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

Search: sex


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 }

I’ve discussed whether couples should sign a prenuptial agreement before marraige recently. A good prenup can protect both individuals in the couple if a marriage were to result in irreconcilable differences.

Signing a legal document of this type could be helpful if the couple owns substantial assets or if there is a wide disparity in income or wealth between the two members of the couple. If either or both of the individuals own businesses, a prenup could protect those businesses, not to mention the lives of any employees relying on those businesses.

Relationships coupleMore people are looking for the protections of a prenuptial agreement without the benefits of getting married. Marriage is becoming a less popular option for couples today, with only 51 percent of adults taking the plunge according to CNN. Couples are increasingly choosing to live together and share their lives without tying the knot.

Cohabitation can cause legal problems the same way marriage can, particularly if the relationship ends.

A growing number of unmarried couples are seeking similar legal protections through cohabitation agreements. These legally-binding contracts, which are drawn up by an attorney, protect each person’s assets, address child custody issues and determine support obligations, much like prenuptial agreements do.

Cohabitation, in the cases where assets need to be protected, is more than just having a roommate. Often, a couple may decide to have children despite not being married, and this leads to questions about caring for children if the relationship were to dissolve. While one might assume that cohabitation is an option only for couples that cannot legally marry in their state, but 70 percent of the divorce attorneys surveyed by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers say most of the new cohabitation agreements they’ve seen are signed by heterosexual couples who could be married if they choose to be.

Buying a house together can be dangerous for an unmarried couple. Most states don’t have laws covering this situation, like they do for married couples. A cohabitation agreement can define how the house and its mortgage are treated in the event of a termination of the relationship.

I might say that a cohabitation agreement for a couple not intending to get married is even more important than a prenuptial agreement for a married couple. In some cases, but not all, the risk of the relationship ending is higher without the bond of matrimony.

Do you believe these cohabitation agreements are necessary? Would you sign one?

Photo: Dragunsk
CNN

{ 12 comments }

It’s no surprise that retailers track your purchases. It’s obvious at the grocery store, particularly if you sign up for the supermarket’s loyalty discount program. If you provide your address, you’ll receive coupons and ads tailored specifically to your buying habits. My local supermarket allows customers to sign up anonymously; the coupons are offered right at the point of sale rather than through the mail.

Retailers use shopping habits to profile shoppers. These profiles can be very accurate. When you have a store that sells more than just groceries and wants to be the one-stop shop for every single item one might need for living — like Target — mathematical and neuroscience geniuses can with a high percentage of certainty determine your age, sex, marital status, whether you have children, how far from the store you live, whether you have children or are planning to, and what websites you visit. They can gather data linked to a personal shopping identification number by taking multiple factors into account, including the products you buy, surveys your complete online, and the ads you use and don’t use.

TargetCombine this information with personal data that can be purchased, like what you talk about online, your political stances, and your charitable giving, there is no limit to the level of precision of your customer profile.

An article in the New York Times explains how a customer’s subtle shopping habits — perhaps buying more lotion than usual — resulted in the algorithm determining there was a high probability that she was pregnant. Target began sending ads to her house for products related to babies and pregnancy.

After seeing the ads arrive in the mail, the girl’s father stormed into the store to speak to the manager, blaming him for trying to convince his daughter in high school to become pregnant. Apparently, she was pregnant, but hadn’t told her father yet. She may not have been overtly purchasing baby-related items at Target to trigger this, but you can’t keep secrets from mathematics.

Here’s how that can happen:

[W]hen some customers were going through a major life event, like graduating from college or getting a new job or moving to a new town, their shopping habits became flexible in ways that were both predictable and potential gold mines for retailers. The study found that when someone marries, he or she is more likely to start buying a new type of coffee. When a couple move into a new house, they’re more apt to purchase a different kind of cereal. When they divorce, there’s an increased chance they’ll start buying different brands of beer.

Consumers going through major life events often don’t notice, or care, that their shopping habits have shifted, but retailers notice, and they care quite a bit. At those unique moments, Andreasen wrote, customers are “vulnerable to intervention by marketers.” In other words, a precisely timed advertisement, sent to a recent divorcee or new homebuyer, can change someone’s shopping patterns for years.

And among life events, none are more important than the arrival of a baby. At that moment, new parents’ habits are more flexible than at almost any other time in their adult lives. If companies can identify pregnant shoppers, they can earn millions.

The changes can be subtle. It’s not buying diapers in bulk that triggers the retailer’s pregnancy sensors. It’s the small changes in shopping habits that may not seem obvious to anyone other than the mathematicians and scientists who understand behavioral data and have applied it to customer profiling.

Do retailers have too much information on customers’ behavior, or are you comfortable knowing these companies can paint an accurate picture of your life and use this information to market directly to you? Do consumers have the right to a somewhat private life?

Photo: Patrick Hoesly
New York Times

{ 23 comments }

Do people have any kind of control over whom they fall in love with? Perhaps Cupid’s arrow strikes randomly, and there is no choice but to obey the heart — or chemicals in the brain — or sexual urges. But once that initial response has subsided, if you and your partner are headed for a life-long or major long-term relationship, there should be some discussion about money.

What role does that discussion have in determining the path of your relationship?

Relationships coupleA recent study explains that opposites don’t attract in relationships. If you’ve ever looked at relationships where each member of the couple is on a different side of a money-related philosophy, you’ve probably suspected this to be the case. A habitual spender in debt and a frugal saver could have a relationship full of conflict; or, if to avoid conflict money is never part of a conversation, the financial damage could be worse in the future.

Avoidance of tough discussions about money, deliberately hiding financial problems, and outright lying about a financial situation could be more damaging than the financial problems alone. When everything is out in the open, and the couple is fully aware of their individual finances, would a difference in philosophy be enough to curtain the relationship before it progressed to a more serious state?

Ginger, who wrote a guest article for Consumerism Commentary, argued that smart women should marry for money. Although the article was misunderstood by many readers, she was not saying that women should marry for quantity of money, but for their approach to money. A smart, independent woman shouldn’t need to take care of a husband as if she were his mother. The same may be true for men, though traditional sex roles tend to make the man-supporting-woman paradigm more acceptable.

There is more that goes into a successful relationship that being financially compatible. Differences in religion, social issues, values, and goals are important to address. This is a financial website, though, and readers are generally focused on their thoughts surrounding money. In planning to move a relationship forward, how important is a compatible philosophy of money when compared to other matters that define compatibility? Would you be willing to accept a difference in opinion about a divisive political issue before you accept someone who doesn’t share the same financial values? Or do you feel that you might be able to sway your partner’s approach to money more easily than changing other philosophical differences?

I’m interested in hearing opinions from every reader. What was or should be the role of money in choosing a relationship? Leave your comments below.

Photo: Dragunsk
Wired

{ 18 comments }

Boost Your Human Capital: Stay Healthy

by Flexo
Jogging Girls

It’s easy to focus on the personal policies that help improve your net worth immediately. Saving money, investing thoughtfully, and earning income affect your bottom line immediately. This view can be shortsighted occasionally. Focusing effort on your personal human capital can have a greater affect on your net worth over the course of the rest ... Continue reading this article…

7 comments Read the full article →

Get Rich By Thinking About Being Rich

by Flexo

In her new book, Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference, the author, Cordelia Fine cites studies that show how our lives are affected directly by the labels we give ourselves. I’m not interested in the strictly gender-related aspects of this discussion, at least not for Consumerism Commentary, but I am ... Continue reading this article…

16 comments Read the full article →

Podcast 113: The Money Couple, Scott & Bethany Palmer

by Flexo

Today’s guests on the Consumerism Commentary Podcast are Scott and Bethany Palmer, also known as The Money Couple. The Money Couple talks about many topics in their book, First Comes Love, Then Comes Money: A Couple’s Guide to Financial Communication such as financial infidelity, money personalities and how couples can better understand each others’ money ... Continue reading this article…

1 comment Read the full article →

Budget Categories Based on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

by Flexo

When I started my first real budget as an adult, the concept was not difficult. I knew I had to track my spending and keep myself from paying more than necessary for expenses I could control in order to fix my financial situation. To reverse the trend of increasing debt every month, I came up ... Continue reading this article…

14 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 1212345···Last »