Comments on: BARACK, HILLARY, AND THE AMERICAN WORKING CLASS

By: Conor McCabe

Conor McCabe — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:58:32 +0000

I didn’t say statistics, I said the media, in particular, the Wall Street Journal. Zweig’s analysis puts class in terms of power relations, not necessarily income, although there is usually a link. so Zweig wouldn’t give a figure as a cut-off point for class, as it goes against the idea of class as a relationship, not a category. Under that analysis (relational), working class occupations constitute around 60% of the working population.

By: arlene poor in a poor state

arlene poor in a poor state — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 02:41:22 +0000

where I come from ( dirty south) a person earning 50,000 is rich, the working class earn about 15,000-27,000 a year. Where does the statistics derrive from that detail working class earn $50,000, when college graduates doesn’t earn that much here with a master degree ?

By: steve white

steve white — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 17:49:18 +0000

but when they say working class they middle class, they don’t think working class as we know it exists

By: Class and the US election… and gender and race too… « The Cedar Lounge Revolution

Sat, 08 Mar 2008 11:20:32 +0000

[…] A great post over at on the class aspect of the Clinton/Obama campaign by Conor. […]

By: dav

dav — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:48:26 +0000

Me neither. The idea of an ‘Iraq recession’ is an idea dreamt up by progressives, nothing to do with Obama or Clinton.

By: Conor McCabe

Conor McCabe — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:38:55 +0000

I don´t think Clinton/Obama have re-focused on the economy in order to combat right wing think tank conspired framing on the idea of an American military presence in the Middle East as an economic necessity.

Clinton/Obama have re-focused on the economy because that is what affects most Americans. People are losing their jobs. They´re worried about getting sick and dying, or losing their job and having their house taken from them.

By: dav

dav — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:22:29 +0000

I think, or hope, it’s more so a plan to create issue based framing in order to combat ring wing think tank conspired framing. You can be sure the right has instilled the idea of a presence in the Middle East as an economic necessity.

Looked at in isolation it’s quite offensive, though it is the same economic savagery that compels ‘reasoned’ debate in Irish broadsheets over the financial and employment implications of opposing military use of Shannon.

By: Conor McCabe

Conor McCabe — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:18:23 +0000

Dav, it´s true that the issues are not seen as mutually exclusive, but it is interesting that Iraq is framed in terms of the damage it is doing to the economy.

By: sonofstan

sonofstan — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:29:41 +0000

[i]Also, regardless of income, in their eyes if you are university-educated you are middle class as well.[/i]

Well that’s a comfort…..

By: dav

dav — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:06:15 +0000

We shouldn’t forget that people in the US don’t see the economy and the war as being mutually exclusive issues, in fact according to an AP poll [1] ‘Pulling out of the war ranked first among proposed remedies’ for recession. MoveOn recently “initiated a campaign to reframe Iraq and the economy” - under the idea of an ‘Iraq recession’. [2]

And John and Elizabeth Edwards recently commented… “The country is spending billions of dollars every month in Iraq, and at the same time we’ve got 40-plus million Americans who don’t have health care coverage.” [3]

Seperating the two issues should be seen as a major success for Democrats and Republicans alike.

See www.rockridgenation.org for more.

1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23073316/
2. http://pol.moveon.org/lte/?campaign_id=88&rc=homepage
3. http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/john_and_elizabeth_edwards_bla.html