Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
2. Fair point.
Tue Nov 26, 2013, 12:39 AM
Nov 2013

But I'm imagining a possibly entirely non-existent white picket fence family with 2.5 now-grown children and an aging boomer couple and probably some nice stuff.

Then again, Matt Yglesias had what I thought was a good point that the distinction now between rich and poor is much less about what manufactured goods they buy (you can get a very good Boost Mobile smartphone for $100 now) but the services they consume (the poor phone user has to use a prepaid service like Boost -- though at least that's now as cheap or cheaper than a postpaid service). This gets into "poor people have color TVs" territory, which is true but misses the point: manufacturers saw that market and produced an affordable product. Making services affordable is more problematic, which is why rich and middle class people will be able to afford home health aides (and even then only if they are poor).

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are home health aides the...»Reply #2