What The Daycare Crisis and the Housing Meltdown Have in Common
Commentary: Two editors, two mothers, and one major magazine award. What the economic gurus could learn from our small shop.
|
|
when we took the reins of this magazine nearly two years ago, the press response was not altogether kind. Two editors obviously meant a "power vacuum," wrote Jon Carroll of the San Francisco Chronicle. Two female editors? "Cue the cat reorws and hisses!" snarked the New York Press' Hype Stalker. Carroll, mensch that he is, has long since apologized, writing last summer that Mother Jones "is as good as I've ever seen it." We've yet to hear from Hype Stalker, but who cares? Now we have the verdict of journalists who actually know what they're talking about. In May, the American Society of Magazine Editors bestowed on us its General Excellence award, our industry's highest honor. We are especially thrilled for two reasons: For one, we were up against some of the most prestigious titles on newsstands today. For another, being honored for the efforts of a rookie year is a rarity.
In other words, WE ROCK! Now, usually we're disinclined toward such self-promotion; it took us two years just to acquiesce to the art department and put our picture up in this space. But we can make an exception because, as any editor in chief should tell you, brilliance doesn't reside chiefly at the top of the masthead. This award belongs to our smart and incredibly hardworking staff, many of whom started here as interns and have grown into leadership positions. They have (mostly cheerfully) embarked with us on what at times felt like an Ironman triathlon as we transformed Mother Jones from a bimonthly magazine into a 24/7 news organization. It's been fun, but also a hell of a lot of work: We've added an eight-person Washington bureau, overhauled both our print and online identity, expanded our focus on training the next generation of investigative reporters (via what's now the Ben Bagdikian Fellowship Program), and begun exploring what reader-sponsored journalism might mean in a new media age. And while conventional wisdom has it that magazine readers rebel against major changes, you have become more engaged and supportive. Thank you.
While we're on house news, there's something that isn't apparent from this artfully cropped picture. At the time of the photo shoot, we were both pregnant. Monika (at right) now has a four-month-old (as well as two preschoolers). Clara is due with her first in July. And so, like all parents, we've been confronted with the abominably poor options when it comes to what is euphemistically called "work-life balance." Mother Jones offers far better parental leave and flexibility than even most Fortune 500 companies, but no on-site day care. That's because we're a small shop—but what's the excuse of a General Motors, Morgan Stanley, or Condé Nast?
Many would argue that figuring out the logistics and cost of child care is up to individual families; if that burden falls harder on women and people lower down the income pyramid, so be it. This notion—that American individualism is incompatible with shared responsibility—is a shopworn talking point of the Chamber of Commerce set. We confront a related fallacy when it comes to the economic crisis. It has been presented as if the problem were one of homeowners too stupid to live within their means, when in fact, in the absence of sensible regulation, financial institutions chose not to live within theirs. Yes, maybe we were all kidding ourselves when we fell for the home-equity sales pitches; surely we were anxious for economic security at a time of vaporizing pensions and disappearing jobs. But let's not forget that the financiers who sold us this fantasy were taking out the equivalent of gargantuan home-equity loans—only without even an overleveraged house to back them up. Talk about irresponsible borrowing.
They managed to do this by the same free-market, anything-goes logic that hangs parents out to dry. How? For 30 years, the financial industry and its Capitol Hill handmaidens worked tirelessly to demolish Depression-era safeguards. The result: a $62 trillion credit derivatives market, nearly four times the size of the US stock market, deliberately engineered to operate outside the bounds of any public oversight. And yet John McCain is obviously simpatico with this approach. Or why would he have hired Phil Gramm, the chief architect of this debacle, as his "economic guru"?
Even the banks have not been immune to the consequences of their deregulation crusade. But given that our savings, our pensions, our jobs, our homes, and the value of America's currency itself are bound up with their misfortune, that's small solace indeed. As it stands, borrowers and investors have lost trust in the banks; banks have lost trust in each other; and the world has lost trust in the American economy. No tidbit of sunny financial news, no marginal improvement in some economic indicator is going to fix this fundamental problem. That will take a more serious rebuilding of the financial system, and the politics governing it.
Monika Bauerlein and Clara Jeffery are coeditors of Mother Jones.
Photo: Anne Hamersky
Somehow it was MJ's point of view that a woman had to be post sexual in order to be a viable candidate.
It hurt! It was like MJ ain't for no Hillo! and it reminded me of so many covers where promising democratic leaders were skewered with ugly cartoons on your cover depicting them as a white knights when we know there will never be another one of those if there ever were any.
It's time to stop the madness. Now.
I love Mother Jones. The foxes are in the henhouse! Am I the only person who saw it live and remembers President Dwight David Eisenhower giving his farewell address and the warning on the Military Industrial Complex?
I'm an astronomy buff, but I don't want us to spend money sending men to Mars. I can think of two persons who will be AVAILABLE after the 20th of January. How about a one-way trip" it will get them there faster and at very little cost! I wish they had been sent four years ago.
Can't now, but I will be supportive next year sometime. But I won't want the print issue. Save the trees!
I'll just send contributions when I can.
If we can combine the two ideas here, surely our American cousins can do so as well!
My husband and I cannot have children, so other than paying taxes for schools and hoping that you will encourage your kids to attend them for a literate educated population, we have no responsibility for your kids, none whatsoever. If my husband just smiles at a kid in the grocery store, then everybody thinks he is a child molester and pedophile, while most child abuse takes place within the family between parents and children. If I scold a young mother for shouting at her kid in the grocery store, then this provokes comments about how it is none of my business, to put it mildly. We have no shared responsibility for your kids. If you are looking to share the costs of their upbringing, then see your own family and other parents in your area, which you are surely doing, but don't try to stick your hands in our pockets beyond a contribution for schools for them.
One reason for unending poverty over many generations is that too many people have too many children that they cannot afford to raise, while the Catholic church continues to ban abortion. Make no mistake - I like children, and we enjoy our nephew and nieces. If you raise them properly, they may even take care of you, when you are older. But your decision to have them is your private decision, and you, most of all, are responsible for this decision and the consequences of your actions and choices.
You might also get your facts straight. The economy is inherently, naturally cyclical, like many things in life. It is now going through a down phase of the business cycle, particularly in the US, where too many people have lived beyond their means for too long, using credit cards, car loans, lying to the bank about their income, and assuming that real estate prices would always go up and up and up. There has always been a business cycle, for thousands of years. If the government has failed us, it failed by not educating people about the economic facts of life and business cycles and about the risks of too much debt, buying on credit what you cannot afford.
Furthermore, I am not "whining" about paying for schools. I gladly accept paying for schools and hospitals, not for the military-industrial complex. The real problem in the public schools, besides guns and knives, is that some of the teachers are illiterate. For example, in Texas, the teachers union has for years resisted having their members tested for their skills in reading, writing, and arithmetic. This nonsense prompts most parents who can to send their kids to private schools and divides us.
Just don't expect that you can put your hand in my purse to pay for your children. This is my simple message. If you bring children into this world, then you have the responsibility, the burden, to raise them. You will probably get the benefit of them later, if you raise them well, and if you are lucky. I'm not taking out anything on you or anybody else. Again, I enjoy the company of my nephew and nieces. If asked, I am willing and able to support them. But you have a lot of nerve expecting me to support your children, which is the drift of this article and what you imply. If you cannot afford to raise your children, then do not have them in the first place. If you already have them, then cut back your discretionary expenses to raise them, and most of all, make time for them. Take your responsibility yourself.
Childcare was given as an example of good corporate citizenship.
The mortgage crises was given as an example of bad corporate citizenship.
It's a weird thing that in this country that corporations have all the rights of real people without a lot of the responsibilities. I'm not sure if that's been a feature subject for MOJO but it may make a good one.
I too would love to see something about childcare, becuase I've been concerned for some time that the huge numbers of double income parents may simply reflect a lack of other options, and the influx of kids to schools with poor social and life coping skills may represent a real, if nascent crisis.
I was responding to the rude posting with the comment about "the economy gutted by a bunch of thugs", which besides being rude, implies that she has a grievance and that everybody else owes her some compensation for this grievance. This is nonsense. In fact, she made a choice to bring her children into the world, and now she has to raise them. Too many people have lived beyond their means for too long, buying what they cannot afford, using credit cards, car loans, and borrowed money that they now cannot pay back. Now some of them would like to portray themselves as victims, with a grand grievance. Indeed, some of them were tricked by lenders or their agents, but many of them also falsified loan applications.
It seems to me that some sort of basic economic education should be part of every secondary school curriculum, including basic concepts of how to handle (and save) money, income, expenses, assets, and liabilities. This would first require that pupils could read and write, but it would be useful to prepare young people to live within their means, not to buy what they cannot afford, and avoid too much debt. Too much debt is what is poisoning the economy.
I recently had a conversation with my step-aunt, who is from Finland. While visiting the US, she remarked that they had subsidized health care, child care and maternity AND paternity leave for the Finns. Believe it or not, their income taxes are similar to ours, and despite what the government machine would have us believe, they are not Socialists!
What I'm getting at here is that the Finns, as a people decided what their important values (I hate that word) for their community-meaning their country-were. Everyone pays, and in perhaps ancillary ways, everyone benefits because ultimately, they are healthier and better educated. (You can look it up-it's fact not opinion).
I do respect your opinion, Brenda, and I'm saddened that you have so many bad experiences with parents in your community.