A Problem of Nihilism: Essay 2

For this next essay, I apologize to anyone put off by the sudden veering into political critiques and US history. That seems to be where I began heading toward an impasse, when the first essay would lead one to believe I was going to address a larger philosophical issue. (But who knows where things will wind up eventually?) The original intent, in any event, was a writing exercise of 500-word essays (in which I was working out some issues I was preoccupied by).

-----------------------

"A Problem of Nihilism: Essay 2"

 

So, those are some things to think about if one cared to. A bit dreary, I suppose. But this is not a quest for sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows.

Nor is it meant to be an argument for atheism. But doubts about any purpose to the world or the existence of God are a bit inevitable if we talk about criminal behavior and mass murder.

And that brings us to Donald Trump and our Republican Party. It all began when Rupert Murdoch sought to become an agent of conservative propaganda in the US... Oh, no, wait -- back up; it did not all start with Rupert Murdoch. Or with those Koch brothers, or that Adelson guy. Those withered old Säcke Scheiße were only the result -- the nadir if you will pardon my language -- of a still more ancient phenomenon.

It would be best to start about a hundred years ago when the US government had to be concerned with monopolies in industries and natural resources. And this was not just some fuss raised by guys who fought in the streets, waved red flags, and carried Communist Party membership cards. A few wealthy people in control of key sectors of an economy meant there was too much power in the hands of too few "citizens." As that became more of a problem, it led to antitrust laws.

But that was a small bump in the road for those who liked to have a few wealthy people in charge of everyone's lives. A reaction set in, and unchecked capitalism was soon on the march once more. Or at least it was until the stock market crashed in 1929, leading to the Great Depression. This time government had to step in for the sake of survival. A new one led by Franklin Roosevelt provided public relief through various programs and legislation and sought to put people back to work.

For some, it was a frighteningly socialistic time. And there would be more omens to come. The government had nationalized the radio airwaves in 1927. A few years later, the Communications Act of 1934 would reaffirm that the means for broadcasting -- how the people would get news and entertainment -- was "public property." (The same would apply to television as well.)

The United States emerged from the Depression by mobilizing to fight the Second World War. Roosevelt's leadership in both crises inspired some consensus about the beneficial aspects of the "New Deal." As a result, the Democratic Party would dominate the US Congress from 1933 to 1995. But the country also experienced the "unrest" of the 1960s and '70s. (Which meant the Civil Rights Movement, antiwar protests, urban riots, liberalized social norms, and so on.)

Americans Are Happy Where They Are

[Originally posted at The Education Forum circa 7 July 2007]

The following information is from Time Almanac 2000, with Information Please. The Millennium Collector's Edition. Ed. Borgna Brunner. Boston: Family Education Company, 1999, p. 838.

A brief article, "The Rich Get Richer," reads as follows:

"In September 1999, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) released a report examining the distribution of after-tax income among Americans in 1977 and 1999. The report, which is based on data from the Congressional Budget Office, shows that despite tax increases on high-income households in 1990 and 1993, this group has received large tax cuts overall since 1977. The result has been a widening of the gap between the rich and the poor.

"The CBPP report breaks the U.S. population into fifths based on after-tax household income level. According to the report, the top one percent of Americans made an average gain of 115% in after-tax income between 1977 and 1999. The top one-fifth also fared well, gaining 43%. In contrast, the middle fifth made only 8% more and the bottom fifth in fact saw its average income decline by 9%. The next-to-bottom fifth did not change significantly."

The data for this is as follows (U.S. Average After-Tax Income in 1977 and 1999):

The lowest 1/5 income group had an average after-tax income in 1977 of $10,000 a year (5.7% of all US income); in 1999 the lowest fifth was projected to have an average income of $8,800 (4.2% of all income).

The second-lowest 1/5 income group had an average income in 1977 of $22,100 a year (11.5% of all income); in 1999 this income group was projected to have average income of $20,000 (9.7% of all income).

The middle group had an average income in 1977 of $32,400 a year (16.4% of all income); in 1999 this group projected to have average income of $31,400 (14.7% of all income).

The fourth 1/5 income group in 1977 had an average income of $42,600 a year (22.8% of all income); in 1999 this group projected to have average income of $45,100 (21.3% of all income).

The highest 1/5 income group in 1977 had an average income of $74,000 a year (44.2% of all income); in 1999 this group projected to have average income of $102,300 (50.4% of all income).


Meanwhile, the top one percent had an average income of $234,700 a year in 1977 (7.3% of all income); in 1999 the top one percent projected to have average after-tax annual income of $515,600 (12.9% of all US income).

"NOTE: Figures rounded to nearest hundred dollars.... Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Web: www.cbpp.org. (Based on data from the Congressional Budget Office.)" (Ibid.)

Although no indication is given either way, I assume these figures are in constant 1996 dollars (like the minimum wage data below; otherwise $10,000 in 1977 would be a much larger amount than $8,800 twenty years later). But even assuming so, it's noticeable that income becomes "depressed" the lower you go on the income scale (see minimum wage rates below for similar indications of "depressed income").

One of the interesting things about this is that while the highest income group was the only one that actually increased its "percentage share" of all after-tax income (44.2% to 50.4%), it seems likely that the illusion of "upward mobility" for the second-highest group (and similar notions of incremental improvement in the middle groups) helped offset the reality that there was little or no substantive improvement in their own "position." (The first four groups are separated by around $10,000 ascending increases, until that last group, where there's a big jump in differential -- $45,000 to $100,000.) In other words, the vast, vast majority (4/5ths) of Americans can "aspire" to after-tax annual income of around $50,000, and all their income put together only makes up half of all such income.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the following data, the year and its corresponding US federally-mandated minimum wage rate is given, followed in parentheses by the constant value of that rate in 1996 dollars. [1]

1955: $0.75 ($4.39)
1956: $1.00 ($5.77)

1957: $1.00 ($5.58)

................................................................................

1960: $1.00 ($5.30)

1961: $1.15 ($6.03)

1962: $1.15 ($5.97)

1963: $1.25 ($6.41)

1964: $1.25 ($6.33)

1965: $1.25 ($6.23)

1966: $1.25 ($6.05)

1967: $1.40 ($6.58)

1968: $1.60 ($7.21)

1969: $1.60 ($6.84)

1970: $1.60 ($6.20)

................................................................................

1973: $1.60 ($5.65)

1974: $2.00 ($6.37)

1975: $2.10 ($6.12)

1976: $2.30 ($6.34)

1977: $2.30 ($5.95)

1978: $2.65 ($6.38)

1979: $2.90 ($6.27)

1980: $3.10 ($5.90)

1981: $3.35 ($5.78)

1982: $3.35 ($5.45)

................................................................................

1988: $3.35 ($4.44)

1989: $3.35 ($4.24)

1990: $3.80 ($4.56)

1991: $4.25 ($4.90)

1992: $4.25 ($4.75)

1993: $4.25 ($4.61)

...............................................................................

1995: $4.25 ($4.38)

1996: $4.75 ($4.75)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] "Adjusted for inflation using the CPI-U. Source: U.S. Employment Standards Admin. Web: www.dol.gov/esa/public/miniwage." (Ibid., p. 828.)

One conclusion may be that from the time of the Kennedy Administration until the Reagan Administration there was some consensus that a "reasonable" minimum wage rate was about $6.00 an hour (in 1996 dollars). Since then apparently even $5.00 an hour was too much to hope for.

To put this in context, I know plenty of people who've worked the same jobs for 25 years or so and make a good living earning about 3 times the 1996 value of the minimum wage circa 1962; this is "more" in today's terms because it's roughly 4 times as much as current minimum wage rates.

To put this in more context, where I live factory workers consider themselves lucky to start out at $10.00 an hour, which is not much more than what minimum wage would've been in the 1960s. And there's always uncertainty because of extremely inexpensive labor pools in other countries (where democratic government as such is lacking, to say nothing of basic bargaining rights, and so various commodities can be produced at much cheaper cost and sold at cheaper prices).