Why You're Not “Middle Class” - YouTube

Channel: Second Thought

[0]
This episode is made possible by Audible. Follow the link below and get your first month
[4]
absolutely free.
[6]
“the wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes”
[12]
“people in the middle class today are trying desperately to survive”
[16]
“America’s middle class is being hollowed out”
[20]
“Joe Biden announced today a new front in his ongoing war against america’s middle-class.”
[26]
“he's trying to tell us he cares about the middle class? give me a break! that's a bunch
[34]
of malarkey!”
[36]
Pop quiz, cornpop. Are you middle class? Well that depends, obviously. So many variables
[41]
to take into account, where to even begin? Ok, for starters, are you a millionaire? Oh…good!
[48]
Well, most millionaires are middle class according to millionaires, so welcome to the club I
[52]
guess. Millionaires are the wealthiest 8% of the country, but sure, they can be part
[57]
of the middle class. Plenty of room in the middle class for everybody, come on in, the
[61]
water’s fine. It’s not too hot and not too cold. It’s right in the middle.
[66]
Look, don’t get mad, everybody’s middle class anyway. All the way from the lowest
[70]
income bracket to the highest in this gallup poll [show graph “social class identification
[72]
by household income”, arrows pointing at the middle and upper-middle class bars] you’ll
[73]
find people who call themselves middle class, or, if they’re really brave, upper-middle
[77]
class. But very rarely just “upper class,” with no middle. This is just how it is, and
[82]
it’s been this way forever. Back in the late 30’s, nearly 90% of Americans told
[87]
the New York Times they were middle class and only a measly six percent bravely donned
[92]
the “upper class” label. Don’t worry, we’ll be putting all that to rest with a
[96]
better definition of class later in this video.
[98]
But you’d be forgiven for getting confused. What are millionaires doing in the same middle
[104]
class that people making less than $20k a year say they’re a part of? If being middle
[109]
class is all about how much money you make and yet this is how people self-identify,
[113]
does the phrase “middle class” even mean anything at all? Is it an actually useful
[117]
phrase with any sort of analytical purpose or just a cheap way to score easy political
[122]
points, like supporting wildly unpopular policies or shooting beer bottles some intern wrote
[127]
“socialism” on?
[129]
No. Of course "middle class" means something. It’s definitely, 100% a real thing. Come
[134]
on, if it didn’t mean anything, who would care? Why would politicians spend so much
[138]
time comforting the middle class and telling them they’re going to be safe with them,
[142]
or if they don’t vote right, that the other guy is going to screw them over. Why would
[146]
the media regularly panic about the “death” of the middle class or it getting “hollowed
[151]
out” if it wasn’t definitely real and also very important?
[155]
Listen up, bucko, the middle class is vital, ok? It’s the American dream! Look, right
[160]
here in this Vox article about the middle class getting hollowed out: “Forty years
[163]
ago, the term “middle class” referred to Americans who had successfully obtained
[167]
a version of the American dream: a steady income from one or two earners, a home, and
[172]
security for the future. Now, it mostly means the ability to put your bills on autopay and
[177]
service debt. The stability that once characterized the middle class, that made it such a coveted
[182]
and aspirational echelon of American existence, has been hollowed out.” There, not only
[187]
is the middle class a real thing, a house with a white picket fence, a dog, and 2.5
[192]
kids, all of that is not only real, it’s under threat. We know this because the American
[196]
dream isn’t attainable anymore, and the only way to really experience it if you’re
[200]
not ludicrously wealthy is by getting into debt.
[203]
Mortgages, credit cards, student loan debt, needing to rent instead of owning your home
[208]
for more of your twenties and thirties. 6 of 10 Americans can’t afford a surprise
[212]
$500 expense, average student loan debt is somewhere north of $35,000, inflation is pushing
[219]
consumer prices sky high. The American dream is functionally over, ergo, you can kiss the
[225]
middle class goodbye. It makes sense. Or, alternatively, if you’re an economist or
[230]
something, the middle class isn’t going anywhere. Like a guy at a Phish concert, the
[234]
middle class goes with the flow.
[237]
Finding the middle class is as easy as cutting up the population into five chunks and calling
[242]
the middle three the “middle class,” or multiplying the median household income by,
[246]
let’s say ⅔ and 2 and all the numbers you get in between, well that’s the middle
[251]
class. See, it’s not going anywhere. Mathematically there’s always going to be a middle class,
[257]
or rather a bunch of wildly different middle classes depending on who you ask.
[260]
But what if the middle class never even existed in the first place? After all, we have so
[266]
much trouble pinpointing exactly what it is and who belongs in it. When we do give a definition
[271]
of the middle class it’s about vague things like the American dream or some arbitrary
[275]
number we got by multiplying income by this or that fraction. And what about things like
[279]
where you live? 50k a year is a very different amount in San Francisco than it is in rural
[285]
America. And is 50k really the same if you make it by working 8 hours a day or just collecting
[290]
returns on your investments, say if you’re a landlord? Are two people with the same amount
[295]
going into their bank accounts but living wildly different lives really part of the
[299]
same class? It really seems like our current definition of class isn’t doing a very good
[304]
job, and is mostly just muddying the waters.
[306]
Well that’s on purpose. The reality is that class isn’t about how much money you make,
[311]
it’s about how you make your money. Do you make money by working for someone else, or
[316]
by profiting off the work of others? Don’t worry I’ll explain exactly what I mean by
[320]
that in two minutes and twenty two seconds. Regardless of how you feel after hearing this
[325]
definition of class divided into two, maybe for the first time, you have to recognize
[330]
that it’s just more useful than the current definition we hear our politicians use. Our
[334]
current, dominant definition sucks. You’re telling me the best we can do is define class
[339]
into 3-ish groups of unknown size, with undefined cut-offs, and everyone has a different idea
[344]
of what the cutoffs should be based on some random math, a fantasy from the 1950s, or
[349]
the whims of a pollster? It sucks. Cutting up society in this crude, vague way isn’t
[355]
just impractical, it also ultimately tells us very little about society and gives us
[360]
very little help in figuring out what we want it to look like. Are we okay with the lower
[364]
class making 500x less than the upper class? I don’t know. Maybe. Is 500 a lot or a little?
[370]
Are we multiplying from the top of the lower class, the bottom, the very top of the upper
[375]
class, or the middle of the middle class? Do we even objectively know what those numbers
[379]
are in the first place, or does it all depend on how big we make each group and where we
[383]
draw the lines?
[385]
The truth is we don’t have a clue. It’s all random choices and opinions when you define
[389]
class by income. And at the end of the day, it’s what allows one politician to say they’re
[394]
helping the middle class while another says they’re actually hurting it. They can be
[397]
looking at the same numbers, but because we don’t have any universal frame of reference
[402]
for what the middle class is, they can technically both be right. One guy can say “this is
[407]
what’s happening to the middle class,” the other guy can say “malarkey” and then…
[412]
nothing. We don’t have a good way to even start agreeing on the facts and therefore
[416]
our politics go nowhere. Things don’t change. And politicians know this.
[421]
So what if we actually made an effort and used that second definition of class I talked
[425]
about earlier? The advantage of dividing class along the lines of how you make your money
[430]
instead of how much you make is that, not only does it still give you an idea of the
[434]
“how much?” question anyway, on top of that, you get a great insight into how the
[438]
economy works, what your interests are, and therefore which politicians it actually makes
[442]
sense to support, instead of hearing both sides tell you they’re the ones who really
[446]
fight for the middle class and assuming whichever one you don’t like is just lying.
[450]
You will benefit from seeing class in this more practical way, because right now, politicians
[456]
and the people who finance their campaigns are the ones benefiting from the vague definition
[460]
that keeps things the way they are, in their interest. And just so we’re clear about
[464]
how I’m defining class, here it is: Society is divided into two classes, not three, not
[471]
four, not five. On the one hand, there are those who need to work to live, and on the
[476]
other, those who have the privilege to make other people work so they don’t have to.
[480]
So long as you exchange your mental or physical energy for a salary, you are part of the working
[485]
class. The class of people that works. A term which I know is confusing because to most
[491]
people “working class” just means “poor,” but here it literally means what it says,
[496]
regardless of whether the work you do is white-collar or blue-collar. The remaining few who make
[501]
most if not the entirety of their money through rents, speculation, or profit, mainly by owning
[506]
things like companies or housing, not through their own work, are called the capitalist
[510]
class, or the owner class.
[512]
But what’s the point of all this? Let’s start with the advantage politicians get by
[516]
pretending class is about how much you make, not how you make it.
[520]
As we’ve already seen, the first advantage of the vague definition is that it makes things,
[525]
well, vague. We don’t really know what’s going on and it’s basically impossible to
[529]
assess what politicians say objectively. But there’s more. The vague definition is constantly
[535]
used to throw the middle class into competition with the so-called “lower class.” In other
[539]
words, according to our better definition, two people who are both part of the working
[543]
class are pitted against each other. Politicians constantly invoke “the middle class” because
[548]
you’ll always be able to find someone with more money than you and someone with less
[553]
so it’ll always feel like they’re talking to you. And in that process, warning you against
[558]
the people below you in the hierarchy. The lower class are the people who make less money
[562]
than you, and therefore that you are told are out there gunning for your job, or taking
[566]
your tax dollars for welfare and whatnot. You are constantly pitted against people who
[570]
are worse off than you,
[572]
and if that feels weird it’s because at the end of the day you actually share the
[575]
same interests. You’re both trying to get by and live a decent life. Just like there’s
[580]
no middle class, there’s no such thing as the lower class, you’re on the same team.
[585]
The only thing that sets you apart is how precarious your situation is right this second,
[590]
not the incentives you’re responding to and where you could be if the circumstances
[594]
were slightly different. As a member of the so-called middle class you’re always told
[599]
to fear if not outright despise the lower class. But they’re not a threat to your
[603]
guarantee of a decent life. It’s the capitalists above you who enjoy a net benefit from working
[609]
class infighting. Infighting not only pushes things like wages down, therefore increasing
[614]
their profits, it also distracts from the fact they are profiting in the first place,
[619]
meaning their position at the top of society doesn’t get challenged.
[622]
This can get confusing, like wandering into a Phish concert. Oftentimes, people get a
[627]
bit confused with all this because they won’t feel like they exactly fit into the definitions
[631]
I’ve given so far. Usually it’s because calling yourself “working class” feels
[635]
wrong after years of being told it means “poor,” especially if you now live a comfortable life
[640]
working a white-collar job. But most often the confusion arises among small business
[644]
owners, people who don’t seem to fit in because they ostensibly own a company but
[648]
still have to work to get by and live a comfortable life. What side of the divide do you end up
[653]
on if this is you? It’s easy to imagine a day where your company will grow and you’ll
[657]
need to employ more people and eventually you won’t need to work anymore, that you’ll
[661]
become a capitalist and will be able to earn a living even after you stop working. It’s
[665]
the vision of success the American dream is built on. If this is you, it’s easy to see
[670]
how you’ll start identifying with the capitalist class that you hope to join one day rather
[673]
than the working class you share a lot more in common with today. It’s that famous Steinbeck
[678]
misquote that “the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily
[683]
embarrassed millionaires.”
[685]
But if you’re a small business owner, some part of you intuitively knows what side will
[689]
actually defend your interests, even though it’s not always obvious. You know it’s
[694]
not the capitalists, deep in your heart. You’ll have heard of stores like Wal-Mart coming
[697]
into cities and towns like yours and driving people who do the same things as you out of
[702]
business. Big businesses always end up cannibalizing the small ones. If you’re a small business
[707]
entrepreneur in tech, this kind of stuff might even be built into your business plan, getting
[711]
bought out by a bigger company like Facebook or Google, even though you know that it’s
[715]
ultimately bad for society to have monopolies like this. But you still do it because it’s
[720]
just the rules of the game, and if you don’t sell out early you’ll probably just get
[723]
driven out eventually.
[725]
Nobody really stands up to the giants, at least not for long. Small business owners
[729]
constantly have to hold competing narratives in their heads: 1) that they’re going to
[733]
be taken over or driven out of competition by a bigger company and 2) that they will
[738]
be one of the lucky few that becomes the bigger company. There is no alternative.
[743]
There is no situation in a capitalist economy where businesses of all sizes cohabitate and
[747]
don’t try to encroach on each other's territory. The goal is always growth, and those who don’t
[753]
subscribe to that mentality don’t make it very long. 20% of small businesses fail after
[757]
a year. Half are gone after 5. And only 30% make it past a decade. Say what you want about
[764]
the reasons why these businesses fail, the ultimate truth is that the system is not built
[768]
for small businesses. To continue to identify with the people who it is built for is to
[773]
bet a lot on the system that will happily chew you up and spit you out.
[777]
In other words, the real threat is not from below, it’s from above. So if you’re a
[782]
small business owner and you make the majority of your money through your own work, you’re
[786]
not a temporarily embarrassed millionaire, you are a member of the working class. That’s
[792]
it. This system is not built for you and the odds you make it to the upper strata of society
[798]
for whom it is built are insanely low.
[801]
The capitalist class, by virtue of the incentives it’s responding to, the main one being profitability,
[806]
will always, inevitably consolidate into monopolies at the expense of everyone else. While this
[811]
model may temporarily give us cheaper products, once a few companies have become a cartel
[816]
or an outright monopoly, like we see in our media, consumer goods, and food and beverage
[821]
markets [you know the tree-diagram graphics I’m talking about here with like 4 companies
[822]
in the middle], even that positive outcome gets thrown out the window. Just look at Uber
[825]
and Lyft raising their rates now that they’ve completely taken over the market, or at the
[829]
individual level, how mega-billionaires have consolidated more wealth than the many billions
[833]
of people on earth. The problem is that if you’re constantly focused on protecting
[838]
yourself from the so-called lower class, it’s easy to ignore this going on in the background.
[843]
By naming terms directly, and stating things as they are, not as we imagine them to be,
[848]
it’s easy to see that we all have an interest in stopping this from happening. But so long
[853]
as there is rampant working class infighting, that won’t be possible. Stop calling yourself
[858]
middle class, it clearly doesn’t mean anything and it’s not doing anything except hurting
[862]
you in the long run. The good thing is that now that you have a stronger, more useful
[866]
definition of class, you can understand politicians a lot better. When you hear a politician tell
[871]
you their policies are going to help “the middle class” and they give you numbers
[875]
on like how many jobs are going to be created, or how much more money you’ll save on taxes
[879]
or whatever, look past the carefully written speeches and think to yourself “does this
[884]
policy help me as a worker, or is it going to end up giving more power to my boss?”
[889]
Put yourself in your boss's shoes and if this seems like something he’d be into, you know
[893]
it’s something you’re not gonna enjoy. If you’re a worker, someone waiting for
[898]
employment, or someone who depends on worker’s wage (like if you’re not of working age
[902]
or are a stay-at-home spouse for example), in other words: working class, I guarantee
[907]
this is going to make politics not only more digestible but a lot more transparent. Stop
[912]
believing these white picket fence lies.
[916]
This is one of those topics that’s super important, but rarely gets explained all that
[920]
well. I try my best to learn and understand as much as I can so I can share with others,
[925]
and one way I like to do that is by listening to audiobooks. I travel a lot for work, so
[929]
I have plenty of time to sit on planes and listen to fascinating audiobooks on Audible.
[933]
One great one that I recently listened to is Capital In The 21st Century by Thomas Piketty.
[938]
Where many books fail to grapple with the actual economic base that supports modern
[942]
capitalism, Piketty’s work actually explains the origins of skyrocketing inequality and
[946]
capitalist crisis. If you’re looking for a book to help you understand the reality
[950]
of class divisions, this is your one stop shop. If you like to learn as much as I do,
[955]
getting to pick a free audiobook every month is pretty nice. I don’t think I can accurately
[959]
convey how much I love Audible. I struggle to sit down and read a book, but with Audible
[964]
I can get through all the titles I’ve wanted to, all while running errands or commuting
[968]
or traveling for work. It’s completely changed how I learn. If you enjoyed this week’s
[972]
video, I highly, highly recommend you check out Capital In The 21st Century on Audible.
[976]
It’s a fantastic listen. So, if you want to help support my channel so I can produce
[980]
more content like this, visit audible.com/secondthought or text secondthought, one word, to 500-500.
[987]
Sign up today, and get your first month absolutely free. It really does help support me and my
[991]
channel. Get started by following the link below, or by texting secondthought to 500-500.
[997]
If you enjoyed this video, consider dropping a like. If you hated it, a thumbs down. You
[1001]
can check out my previous content by clicking the links on your screen. Thanks for watching,
[1004]
and I’ll see you next week.