Here is an article about the upper-middle class and meritocracy that reminded me of some discussions I have seen on this forum. I think some of you may find it interesting:
First of all, Vox has a leftist bias, similar to VICE, HuffPost & CNN.
Secondly, this interview is about opinion and not fact. Not that it’s wrong, just to keep in mind.
I think some of the following factors contribute to the problem:
- women and immigrants have entered the workforce, making a downward pressure on the wages
- globalization made jobs and production move abroad
- aging society means the demographic dividend is ending
As a result, the upper-middle class is shrinking and people cannot maintain the lifestyle of their parents. So they go to great lengths to hold onto their status.
I think this video discusses the topic in more details, and from a historical perspective.
3 Likes
I also don’t see how is this the case:
Most of this culture of the 9.9 percent is an effect and a consequence of inequality
Oh, the infamous enemy, inequality! We need to make everyone equal, then they… will have less need to become better off than their peers? Where’s the sense in that?
I would try to explain what is happening in the following way:
- all the things I mentioned above make pressure on middle class
- growing technological advancement makes the economy more capital-intensive and less labor-intensive; you can buy some machines and they will do the job, multiplying your capital; I think this drives inequality
- additionally, high taxes are a burden, but the 0.1% find a way around them; there is much talk about taxing the rich, but it’s the middle class who has fewest tricks to avoid taxes
- high money printing and redistribution flattens the lower end if inequality, making middle class even more miserable, as they work hard, but can’t afford a much better life than the basic workers.
2 Likes
I mostly disagree with both the article and the comments: I don’t think that using a political or economical lens will solve any of this.
What the article fails to mention is that:
- Humans are wired to play status games
- Most of our desires are memetic: I want to have/do something because I have seen someone else have/do this same thing.
It just happens that we live in a capitalistic society where desire and status are based on who possesses the biggest house, the biggest car, the best education, etc. And indeed, people being quite competitive, they are always making more efforts to keep being at the same place (the “red queen effect”).
But you could have a totally different society and still see the same mechanisms at play. If we were to live in a communist country, the status game would be to be ranked as high as possible in the apparatchik system of the Dear Leader. In other terms, we would find other ways to measure who has the biggest swinging d*ck.
These mechanisms appear as soon as you have a community forming. For instance on this forum I have seen a lot of people comparing (mostly implicitly) how much they were saving, who has the highest saving rate, what it means to be a good “Mustachian” (whatever that means). I don’t think it is necessarily a bad thing, but I think it is good to be at least aware of how we are wired as humans.
From there on, there are two main points to remember:
- As soon as we are part of a community (whatever it is: a nation, a city, a local Verein, an online forum, etc), there are going to be inofficial “rules”, by which we are going to play status games.
- Being aware of point 1), it is especially important that we align the rules of the community with our personal values, or we are going to be deeply unhappy. For instance, I tend to value health and free time to be with my family and to read, learn and think. Those values are in line with a financial independence mindset, so I gladly join this FIRE forum. But I would hate to be part of a side hustle community (even if it is often linked to FIRE), because the way to play status games would involve spending a lot of time in activities I don’t necessarily enjoy.
My 2 cents.
16 Likes
Today I somehow ended up reading about Daniel Markovits’ “meritocracy trap” which seems quite relevant to this thread:
Of course the wikipedia rabbit hole goes deeper: