Blumneconomics IV

That pinata of the St. Petersburg Times, editorial columnist Robyn Blumner, is at it again.

I find few things as maddening as when economists try to convince Americans that the middle class and poor are far better off today than a generation or two ago because of all the things we can now afford that used to be considered luxuries.
(St. Petersburg Times)

Why would that make you mad, Ms. Blumner?

Reading the rest of the column should leave the reader still wondering how Blumner would answer the question. Really answer the question, that is.

Rather than comparing the classes now with those from a generation ago, the best Blumner can do in this column is cite a study that reports on the the current middle class, including a focus on the attitude of people regarding their financial well-being.

I guess if you think you're poor than you are poor. Here's how Blumner puts it:

Prosperity is not how many DVDs you have stacked on a bookshelf. It is a sense of financial security and peace of mind.

By this reasoning, any multibillionaire who puts his fortune at risk pretty much qualifies as poor. So long as he perceives the risk, anyway.

The funniest part of it is that Blumner is, in effect, trying to convince people with televisions, microwaves, a place to live, a car and a nice selection of clothing that they are poor. If she's lucky, these folks enjoying the luxuries of modern life will buy the notion that they are victims and align politically with Blumner to engage in a little bit of class warfare.

The argument she mocks is solid economics. In calculating standard of living, unfortunately for Blumner, it is the standard of living that should be examined and not the perception of the subjects. Perception is a separate issue.

*****