The older I get, the more I realize that capitalism, at least, the American variety, cannot function without a permanent exploited poverty caste. Whether it’s slaves, sharecroppers, immigrants, prison labor, interns, or, nowadays, children, there has to be someone so desperate and/or powerless that capital can extract their labor at the lowest rates for the worst jobs.
There was that brief period, though, between 1930 (the first time American capitalism crashed the world economy) and 1980 (when American capitalism returned to its trickle-on roots) when we recognized that unfettered American capitalism was like a metastasizing cancer that eats away all public good in the neverending quest for growth and profits. We formed unions and passed labor laws and more strongly regulated industries for safety and workers’ wellbeing.
Well, that wouldn’t do. Sure, during those years America became the most prosperous nation in world history, developed a robust middle class, and did much to eradicate poverty among seniors, injuries to workers, and exploration of child labor.
But under those conditions, wealthy people could only become wealthier. What wealthy people wanted, you see, is all the money. All of it. See, some other wealthy person has more money, so wealthy people need to become even wealthier. Only when they have all the money can they rest assured that nobody else will be wealthier.
And they can’t do that if the poors are getting money!
That brings us to now, where two stories catch my eye this morning. First, we have that pesky debt ceiling that Republicans won’t raise because there’s a Democratic president. This creates a dilemma, because on the one hand, wealthy people want to hurt Biden because that helps Republicans regain control, who then repay the wealthy with policies that then extract more of the money from the poors faster. But if they try too hard to hurt Biden, they’ll crash the economy (again) which will temporarily inconvenience wealthy people.
The solution, therefore, has to somehow extract money from the poors and not crash the economy.
But major sticking points remain, such as the GOP’s demand for increased work requirements on public benefits programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and Medicaid.
The Hill: White House, GOP getting ‘very close’ to budget and debt limit deal
Yes! Make the poors work for food, shelter, clothing, and healthcare assistance! Brilliant! It makes perfect sense, because they’re too poor to afford food, shelter, clothing, and healthcare, so they’ll be desperate to do whatever job we force them to. Then, when we make them spend more time working, then they can afford bus fare, work lunches, and childcare they’re not paying now while they work.
After all, it’s not like we can just ask the wealthy to return the tax cuts the GOP gleefully raised the debt limit for in previous years with a GOP president. Again, that runs counter to the point of American capitalism: having all the money.
Second, there’s this new law in Iowa that’s part of a growing trend of reversing child labor laws.
The Republican governor signed the law after it was approved by the Legislature earlier in May with only Republican support. Several states are embracing a rollback of child labor laws in response to complaints from business owners that they can’t find enough workers. Iowa’s April unemployment rate was 2.7%.
Chicago Tribune: Iowa governor signs bill loosening child labor laws
Yes, that’s the problem. There just aren’t enough workers. What’s Iowa Minimum Wage? Oh, $7.25, huh? Weird how there’s not enough workers who’ll exchange a day of their life for $58. Before taxes.
The same capitalists will complain that the streets are overrun with homeless while they say they can’t find enough workers. If they just stopped trying to have all the money and paid workers a living wage, they’d solve both problems.
But then, they wouldn’t be able to have all the money. And that, to them, is a bigger problem than tent-filled streets, single moms having to work a third job for food stamps, and high school juniors slicing off a finger during a 30-hour work week he adds on top of a 35-hour school week.
The new law would let 16- and 17-year-olds work in areas such as manufacturing as long as it was in a work-based learning program given an exemption by the Iowa Department of Education or Iowa Workforce Development. Those jobs could potentially mean the teens would operate power saws or join in demolition.
Come to think of it, with all the school shootings, maybe they would be safer working.
Under the new rules, 16- and 17-year-olds also could serve alcohol in restaurants as long as business owners have written permission from the worker’s parent or guardian. Two adult employees would need to be in an area where the children served drinks, and restaurant employees would need to complete sexual harassment prevention training.
When it comes to discussions of legalizing marijuana in Iowa, “what about the children?” is always the rallying cry. We can’t normalize drug culture to our kids. If we legalize for adults, the kids will think it’s okay to get high on drugs for fun!
But can a high school sophomore serve you Piña Coladas at the Hooters at 10pm on a Tuesday night? Sure, just as long as she doesn’t sexually harrass anybody.
Whatever we have to do to make sure the benefits of productivity and automation continue to accrue money to the wealthy in their pursuit of having all of it. Having those benefits translate into shorter work weeks for adults for which they are paid middle class wages is completely off the table.
