![]() ![]() And then you have a large group that is much closer to the traditional style of having kids early and not investing as heavily in them - although many of them, of course, try to emulate the practices of the upper-middle class. At a high level, you have people who have their kids late in life after getting a lot of education, have fewer kids, and invest massively in them. You have at least two very different groups emerging in American society. I put a lot of emphasis on the family aspect because I think that’s a place where you really see in operation the attitudes and practices that go into child rearing and family formation. The obvious place to look for it is the whole college admissions game. The main measures of that are educational attainment and material well-being, and anything that we provide to society or other people is on top or on the side of that and is a reflection of our own virtue and not in any way necessary for social functioning or part of a good life. The driving idea is that people get where they are in society through a combination of talent and work and study. The guiding ideology is essentially that of a meritocracy. What does the culture look like? How do these people separate themselves out? ![]() It’s a cultural construct that is defined by attitudes toward family, toward identity issues about gender and race, by education and educational status and the idea of what constitutes a good career, which is mainly professional and managerial. I see it more as a culture, and it’s a culture that tends to lead people into the 9.9 percent of the wealth distribution. I don’t think of the 9.9 percent as just everybody who has more than a certain amount of money and less than another amount of money. The statistical side of it is very imprecise. So, to start out, you write about the 9.9 percent and a “new aristocracy” in America. Our conversation, edited for length and clarity, is below: We talked about fear, meritocracy, and why the 9.9 percent are so obsessed with nannies. I recently spoke with Stewart about America’s 9.9 percent - the people who are semi-rich but don’t necessarily feel it. Sign up to receive our newsletter each Friday. Vox’s German Lopez is here to guide you through the Biden administration’s burst of policymaking. They recognize that American society is increasingly one of have-nots, and they’re determined not to be one of them. While this 9.9 percent drives inequality - they want to lock in their positions for themselves and their families - they’re also driven by inequality. They’re rich, but they don’t feel like it - they’re always looking at someone else who’s richer. They believe in meritocracy, that they’ve gained their positions in society by talent and hard work. They want to live in great neighborhoods, even if that means keeping others out, and will pay what it takes to ensure their families’ fitness and health. They are hyper-focused on getting their kids into great schools and themselves into great jobs, at which they’re willing to work super-long hours. There are some defining characteristics of today’s American upper-middle class, per Stewart’s telling. They’re the group in focus in a new book by philosopher Matthew Stewart (no relation), The 9.9 percent: The New Aristocracy That Is Entrenching Inequality and Warping Our Culture. There’s a space between that 0.1 percent and the 90 percent that’s often overlooked: the 9.9 percent that resides between them. Or to channel Elizabeth Warren, the top 0.1 percent holds a similar amount of wealth as the bottom 90 percent - a staggering figure. To quote Bernie Sanders, the “billionaire class” is thriving while many more people are struggling. They hoard a disproportionate amount of wealth and are taking an increasingly and unacceptably large part of the country’s economic growth. It’s easy to place the blame for America’s economic woes on the 0.1 percent. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |