1950s

Home » 1950s

Conservative Freak Out (Update)

It was this itty-bitty little graph that caused conservatives to absolutely lose their minds last week. Basically, a study from the Pew Research Center revealed that there are a lot of women who are the sole breadwinner or the major breadwinner in their households. For those of us who live in the reality-based world, we’ve recognized for some time that the “Leave It to Beaver” or “Father Knows Best” male-dominated models of the household simply don’t exist to the extent that they did back in the 1950s in the United States. This changed for a variety of reasons. Yet, conservatives simply want to blame women for this trend. Oh, let me correct myself. Conservatives would like to blame “liberated” women for this trend.

If you want to blame someone, there’s plenty of blame to go around. First of all, and my blame list is in no particular order, one of the glaring facts that springs off the page when you read this study is the fact that women get paid less for doing the exact same job as men. Why is this? This is simply a fact of gender discrimination. From my personal vantage point, as a physician, I’ve seen nurses’ salaries stagnate and even regress over the past 20 years. It is clear that there are more women who go in the nursing than men. Nurses, outside of California, have yet to band together to demand higher salaries. Instead, what we see in the nursing profession is that nurses after five, 10 or 15 years will leave a hospital because the work load is too hard, the hours are too long and the salaries are too small. So, nurses will move to doctors’ offices for better hours and a decreased workload in exchange for… wait for it… most the time, lower salaries. (more…)

By |2013-06-06T21:56:04-04:00June 6th, 2013|Economy, Education|2 Comments

Taxing the Rich And Helping the Middle Class

Nick Hanauer, a rich venture capitalist, gave a simple TED talk, which has become an Internet sensation. To be honest, he really didn’t say anything that was earthshaking. But the fact that somebody who’s rich stood up and stated that the rich do not create jobs – Wow! It is not often that we see someone who simply speaks the truth. Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, the United States made investments in the middle class and the lower class and we all benefited from an unprecedented economic boom. We had prolonged prosperity from the 1950s throughout the 1970s. Then, we decided that we had too much prosperity. We decided that we needed to stop investing in the middle class. We needed to stop programs which helped the poor. We needed to give tax cuts to the rich. That has been our mantra for the last 30 years. It is wrong. It is not only morally wrong but it has been a complete failure as an economic policy. It is one of the reasons why we had economic collapse of 2007/2008.

By |2012-05-19T15:36:27-04:00May 19th, 2012|Economy|1 Comment

How did the racial divide get worse during the 1950s?

Here is a nice article by Ira Katznelson.

From WP:

Hurricane Katrina’s violent winds and waters tore away the shrouds that ordinarily mask the country’s racial pattern of poverty and neglect. Understandably, most commentators have focused on the woeful federal response. Others, taking a longer view, yearn for a burst of activism patterned on the New Deal. But that nostalgia requires a heavy dose of historical amnesia. It also misses the chance to come to terms with how the federal government in the 1930s and 1940s contributed to the persistence of two Americas.

It was during the administrations of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman that such great progressive policies as Social Security, protective labor laws and the GI Bill were adopted. But with them came something else that was quite destructive for the nation: what I have called “affirmative action for whites.” During Jim Crow’s last hurrah in the 1930s and 1940s, when southern members of Congress controlled the gateways to legislation, policy decisions dealing with welfare, work and war either excluded the vast majority of African Americans or treated them differently from others.

Between 1945 and 1955, the federal government transferred more than $100 billion to support retirement programs and fashion opportunities for job skills, education, homeownership and small-business formation. Together, these domestic programs dramatically reshaped the country’s social structure by creating a modern, well-schooled, homeowning middle class. At no other time in American history had so much money and so many resources been targeted at the generation completing its education, entering the workforce and forming families.

But most blacks were left out of all this. Southern members of Congress used occupational exclusions and took advantage of American federalism to ensure that national policies would not disturb their region’s racial order. Farmworkers and maids, the jobs held by most blacks in the South, were denied Social Security pensions and access to labor unions. Benefits for veterans were administered locally. The GI Bill adapted to “the southern way of life” by accommodating itself to segregation in higher education, to the job ceilings that local officials imposed on returning black soldiers and to a general unwillingness to offer loans to blacks even when such loans were insured by the federal government. Of the 3,229 GI Bill-guaranteed loans for homes, businesses and farms made in 1947 in Mississippi, for example, only two were offered to black veterans.

By |2013-11-03T18:08:26-04:00April 22nd, 2012|Race|1 Comment
Go to Top