Street roots
February 6, 2009
Elsewhere, from page 8
D.C j I think something I probably didn’t
touch on enough in the book is that most
people in this class really enjoy their work.
You re right, it s not boring. Because of
computerization, the really mind-numbing
parts of many jobs have been replaced by
computers, or computers have allowed
outsourcing for that. I think that makes
people like their jobs more. It means that
they're willing to work more, but it
impacts on the rest of their life. It takes
away from the joys of family, community
and leisure.
AJL: You say in the book that leisure is
now something that only the poor can
afford. Can you give me an example?
D.C.: Well, for the first time in labor
history the further up the income ladder
you go, the more hours people work, and
the further down you go, the fewer hours
you work.
AJL: As you write in the book, “The
more you earn, the more you work."
D.C.: Yeah, it used to be that you used
the additional income, if you were doing
well, to buy leisure* time. And now the
opportunity cost of not working in this
anxious environment trumps that effect. If
your billable rate goes from $50 to $75 an
hour, then all of a sudden it's actually
costing you more to take time off.
So, instead of using that extra $25 an
hour to buy leisure, you're panicked and
you're working more because it costs you
more not to work. That is a fundamental
shift. I think the poor, who are often doing
service jobs that are psychologically
taxing, or more physical jobs, jobs that are
more rote and less fun so to speak, have
less incentive to work from a non
economic point of view.
AJL: You also say in the book that a
great number of things we do in our daily
lives that look like work also look like
leisure. Why is that happening?
D.C.: One reason is that we do like our
work more. That makes us want to do
those kind of things. Secondly, I think
there is this notion in this weightless
economy that getting ahead is as much
about who you know as what you know, as
the saying goes.
And that's not wrong. Social capital, as
sociologists call it, is real capital in this
knowledge economy. And because work
has impinged on so many areas of life, it
they're going to socialize, people are more
likely to socialize with people who might
be potential colleagues or clients. All
social encounters are potential work
opportunities.
AH? Forty or 50 years ago, there was
no way people would have said that it’s as
much about who you know as what you
know.
D.C.: Yeah, 50 years ago there was an
obsession with meritocracy. Companies
used testing agencies to try to predict who
was going to be the most productive and
rise to the top. We cared about the scores
on these personality and IQ tests. We still
use those technologies to a certain extent,
but today a lot of the economy is about
social relationships. The skill of having a
good social network or a useful social
network is a real skill. At one time it was
seen as almost nepotistic to rely on social
connections, and today that tension has
been resolved because the Rolodex is such
an important part of any business.
gaps get bigger as you go up, the rise in
the inequality gets bigger as you go up. So
you can never feel like you're getting
ahead. If you're anywhere in the top half of
the distribution it's kind of like red shift in
the galaxies in the universe. It looks like
everything's rushing away from you.
D.C.: Exactly. So a second-order effect
on inequality is the fact that the jobs being
created are almost feudalists in nature,
essentially serving the needs of the
knights and the overlords, who are too
busy to do these tasks themselves.
AJL: So when we speak about
inequality' among the top 50 percent, it
isn't so much to do with wages flatlining,
de-industrialization or taxation.
AJL: Janet Mas!in in a review in the
New York Times said your book is
outdated on the subject of layoffs.
D.C.: I would say wage inequality is
increasing largely because of skill bias
technological change, which is the
technical term for computers and
AJL: And you can't independently test
automation. Computers either doing jobs
the usefulness of a
directly or allowing
person's social
for them to be
network.
'The real people that are
outsourced to the
bearing the brunt are not
D.C.: Right
famous call centers
Because the tasks
the people I'm writing
in India, or running
that are involved
assembly lines
about. They're the people at
are generally very
through automation.
the
bottom
half
of
the
intangible. It's hard
And giving a
to even say what a
income distribution. The
premium to people
meritocratic
who are essentially
poor, the more marginal
assessment for
the masters of the
workers, always get
many of these
technology and have
screwed first."
things would be.
a big skill set
There's no
AJL: Hence the
question that wage
sense of insecurity that many feel.
inequality for individual workers has
D.C.: That’s contributed to it, because
increased dramatically. But if you look at
there's nothing that you can grab on to.
total household inequality of family
That you scored a perfect score on your
income, that's risen even more. And
SATs, well, so what? That’s not what we're
almost half of that has to do with the fact
doing these days.
that women are now workers, combined
with the changing nature of marriage,
AJL: Can you explain the economic red
meaning that there's more “assortive of
shift? I find that concept really fascinating.
mating” or marriage of similars. Now,
business executives want to marry their
D.C.: Sure. That's the notion that every
business partners. That has a blackjack
year since the year I was bom, 1969 — I
effect of doubling down your bet, so before
hope I’m not the cause — inequality has
in the 1950s, the janitor was married, and
risen. And most people think when they
the executive was married, and neither of
hear that, and what I used to think, is that
their wives’ worked. Only 17 percent of
it’s tHe story <6f the nch getting ficKer and"''
the poor getting poorer, as my Mom used
to tell me during the Reagan era. But
when I grew up and looked at the data, it
turns out that that's not what’s going on.
It's the rich getting richer, and the middle
and the bottom staying the same.
So what’s really happening is if you look
at where the average American family is
versus the bottom, that gap has not gotten
bigger. What’s gotten bigger is the gap
between the average American family and
the rich. All the way up, and the further
up you go - to the 95th percentile, to the
98th percentile, to the 99th percentile, to
the top one-tenth of 1 percent - the huger
the gaps get And they’ve been rising
every year.
I think if I had to take one factor that
contributes to this anxiety, it’s that when
you’re in the top half, even if you're doing
better, or almost especially if you re doing
better, as you look up, people are pulling
away from you. And the gaps get larger
and larger. Because income is /
exponentially distributed and because the
women with children worked in the 195Os,
and if either of those were in the 17
percent, it was more likely to be the
janitor’s wife because they needed the
extra money.
Today, that’s completely reversed. The
wives of high-income men are more likely
to be working than the wives of low-
income men. And they're not the
secretaries anymore. Therefore, you re
literally doubling the level of income
inequality as the janitor marries the
cashier.
A.H.: And the result of two doctors
marrying is that neither spouse has the
time to do some of the household work.
D.C.: The unpaid labor. Yeah.
AJL: You point out that some of the
things we do to cope with inequality
actually make it worse. The fastest _
growing job sector in this economy is
supposed to be food service and
preparation.
D.C.: I did not like that review. I was
arguing that job security and job tenure
has not declined, and she’s saying that
that's outdated.
Famous last words, but: I don’t think
this is the Great Depression all over again.
I think that the white-collar layoffs always
get way more attention. As much as you
and I both know whitecollar folks have
been laid off, we pay a lot more attention
to the high unemployment rate now
because of the media frame. The real
people that are bearing the brunt are not
the people I’m writing about They’re the
people at the bottom half of the income
distribution. The poor, the more marginal
workers, always get screwed first.
The myth of white-collar downsizing
layoffs has been around since the 1990s
and so far hasn’t been true. It could be
that this is a brave new world, but I'm not
so sure. I think that Obama is very smartly
playing this up so that he can pass his
agenda.
AJL: Your book addresses those in the
top half, income-wise. Some on the left
espouse a kind of populism that links the
bottom 80 percent, or so, in common
cause. What's the likelihood of that?
D.C.: I think that professionals could get
together and say, “We want to work but we
time.
We want a break.1’ The nyoucouTdsee a
want our lives back. We want leisure
push from both traditional labor, the
working class, and this professional class
to limit work hours the way they do in
France, for example. But that would be so
against American tradition that I don't
really see that happening.
What really might bring things back into
line is if the stock market continues to
decline. That will lower inequality quite a
bit. In turn, that will change the politics
and the anxiety level among professionals
and might make them more open to social
welfare benefits, labor laws, a safety net.
The stock market doing badly for a while
creates less inequality across all the
income spectrums. Everybody sort of
compresses together. It’s actually when
people feel secure that they stop looking
out for themselves in a panicked way and
are able to think about the common good.
Reprinted from Real Change News,
Seattle, Wash. © Street News Service:
www.street-papers.org
Albina Community Ba
BY JULIE MARTIN
T he A labaster B ox - w»n Reuet
Cold C«< Bronze I3’xn=xl" $125^^
Cold Cait Bronze; 6.g* x 5.5* x .Og $65
Meet Your Local Branch Manager.
“Communities aren't just streets and build-
ings. Communities are thriving places
where cultures, commerce and souls grow
stronger together.
Hydroitone; 6-5’« 5-5"
-Mary
BELLA PERM
gallery
Mary Edmeades
Social Impact Banking
503.445.2155
m6dmeades@albinabank.com
W NW 9™ Avenue . Portland. OR 97^9
Phone: 5O3.222.l862
.dUUEMARTlN.NET ANO IN OUR
s are available online at WWW.
LSJ E»»/*
At Albina Community Bank the most ordinary
financial transaction can have an extraordinary
impact on our local community.
You’re going to bank somewhere,
why not let your banking make a difference in
the places where you live and work?