wage increases in states and cities
- ACA health-care coverage expansion
- Social-welfare spending
- Student loan relief
Most of these implemented by Democrats, or directly by voters through ballot initiatives.
Yes.
Well, that's a great chart, except you have to weigh the categories.
I mean you didn't put "access to health care" so I would rank the top three as (1) housing, (2) Food insecurity and (3) access to health care.
The wealth inequality, while nice, is not even close to the top three I listed, because while in an economic sense (and a sophisticated economic sense at that) "wealth inequality" has an effect on "housing" -- if people have good housing wealth inequality is really a secondary consideration.
By this chart, I mean, its bad, you can't have homelessness and rent going south and tell a person that things are looking good because their minimum wage job went up more than all the lawyers who eat in the restaurant they work in.
To the extent we don't have a permanent Dem majority I blame a total lack of focus on housing. I mean, in Los Angeles the last time I looked Section 8 had like over a five year waiting list. Come on!
P.S., does "uninsured" mean health care? If so, my point (3) was on the list, but I stand by (1) and (2) as being like north of 80% of what any poor person would care about.
This also brings up something that would be right in Kevin's wheelhouse but I doubt can be done in a blog post.
We know that for, say the wealthy, they personally may be fine but they see an increase in homelessness, which really only affects them in some theory, like a dislike for graffiti on a freeway wall they drive by every day, as the country "going to shit."
But its only going to shit for the actual homeless. And, I suppose, someone who lives right near the homeless. And, I suppose, partially someone who has to walk by the homeless.
But what about the lower middle class? Do they feel better if things go better for them but not the truly poor?
I don't know, but I would guess that seeing how bad it can be if you are laid off from your current job is not, like a fantastic thing to see.
Because Progressives / Hard Left are fundamentally people who see the half empty view, and nothing less than total utopia is worth celebrating.
Indeed, anything that isn't their version of utopia automatically makes them unhappy. Real liberals know better.
Funny story… many of those “poor” adults either don’t vote or will vote for trump. Is that right? Where’s the chart?
They vote for trump for the same reason they are poor. They really aren’t all that smart.