Why Are We So Angry?

It certainly seems that America is one angry nation. The question is, "Why?" Actually, there are lots of answers, as this is an individual sort of thing, but with some groups of angry Americans connected by the same or similar anger. The George W. Bush era, although not without some foundations produced during the Clinton Era and during previous administrations, seems to have brought about much of this anger, although some Republicans probably won't admit to that. The 9/11 attacks galvanized the country in support of the President. He decided to hit back by sending troops into Afghanistan to go after the bad guys. One problem was, he never asked us to pay for that war. It has gone on seemingly forever, and what first was a war supported by a huge percentage of Americans, has now sunk woefully low in public opinion polls. Then just a short while later, Bush ordered our military into Iraq and he didn't ask us to pay for that war either. That war continues, too. Within about a year, the Iraq war began to grate on the nerves of Americans as casualties mounted and there was obviously no plan on how to get our troops out of there. This war, especially, cast a shadow over the Bush Administration, as the announced reasons for going into Iraq changed as time passed. First we were told it was to get Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, which could be passed onto Al Qaida terrorists. When the weapons were never found, we were then told that it was to get Saddam out of power, as he had had ties to Al Qaida (something that has never been proven, and has been refuted in many ways) and then that was augmented by our desire to establish democracy in Iraq. The whole saga (which still has no final chapter) made many Americans skeptical of Bush and his advisers. The Afghan war was put on the back burner, but that didn't stop the pot from simmering; something we have come to realize within this last year or so. President Obama decided early on to send more American troops to Afghanistan, and to increase that number even more just recently. The President's decision has bumped up support for the Afghanistan war a bit in public opinion polls, but the last I saw, it was just barely over 50%.*

To me, the Bush Era was filled by an American anxiety. The results of free trade policies began to hit home more and more, as American companies transferred a number of operations overseas, along with the jobs that had supported those operation here, to take advantage of cheap labor costs.** Wages and benefits for the average American worker stagnated, as home based companies struggled to compete against foreign goods, produced in countries where workers were often paid only a few dollars a day. This brought about enormous trade deficits of tens of billions of dollars each month; that is, America was importing (buying) more goods than we were exporting (selling).*** Tax cuts were enacted that benefited the very wealthiest Americans.**** Federal budget deficits soared. The stock market boomed, making the wealthiest Americans even wealthier. Oil and gasoline prices soared, making the wealthiest Americans even wealthier. Natural gas prices soared (temporarily), making the wealthiest Americans even wealthier. All in all, there was a massive flow of wealth from lower and middle class Americans into the bank accounts of the very wealthiest Americans (and foreign nations), who took their added money and further invested it in products, driving up the prices on everything in sight, from corn to wheat to dairy products. The tremendous surge in energy prices further drove up prices on EVERYTHING, picking the pockets of EVERY American, except for the very wealthiest, who earned more and more from such things. The income gap between the wealthiest Americans and the rest of us grew to levels not seen since the 1920s, and this was acknowledged even by Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, and George W. Bush. The unemployment rate gradually dropped from the recession that followed 9/11, falling below 5% with about two years to go in Bush's presidency, but many Americans didn't feel secure. Millions of Americans were either in foreclosure, or had notice of such, and millions more were filing bankruptcy. Companies moved plants overseas or companies long established in an area changed locations faster than NBC changed Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien.

Then came the collapse. Banks teetered, and several big banks were merged into other banks to save them. One big bank, Lehman, failed. Panic hit, and Wall Street retreated; no "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" for those of the "sit on their ass class." Unemployment soared, federal budget deficits soared even more, budget constraints began affecting more and more states and local governments. The Bush Administration and the Federal Reserve moved to save the banking system from total collapse. The Fed lowered interest rates to zilch. They also gave protection to some non-banks, by calling them "banks," and entitling them to borrow money from the Fed to stay afloat. The Bush Administration pushed through Congress, with much Democratic backing, a bailout plan to save the American banking industry. Later we would find out that billions of dollars were given to banks with no conditions! Further, we also found out that wealthy banking officials were knocking down millions in "bonus" money each year, even though their companies were floundering. So, run your company into the ground, get rewarded! The Obama Administration came to office and essentially picked up where their predecessors left off. They moved to save the American auto industry with billions in bailouts, but also forced the auto industry to come up with plans to show how they could become profitable again.

With millions out of work, budget deficits mounting by the hundreds of billions of dollars, foreclosures escalating even above the already records numbers, the President and his advisers chose to spend political capital on reforming the nation's health care system, with potential costs around a trillion dollars or more over ten years. This, along with sending more troops to Afghanistan, with the added expense of doing such, and getting a Congress devised "stimulus" plan of about $800 billion passed, made many Americans feel that the President was trying to do too much.

From what I can see, there are a lot of different elements to American anger, and not everyone's anger is about the same things, except there does seem to be a consensus (many of the left and many of the right) that they are VERY angry at the bankers, and possibly big business in general. Some on the political right are upset over the deficits, although most were not as vocal about the mounting red ink when Republicans were in charge of the national credit card. Others are angry over government intrusion into "free markets;" that is, into the banking and auto industries, and attempts at reforming the health care system. Others still are angry about some homeowners getting help or special deals to try to prevent foreclosure.^ Some analysts have said they feel that some on the right have pent up anger from the Bush years, as they didn't like many of the things he did, but they kept their mouths shut. Now, with a Democrat in the White House, they have vented their frustration. Probably some truth to that. Others, hopefully small in number, but I have to include this, are just plain angry that a black man is president. They can't stand that a man of a black father and white mother could hold the highest office in the land. My "guess" is, some of these have latched onto one or more of the other issues I've mentioned as a form of cover. On the political left, many are angry that the war issues have not been totally dealt with, especially now that there is an escalation in Afghanistan. Others are angry that some advisers to the President have strong ties to Wall Street, or were involved in supposed oversight of Wall Street (I'd have to say that some on the political right, feel this way too). Others are angry that their own pet issues have not received high priority by the administration. Still others are angry that regulations have not yet been put in place to curb Wall Street or the businesses deemed "too big to fail" (although that "appears" to be changing).

So, there are a lot of things to be angry about, but we don't all agree on those things; in fact, some run counter to one another, as in a support FOR government regulation, and an opposition TO government involvement in business matters. We'll have to see how things develop. No doubt in my mind, IF unemployment does begin to recede, we'll see the anger level begin to cool. (A word history is after the notes)

* Public opinion polls DO MATTER! I know, lots of people don't like to hear that, at least not if those polls are contrary to their own position. Polls give us some idea of what Americans are thinking about on important issues. Yes, they can be flawed, or they can be skewed by how questions are asked, but if we take the main polls and compare them, it gives us a pretty good idea of public opinion. Unlike election polls that might show one candidate leading by a few points, only to lose the election, public opinion polls on issues don't rely on people actually having to cast a ballot, or changing their minds at the last minute (issue polls are typically an ongoing thing). I'm NOT saying they're perfect, but they're all we have, and they are NOT going away. In our system, political leaders who dare too much to ignore public opinion, especially if that opinion is heavily weighted to one side of an issue, can face harsh reality.

** This is not just a swipe at G.W. Bush, as much of the basic legislation on free trade was supported by, and passed during, the Clinton Administration, with support from all living ex-presidents at that time (Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr.), and a televised debate with Vice President Gore in support of the free trade legislation, and Ross Perot in opposition. I think G.W. Bush took free trade to a whole new level, however, with little regard for American workers, except for duties on foreign steel for about a year.

*** I'm putting this simplistically, but previously, for instance, if a product was made in a country with cheap labor, we imposed a duty (tax) on it when it entered the country, thus driving up the price of that product, so that our own products remained competitive.

**** And not with 60 votes required in the Senate. They were ushered through in a process called "Reconciliation," which required only a majority vote. You've got to watch these politicians (in both parties). They tout certain procedures when those procedures advance their own cause, only to scream "foul" when the same process is used or threatened to be used by their opponents.

^ I heard Joe Scarborough of "Morning Joe," on cable station MSNBC, the other day mention that some people are angry because they are part of "the 90% who paid their mortgages." Now, I like Joe, and he's a VERY smart guy, but that seems a bit nasty. After all, many of those who have been foreclosed on never dreamed their job would go overseas, or that they would get laid off, or their pay would be cut. Further, many Americans NEVER asked for help during their foreclosure process, past or ongoing.

WORD HISTORY:
Sound-This is the adjective form, as English has several words spelled and pronounced the same. This form, meaning "safe, sturdy, healthy," goes back to Indo European "swen," which gave West Germanic "gasundaz," which seems to have developed from Old Germanic "sundas." The West Germanic form (English is a West Germanic language) gave Old English "gesund," with the meaning of "healthy, safe, uninjured." Over time, English altered the spelling a little, and dropped the prefix. Close relatives Dutch and German kept the prefix, as Dutch has "gezond" and German has "gesund." By the way, German "Gesundheit," the word said after someone sneezes, means "health/healthiness." It can also be used as we use "Cheers," when having a drink. The idea of "health/safety" also gave English the extended meaning of something being "sturdy." So we have uses like "safe and sound," and also "that building is sound," and the financial meaning "that company is sound." This also seems to be the same word as in "sound sleep," I suppose with the idea being that good sleep is "healthy."