As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: myth


Tavis Smiley and Dr. Cornel West have been working hard to bring the issue of poverty into the consciousness of the citizens and political discourse of the United States. As a team, Smiley and West have been touring city to city, speaking to audiences concerned about the increasing wealth gap in this country. Their book, The Rich and the Rest of Us: A Poverty Manifeseto, is the culmination of their observations of American citizens throughout these travels.

While the economy is technically in recovery from the Great Recession, a vast slice of Americans have not experienced a real recovery. A “jobless recovery,” where the beneficiaries of an improving economy are the wealthy while the middle class struggles with unemployment, is not a real recovery. Despite this disadvantage, the prevalence and pervasiveness of poverty is still astonishing. According to Smiley and West, 150 million people in this country are in or near poverty. That number represents one out of every two individuals — half the country.

Tavis SmileyThe issue of poverty, affecting this number of individuals, is bigger than poverty itself. The government tallies 46 million Americans living in poverty according to the 2010 census and the government’s own definitions of poverty. Many more individuals are affected by poverty because they are living dangerously close. Many middle class households, particularly those already living in debt or in a paycheck-to-paycheck situation, are one lost paycheck away from a dangerous financial situation, and many families are already experiencing a personal decline due to the inability to find gainful employment.

Poverty has traditionally been a problem classified as urban or rural. Minorities have been and are disproportionately affected by poverty, but poverty is not a suburban problem, too. With white, middle-class families now facing the issue of poverty, whether by losing a job or being dangerously close to not being able to afford their homes, the issue is gaining more attention. While poverty is making life difficult for an increasing number of Americans, those in or seeking office, whether Democrats or Republicans, are not concerned. In order to receive a voice in political discourse, you need money. While the United States may have been founded on the ideals of freedom and liberty, these have generally only been granted to an elite selection of its inhabitants. The distribution of social power is expanded only by revolution among the disenfranchised.

Smiley and West contacted Consumerism Commentary with an interest in speaking to me about these issues — to defend their position, and to open my eyes to the realities faced even by the middle class in this country, many of whom are the “new poor.” We arranged an interview for the Consumerism Commentary Podcast, airing Sunday, May 13. Unfortunately, Dr. West was unable to participate in the interview at the last minutes as he was in New York waiting for a verdict after a conviction related to a political protest in that city. Tavis Smiley was able to participate, but our time together was short. We weren’t able to address all the questions I had prepared, but the discussion was valuable.

Listen to the entire discussion with Tavis Smiley, podcast host Jay Frosting, and myself, Luke Landes, once it is available this weekend. Smiley is the host of Tavis Smiley on PBS and The Tavis Smiley Show on Public Radio International. Update: Listen to the podcast here.

In the interview, Smiley dispelled many of the myths about poverty. One such myth is the idea that those in poverty are entirely to blame for their financial situation.

On Consumerism Commentary, I’ve written that taking personal responsibility for your decisions, financial and otherwise, plays the biggest role in achieving financial security and independence. This is today’s American promise: “Anyone can make it in America.” The media love rags-to-riches stories, even if it doesn’t reflect a reality for the majority of Americans. It’s true that this country’s brand of capitalism is favorable to the situations European immigrants left behind. Religious intolerance, a caste system based on ancestry, and an economic system wherein generally only the first-born male would have rights to any property drove pioneers to create a new society or join a country with a promise to create a better life for yourself. Never mind that doing so displaced others who occupied the land here.

Even in this new society, you had to be a member of the elite to receive the rights as endowed. Not everyone begins on equal footing. The lack of early educational opportunities throughout this country is one of the strongest causes of generational poverty. As Smiley addresses in the podcast, Washington state is the home to large multi-national corporations, providing a huge advantage to those who reside in Washington thanks to the tax these companies pay. The educational opportunities in Washington state far outshine the opportunities in Washington, D.C., for example. Until a quality education for the entire country is given priority, generational poverty will continue to exist.

In the interview, we also address the issue of austerity. The concept of reducing the deficit and national debt is and should be a high priority for policymakers, but the timing of austerity measures, such as reducing funding to societal programs, is just as important. Smiley argues that we cannot cut the budget for these important issues when the economy is not “flowing,” saying that the budget is being balanced on the backs of poor people. Budgets are moral documents, and you can determine a country’s real priorities by evaluating where the money is going. If this country does not address the economy for the 99 percent — those who have seen no benefit from this “jobless recovery” — rather than the “1 percent,” Smiley warns of the downfall of the United States as a world leader.

No empire in the history of the world that at some point did not falter or fail. Every empire had its day. Americans don’t want to think we could be dangerously close to the edge… Poverty is the moral and spiritual issue of our time.

Time did not permit us to explore all the topics I would have liked to cover in the interview with Tavis Smiley. For example, I would have liked to talk more about the Occupy movement and getting a national stage for the issue of poverty. In recent weeks, civil rights are again receiving national attention, from the perspective of same-sex marriage. Not to minimize that issue of equal treatment under the law for all individuals, poverty deserves the same attention from our nation’s leaders.

Be sure to subscribe to the Consumerism Commentary Podcast to hear the interview with Tavis Smiley, where we address more topics related to poverty than are outlined above, as soon as it is available. Be sure also to read The Rich and the Rest of Us: A Poverty Manifesto. Update: The interview is now available as a podcast here.

Photo: DC Central Kitchen

{ 17 comments }

Last week, I acknowledged recent survey findings from the Pew Research Center showing that women are beginning to value success in their careers more than men value their own. It’s a historical twist, brought about by the idea that women entering the workforce is no longer related to a necessity, but an innate desire. Women, as a group, have a higher level of education and are increasingly choosing to pursue a successful career path.

With young children at home needing care and an increasing cost of outsourcing that care, many families need to choose a parent to stay home while the other earns money with an occupation. Women are still subject to compensation inequity — again, as a group — but in an increasing number of families, the wife is out-earning the husband. The choice is often simply financial; whoever earns the most money or has the potential to earn the most continues in their career path, while the other parent stays home to care for the child or children.

Now that more men are staying home to care for their children while their wives concentrate on their careers, it’s easier to shatter one of the long-standing myths about fatherhood. Previously, men who chose to pause their path to career success were judged inadequate to survive in the world of business.

Men are raised to value work as their main source of worth and self-esteem. Society’s underlying message is that men who make sacrifices and choose family over career advancement do it because they can’t succeed at work. But we are at the beginning of an epic shift in cultural norms. More men are finding parenthood meaningful and that is raising the status of fathers. Some men are trading career advancement for time with their family because they value the fulfillment they find in fatherhood, not because they can’t hack it in the job market. More men than ever feel that being a good father is a significant accomplishment in life.

Child and fatherResults from a survey performed last year by the University of Nebraska indicate that 75 percent of men consider being a parent very important, while only 48 percent had the same opinion about having a successful career. It’s possible, however, that there is a new stigma against being overly concerned with financial success, and this psychological aversion to being associated with the stereotypical careerist might prevent people from answering in a survey in a manner the respondent might think reflects poorly on themselves. There’s a tendency, also, to answer surveys as if one is an ideal. In other words, I might answer a survey as if I were an ideal version of myself rather than reflecting a true self-analysis.

Even if that is the case, it reflects the idea that stay-at-home-fatherhood is now a more respected life choice than it has been in the past.

Having a two-income family is still a luxury, and when at least one of the two incomes is significant enough to afford a solid living for a family of three or more, it’s a blessing. Most middle class families, when both parents are working out of necessity, it’s the ability to stay home with the children that is a luxury. It can be a difficult choice, particularly if one parent’s income is roughly equivalent to the cost of day care for his or her child or children.

The argument fails to consider yet another reality of life: one parent, either a father or a mother, struggling to earn an income and take care of one child or more, without a spouse for support.

For men: Would you put your career on hold — possibly forever — if it made more financial sense for you to stay at home with your children?

For women: Would you be willing to pursue your career full steam ahead while your partner develops a closer bond with children through more time spent with them during formative years?

Photo: Chris. P
Fathers Forum, CNN, BabyCenter

{ 6 comments }

A recent article in the New York Times (linked below) synthesizes several studies about people who speak several languages fluently. I am relatively confident that the ability to converse in more than one language adds to your human capital, increasing the likelihood of earning more money over time. There are some surveys that show that bilingual individuals are valued as employees more than those who speak only one languages and are compensated accordingly, but I’m not aware of any research study that proves that learning a second language leads directly to higher income.

When a child learns to speak in a bilingual household, the brain receives more exercise in resolving internal conflicts. This is a relatively new discovery, as until recently scientists believed that a second language would cause interference and would harm children’s ability to successfully master the first language.

The benefits of learning to speak more than one languages fluently are not necessarily limited to the formative years. Adults can possibly benefit from learning a new language.

Bilingualism’s effects also extend into the twilight years. In a recent study of 44 elderly Spanish-English bilinguals, scientists led by the neuropsychologist Tamar Gollan of the University of California, San Diego, found that individuals with a higher degree of bilingualism — measured through a comparative evaluation of proficiency in each language — were more resistant than others to the onset of dementia and other symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease: the higher the degree of bilingualism, the later the age of onset.

One might take from this study the idea that those who are more resistant to brain deterioration could have more income-producing years. If bilingualism helps the brain stay competent longer, the result should be an increase in lifetime income. It has yet to be determined whether bilingualism or multilingualism can increase wealth or income by itself. According to Payscale, the data are inconclusive on this matter. There are several good signs, however, that multilingualism has the ability to open opportunities for growing wealth.

  • Speaking more than one language could present more job or career opportunities.
  • The act of multilingualism inspires the brain to do better work through improved cognitive ability and to work more efficiently.
  • Scientists claim that bilinguals are better multitaskers. I think the idea of multitasking is mostly a myth, and what we call multitasking is actually quick task-switching, but whatever the cognitive process is called, bilinguals excel.

I’m not bilingual, but I’d like to be. As a child and teen, I studied a variety of languages, including Latin, German, classical Greek, and Hebrew, but I never learned enough to be considered fluent by any stretch of the imagination. If I were to study a new language now, I wouldn’t do so with the goal of earning more money; I’m more interested in the ability to converse with more people and perhaps feel comfortable traveling.

Has speaking more than one language provided you any benefits, financial or otherwise?

NY Times

{ 7 comments }

Preservation of capital is an important aspect of any financial plan, but in today’s economy, this is impossible without taking on some risk. At one time, you could confidently place any money you might need within one year in a high-yield savings account and be relatively confident that your money could buy at least as much a year in the future than it could buy the day you deposited your funds. Interest rates were relatively coordinated with the rate of inflation.

That’s not the case today. The Department of Labor released the latest inflation data. It should be no surprise to most consumers that the changes in the price of gas led to an increase in the energy index of 3.2 percent over the last twelve months (ending February). The inflation rate for all items is 2.9 percent. While the government-reported inflation rate doesn’t translate to the actual increase in expenses any one individual experiences year over year, it’s the best benchmark we currently have for a generalized view of the increase in prices.

And it’s the measure we use to determine how much purchasing power savers lose. If your savings account isn’t earning at least 2.9 percent after tax, you’re losing money in real terms by placing it in a bank. With banks offering less than 1 percent interest before taxes on their best high-yield savings accounts, purchasing power losses accelerate. Placing your cash under a mattress to earn zero interest is a worse idea, so are there any other options providing a safe way to maintain purchasing power?

Money BagsNot really. Using a savings account is great for funds you might need in an emergency, because you can access the money quickly without worrying about selling an asset. Savers have to understand that having an emergency fund is a compromise; in return for the safety of an FDIC-insured account, savers waive the right to preserve real value, at least in today’s economy.

Any other options for preserving capital introduce risk.

  • Investing in the stock market. Despite some recent frenzy about the stock market, with prices of the major indexes reaching near-term highs and day-over-day increases exceeding the best-performing day of the year thus far, there have also been daily price decreases reflecting the worst performance of the year. The stock market is incredibly volatile. For the long-term, it’s a good place to be, but there’s no guarantee that your capital will be preserved for when you need it.
  • Buying real estate. For years, families saw the house they live in as a way to store their wealth. The belief was unfortunately based on the myth that real estate values never decrease. Well, any asset can find itself in a bubble, whether they be tulips, stocks, or houses, and people who relied on real estate’s ever-increasing value to make a living have had a difficult time in recent years. It’s been terrible news for real estate flippers, but the effects hit single-house homeowners just as hard.

    Although timing the market is always dangerous, with low prices and low interest rates, if you can qualify and if the time is right for your family, now could be the right time to buy a house, particularly if you’re looking to live there for a long time.

  • Buying Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS). You can buy this investment product directly from the U.S. Treasury. Twice a year, you receive interest as well as an adjustment to your principal balance based on the inflation rate. This is basically a bond that will only lose value in the event of deflation. If you must sell TIPS after the value has dipped below your initial investment, you will still receive your full initial investment back.

    There’s no risk in losing money, and this is the closest you might be able to get to true preservation of capital during inflation. Keep in mind, however, that the government’s reported inflation value doesn’t necessarily reflect any one household’s experienced rate of inflation. The government’s rate used for calculating TIPS adjustments, the CPI-U, uses the prices of a combination of goods that weights items in a way that might not be relevant to most consumers.

  • Buying gold. Investing in gold is traditionally a good way to hedge against inflation, but the price of gold fluctuates. Like all commodities, the value of gold at any particular time is subject to the whims of commodities traders. An investment in gold is not as stable as its reputation. The price fluctuation may be due to fluctuations in the value of the dollar or of any other fiat currency, but the cause is irrelevant because the U.S. dollar is the world’s standard for currency, and if that ever changes, it would be another currency or combination of currencies that becomes the standard, not a commodity like gold. The days of the gold standard are over.

    Furthermore, most people who invest in gold use ETFs or mutual funds due to convenience. It would be inefficient and expensive to store and secure a significant amount of physical gold bars. Once you are dealing with electronic trades rather than a physical manifestation of metal, you’re subjecting yourself even more to the whim of the financial industry.

With low interest rates and increasing inflation, this may be a good time, from a financial perspective, to borrow money. You can do more with someone else’s money, repaying the loan with money valued less in the future. Borrowing money is of course not a good idea for people who could find themselves in trouble with debt, as interest costs could spiral out of control, but if you look at the numbers, borrowers are getting a much better deal, relatively speaking, than savers.

In today’s economy, if you are preserving your money, how are you doing so?

Photo: Lord Jim

{ 19 comments }

Podcast 150: The Big Retirement Risk

by Flexo

Today on the Consumerism Commentary Podcast, Bryan J Busch talks with Erin Botsford, author of The Big Retirement Risk. They discuss myths that Wall Street perpetuates about itself and Erin’s plan for a more sensible retirement portfolio. Consumerism Commentary Podcast The Big Retirement Risk: S06E20 / 150 Download – RSS – iTunes Table of contents ... Continue reading this article…

0 comments Read the full article →

Weekend Reading

by Flexo

Here are a few articles I’ve spotted recently. Are you superstitious? Superstitions can extend into your finances; the belief that the stock market’s performance on January 1 signals the performance for the entire year can be classified as a superstition. Frugal Zeitgeist offers a compilations of several superstitions and their origins. I’m a customer of ... Continue reading this article…

6 comments Read the full article →

The $4 Million Photograph: How Do You Value Art?

by Flexo

Last week, a photograph by Andreas Gurksy, Rhein II, was sold at auction for $4,338,500 to an anonymous buyer. The record-breaking sale allowed Gursky to reclaim fame as the artist whose work has claimed the highest price paid for a photograph. This auction was a secondary market sale. As in most art auctions commanding high ... Continue reading this article…

14 comments Read the full article →

Podcast 127: Your Stronger Financial Future

by Flexo

Today on the Consumerism Commentary Podcast, Bryan talks with Mike Egan, the author of Your Stronger Financial Future. In the book, Mike details several popular myths about social security, saving, and investments, and then explains the truth about each one, giving the reader solid knowledge and formulas about how much to save for retirement. Consumerism ... Continue reading this article…

1 comment Read the full article →
Page 1 of 912345···Last »