Last Sunday’s Seattle Times’ feature story was on the
“unequal” economic recovery in the state,
and I quote:
“In the Seattle area, the top 5
percent of households — those making at least $230,000 in 2007 — saw their
earnings fully recover to pre-recession levels. Meanwhile, the group earning
less than $32,500 when the recession started — the bottom 20 percent — saw
their incomes decline further…Most of the jobs lost in the state between 2007
and 2013 paid less than $30 an hour, while the number of jobs paying $54 or
more an hour saw big gains. That contrast was even more stark in King County,
where jobs paying $54 vior more an hour have soared.”
Two other recent local reports
likely explained some of this. A Times’
columnist fulminated joyously at the recent Census statistics that showed that
the percentage of the white population in King County made it one of the “whitest”
counties in the country; the percentage of whites in the county no doubt
accurately reflects the reasons why was a “big gain” in the higher income
brackets. In a story in the Seattle
Weekly, on the other hand, showed that there is still widespread
discrimination against non-Asian minorities in most job professions, but
particularly in the “tech” industry and its high wage jobs; I can tell you from
personal experience that behind the façade of “liberalism,” there is a
“me-first” mentality among such white people who profess to be “liberals”—and
when they all feel that way, it all adds-up to widespread racial discrimination,
even in “progressive” Seattle.
Other reasons might include the
influx of new residents of the white and Asian self-involved “yuppie” variety
with and the promise of high wages, and the loss of affordable housing, driving
mostly minorities who cannot afford souring rents out. Yet I sense that another reason for this may be that income disparities are in fact "artificial," that there is not just a lack of "fairness" in pay, but that arrogance, conceit and greed play a bigger role than most people imagine: An artificial class system is being created based on massive income disparities not just among the very richest and everyone else, but between the mostly useless "yuppie" class and working people, this need to feel "superior" to "common people."
I can’t help but be bemused by all
of this, since I and everyone I know has never even sniffed at $30 (let alone
$54) an hour. A high percentage of the jobs available in the area today are
just barely above the state minimum wage of $9.47, and the highest hourly rate
I’ve ever been paid, no matter how physically or mentally demanding the work was, was $14 an hour, and that not
even for a full 40 hours a week. I’ve lived in the Seattle area for almost 25
years, and it’s always been a personal “recession,” more so because unlike most
people living on similar wages I don’t live with parents, or a roommate or spouse who also
works. Certain people tell me it is my “fault,” but those are usually white
people who are taller and “prettier” than I am. All too often, an employer who
liked what they read on my resume and sounded positive on the telephone
suddenly become less certain I was “qualified” when they saw me in person; they
always had to talk to another “candidate” before they got back to me about a
job—and usually they didn’t even bother to call.
That begs the question “Who the
hell are all of those people making $54 dollars an hour (or $100,000+ a year)? I’m
sure that some of them probably have engineering or advanced technical skills,
but I suspect that most of these people just sit around in meetings or talking glibly
on the phone making “deals”; just give them a high-sounding title (like “Chief
Operating Officer” to a frumpy blonde white female at a small sports apparel company
I used to work for;. all she ever did was sit at desk all day and think of ways
to disturb the orderly routine in the warehouse.
Small business owners especially
complain about their inability to pay employees a living wage or provide health
benefits; they are, after all, in the “business” of becoming rich. Mid-size
companies, like, say, Alaska Airlines, have become immensely profitable far
beyond their larger competitors by a concerted campaign to depress wages; it’s
all about profit, the more bloated the better. Only the hourly employees ask
what is “fair” about this. Large corporations pay CEOs and other high-level managers
eight-figure pay packages—perhaps they don’t feel any shame about this because it’s
just “penny-ante” stuff compared to total revenue. One wonders how many
percentage points the unemployment rate would go down and wages would rise if
the pay of just one high level executive from each of the Fortune 500 companies
was instead used to employ workers at a
living wage.
It is apparent that since the
“earnings” of the wealthy have continued to increase while those at the bottom
have only seen their wages depress further, there was no moral or ethical
lesson learned from the “Great Recession.” I once heard someone pontificate
that money was the “root of all evil,” and white man, apparently of
conservative leaning, respond by saying that neither money nor the desire for it was “evil,” but only the way it was
portrayed by the media and people who didn’t “have it.” I suppose he meant what
Reagan derided as the “envy” of the poor of the rich. But that isn’t the truth.
People who actually “create” things in the main are less motivated in becoming “rich” than in making a “name”
for themselves. Having a lot of money may lead to a comfortable, carefree life
and buy everything you “need,” but it can’t buy you “immortality” like leaving
behind something of social or cultural worth and memory.
Corporate executives with
exorbitant pay packages and “golden” parachutes when they are fired for running
their companies into the ground (and workers with them) on the other hand have
nothing on their minds but “beating the competition,” usually by finding ways
to “cut costs” by targeting their own most vulnerable workers who are just
numbers on a spread sheet. Most are hired by shareholders who themselves are
motivated by the riches promised them.
Yet few realize that the people who
actually make the things you use have no faces or names. They are the 47
percent that Mitt Romney accused of feeling that they are “entitled” to such
basics of life such as food and shelter; Romney, like many like him, never
worked an honest day in their lives—playing with other people’s money to make
more money, not caring who won (mainly people of his “class”) or who lost
(people like the rest of us).
No comments:
Post a Comment