Last week, Rand Paul took to the air to say that politicians and taxes are to blame for the police chokehold death of Eric Garner.
Notably, the reaction from the left was swift. Outlets like Think Progress denounced this position. Jon Stewart took to the air to ask “What the f*ck are you talking about?”
We’re good at denouncing the opposition’s story.
The problem is that this tends to contribute to the echo chamber. That is, the echo chamber consists of a strong corporate message plus the message repeated in the form of populist outrage.
I want to talk about the story that’s missing when it comes to Ferguson and the rest of our country, the one that we don’t see in the corporate media.
What’s missing is a better story about how the economy should work.
The story starts with the problem: a different inequality.
We’ve given corporations 30-40 years of tax cuts and privatization. Where are the jobs? Where are the benefits? Shouldn’t we be drowning in jobs and prosperity?
All this “trickle-down” economic nonsense has done has been to make the rich richer and the rest of the country poorer.
The following chart from the Brookings Institution shows the poverty rate in Ferguson, the highest in St. Louis County.
This is dramatically worse than just 10 years ago.
According to the analysis:
At the start of the 2000s, the five census tracts that fall within Ferguson’s border registered poverty rates ranging between 4 and 16 percent. However, by 2008-2012 almost all of Ferguson’s neighborhoods had poverty rates at or above the 20 percent threshold at which the negative effects of concentrated poverty begin to emerge.
What happened? 10 years of capital returns outpacing growth and policies that push wages downwards and shift wealth upwards.
Poverty in America is a result of an economy that puts downward pressure on wages and benefits.
Poverty in America is a result of outsourcing. It’s a result of the corporate fight to end unions. It's a result of tax handouts to the wealthy. It’s a result of economic policies that put downward pressure on wages and benefit the 1%.
Radley Balko at The Washington Post wrote one of the best pieces of the year about how Ferguson, impacted by tax cuts affecting the majority of our municipalities, has shifted costs onto the middle class and poor. Mr. Balko writes: “the cops and courts are still geared more toward generating revenue than promoting public safety.”
This is happening in towns, cities, and municipalities across the country. At least in some places like The Washington Post this story about poverty as the problem is being told.
People also understand the income inequality story because they can see it in their own lives and the lives of people they know.
What’s missing
What’s almost completely missing from the public discussion is a populist story about what to do about it.
I think Rand Paul is right in talking about fixing the economy as a solution. His solutions are deeply flawed, but he’s right to talk about the economy.
In a nutshell, I’d say a much better story goes something like this: we need an economy that works for more people.
What this means is that all of the benefits of our industry and our labor shouldn't go to just a few people at the top.
It means government policies (including corporate charters) should benefit people.
As a country, we were better off when more people made more money.
Public policies should put upward pressure on wages.
A few examples:
- Promoting and encouraging unions as a counterbalance to owners.
- Structuring incentives to keep jobs in America.
- A progressive tax code where people and companies that succeed invest back in our country.
- Investment in infrastructure and innovation that will deliver the high-paying jobs of the future.
- Raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.
We should roll back the radical economic measures that corporate special interest groups have put in place over the past 30-40 years and return our economic policies to at least the 1960s.
And we should end the influence of money in politics that’s led to far too many corporate special interest group handouts.
In other words, when it comes to economic policy, strangely, I’m a conservative, not a radical Ayn Randist.
All of these radical ideas that corporate special interest groups have been pushing for years are making things worse, not better.
Where is this story?
Look, I love Jon Stewart. Jon Stewart is a comedian though. His show is about making fun of politics to a predominantly liberal audience that already agrees with him. This isn't a critique of Jon Stewart. It is simply what Jon Stewart does. People who don't agree with him don't watch his show because they don't find him funny.
What he doesn't do is convince people who don’t already agree with him that a better way is possible.
If Jon Stewart had a convincing show about populist solutions, would he be allowed on the air?
While there’s definitely a place for outrage and humor, what’s missing is a better vision of our economy.
We know Rand Paul is going to say something crazy. Why is this a surprise? The problem is that if it's the only solution people hear, it's the only solution.
My favorite quote actually came from Ohio Governor John Kasich in a softball interview with George Stephanopoulos:
When I look at economic development, whether it's tax cuts or deregulation or whatever, economic growth is not an end to itself. Economic growth is terrific, but it should lead to helping people who live in the shadows.
This sums up the entire discussion of the economy in the media. Our options are tax cuts and deregulation or "whatever".
What’s missing is a vision of a working economy where more people make more money.
And yes, we're speaking about Ferguson and the Eric Garner killing as a race issue and that's good. But the opposition is using it to pivot to the economy.
Remember, the #1 issue of the last ... idunno ... every election.
At the top of my Christmas list is a television network (I'll settle for a network of 100 radio stations or newspapers) capable of reaching America with a better economic vision.
Unless Santa delivers, I’m afraid we’re going to have to do our best to tell the story ourselves. I guess the good news is that it’s a simple story.
It’s just not a story you’ll hear in corporate media.
---
David Akadjian is the author of The Little Book of Revolution: A Distributive Strategy for Democracy.