On the Rich Doing Their Own Laundry
Brad DeLong recently quoted the following snippet from an email he received on his blog:
In Agatha Christie’s autobiography, she mentioned how she never thought she would ever be wealthy enough to own a car – nor so poor that she wouldn’t have servants…
Today, having servants is a luxury only open to the rich, whereas owning at least one car is a standard part of middle class life, outside of a few major cities. In Christie’s youth, however, it was just the opposite. Automobiles were the luxury, whereas most middle class families could afford live in servants (the same is true of many developing countries today).
The Christie quote (or paraphrase, rather) reminds me of something a Papal legate wrote about the habits of the Byzantines back in the day: “Their treasuries are overflowing, yet they do their own laundry.”
In both cases there is the same basic phenomenon at work. As a society gets wealthier, the real cost of most things goes down, but the real cost of human labor goes up. To quote John Nye:
As incomes rise and the opportunity cost of performing menial labor changes, fewer people will want to work as servants. Those that do will command a higher price. So in America the middle and upper middle-classes are less likely to have servants than in much poorer nations.
Higher labor costs due to rising incomes also affect the supply of goods requiring specialized knowledge and high degrees of craftsmanship. Those members of the population with a taste for hand-carved furniture, stained glass windows, or other items requiring patience and craftsmanship will find that the number of people willing to work at such tasks may shrink and the prices that are charged by those that remain may grow. In certain cases, the costs may so discourage demand, and the supply of workers may fall below a critical level so that even the specialized knowledge itself is lost to future generations. Again, this change in relative prices is likely to be felt most acutely by the wealthiest, but it will also affect those of more modest means who have a peculiar affinity for some items that they feel are essential to the good life.
Comments are closed.
Do you really think the “middle class” (I have problems with the term) don’t have servants anymore in the u.s. simply because those who would be servants are “charging more” for their labor? Could it be that values have shifted?
What’s with your tag “progress”?
Michael,
I have noticed that you capitalize Canada and Canadian and Latin America but when referring to the USA you write america and american and u.s. Is it meant as an insult?
Also: where’s your lapel pin?
I walk through Madison Square Park in Manhattan going to and from work and sometimes during my lunch hour (especially in nice weather), and I see a great many babies being taken care of by nannies. I also see a lot of elderly people out and about, often in wheelchairs, being cared for by various kinds of aides. There are dog walkers, too. I think it’s not uncommon, in New York, at least, for people to have someone in once or twice a week to clean their apartments. I have known people who have done this who were far from being affluent.
When I was a kid — and we were far from being rich — we sometimes had “hired help” to do things like ironing and light cleaning. That, though, was in the time after my mother had octuplets. (Actually, it was twins, but the truth would have sounded too mundane in this day and age.)
Sadly, servants aren’t that servile anymore. Now they deem themselves part of the service industry. Bless the hearts of those darling illegals though. With my nostalgia for Big Daddy’s days I’d be lost without the brown people. I can dream of the golden age, before such socialist nightmares as minimum wage and other protections – however rudimentary they still are in this country, thankyoujesus! All I have to do is say “La Migra, Jesús!”
Also: where’s your lapel pin?
phosphorius,
Deliberately not capitalizing America and United States is not like failing to wear a flag lapel pin. Capitalizing proper nouns is not a matter of patriotism. It’s a matter of following the conventions of written English. Deliberately and consistently not capitalizing the name of one country does seem to be some kind of statement. I’m just asking what it is supposed to mean. It strikes me as being kind of like saying “Democrat Party,” which I find very annoying.
Lapel pins, much like 50 foot American flags at car dealerships, serve a valuable purpose. Alzheimer patients oblivious what country they’re in are provided a helpful reminder. The latter also double as orientation points for space invaders.
“I have noticed that you capitalize Canada and Canadian and Latin America but when referring to the USA you write america and american and u.s. Is it meant as an insult?”
It’s what the cool kids do at U of Toronto. Nothing sticks it to U.S. imperialism like lower case.
There is no question that mji’s refusal to capitalize United States or America is intended as an insult. He hates the United States with a passion. That much is clear.
He does love pioneers “in the area of the convergence of liberation theologies and queer theory” though, so I suppose that counts for something.
David,
I guess it depends how you define people as “rich”. The people I know who have someone in to clean an hour or two each week all have household incomes north of 80k, and those I know of at work you use nannies rather than group day care facilities are generally in the 200k+ household income set. I think the usual formula for defining “rich” is “people who make more than twice what I expect to make in the next couple years”, so whether these folks are rich is fairly relative.
Certainly, people still hire out work which in the past might have been done by servants of some sort. (It seems like I’m the only guy in my neighborhood who insists on doing his own yard work rather than having a “yard guy” come once a week.) But I think the broad point that those in the middle to upper middle class cannot command nearly the hours of service to have full time servants (as Agatha Christie did) probably holds true.
100 years ago an upper middle class family might quite reasonably have expected to have two full time servants. These days, even valuing those at only 40hrs/wk would put having two full time servants at the 70k/yr cost at an absolute minimum. Which is an outlay I would imagine most people even in the upper middle class would be highly reluctant to make.
I think in this case, not capitalizing “United States” or “America” is meant to show opposition to the hyper-patriotism common in the U.S.
Of course that is rather a childish way to go about it, it’s basically on the same level as demanding somebody wear a flag lapel pin to prove their patriotism. Even Senator McCarthy capitalized “Soviet Union,” I’m sure. Serious scholars don’t bother with silly “statements” like that.
Darwin,
The nannies I see in the part may very well be working for rich families. Also, they tend to be minorities, and some (many? most?) of them are no doubt being paid off the books.
I worked with a guy whose family had moved to the United States from India, and the whole family would go back and visit occasionally. I believe they still had a house there. After one trip he told me they had hired someone who did all the cooking (offering a wide range of cuisines) and constantly hovered over them asking if he could make them a snack or refill their glass. He said that when he left, he gave the man the equivalent of a $50 tip (this was for a week’s work), and the man tried to turn it down because it was too much money.
I am a nanny, full time. My skin is white. My employers are an upper middle class black family. Go figure.
I for one do not believe MI is deliberately not capitalizing USA and America. That is just too juvenile.
I am sure he would capitalize Iran or North Korea, and those societies have some pretty strong jingoism running through them.
I am sure it’s just a slip of the fingers.
I did not mean to dump on Michael, whom I agree with much of the time. It was just that I noticed the lower case thing for the first time, and I thought it was fair to ask the question.
I would note that e. e. cummings wrote some great poems, and this is one of my favorites.
Ole’ Feddie’s at it again…
I am surprised he was able to delay playing with his patriot missiles enough to write such America-loving script.
Amusing that my online capitalization habits continue to cause people grief.
David, Magdalena is right that it’s simply meant to be provocative (and it obviously works) as a way to question “hyper-patriotism” in the u.s. (of course the u.s. is not the only country in which this is a problem, but it’s my context). To me, the folks like Feddie who obviously take it as a personal insult and assume that I “hate the United States with a passion” make themselves look utterly foolish.
I’m not sure why Magdalena thinks it “childish” and that “serious scholars” don’t do such things. She obviously does not read much serious scholarship, or else she read very narrowly. The idea to decapitalize such words was inspired precisely by similar practices among certain scholars. That said, in my own academic writing I certainly do capitalize references to the u.s. – I’m not sure why Magdalena cannot distinguish between casual blogging/commenting and academic writing.
He does love pioneers “in the area of the convergence of liberation theologies and queer theory” though, so I suppose that counts for something.
Fed, you are obviously a terrified, whimpering mess of a human being. That you would turn my observation of the death of a prominent gay theologian into an insult is really sad.
I am surprised he was able to delay playing with his patriot missiles enough to write such America-loving script.
Always vigilant, always at the ready to defend our shores and our honor from the queers and those who do not worship Her as he does.
Michael,
I am kind of sorry I brought it up. Provoke away. I will even defend your right to burn a flag (although so will Scalia, so I don’t know how many points I can claim for that).
If I remember correctly, you are an american currently living in canada (so there!). Years and years ago, after the arrival of personal computers but before the public had any significant Internet access, I belonged to a local bulletin board that participated in a network in which messages were delivered overnight to and from other bulletin boards by phone. I had an exchange with a Canadian who was critical of the United States, and I was offering a defense along the lines of, “Sure we did this, and sure we did that, and of course right now we’re doing this, but . . . . so what are you complaining about?” And he wrote back, “All those things you listed!” And I thought, “Oh, interesting point.” I sometimes wonder if the United States can’t be seen more clearly from Canada than from anywhere else.
Flag burning only affirms the beliefs of flag aficionados and raises Hannity’s ratings :P But actually, if I recall correctly, burning is one proper way of flag handling. There is, as I learned to my astonishment, a whole code on how to deal with the flag. It’s liturgy, basically. I don’t think I’ve ever come across a home in Austria that had an Austrian flag up, let alone a flagpole. People generally know what country they live in :)
The lapel pin is such stupid crap, and it’ll never go away again, much like taking off shoes at the airport or the crawler on cable news informing us of Britney Spears’ latest misdeeds in the same crawl as earthquake kills 100,000. It should be insulting to one’s intelligence but apparently most intelligences aren’t sufficiently developed.
I see. My unwillingness to “celebrate” an individual’s decision to engage in “intrinsically disordered conduct” or a book entitled “Indecent Theology: Theological Perversions in Sex, Gender and Politics and The Queer God” makes me a “terrified, whimpering mess of a human being.”
Whatever.
I see now why you believe Andrew Sullivan is a Catholic.
I watched that puppet movie “Team America”, and man, I think they got the mood of the nation down.
Plus, you gotta admit, that theme song did kick a little you know what! :)
Fed – You are perfectly free to disapprove of whatever behavior you imagine she engaged in. Just keep your mouth shut about it here. And the fact that you would use the occasion of her death to insult me and to make your judgmental self feel better about yourself is absolutely disgusting. If you have a comment about the post I made at my blog, do it there. Got me?
MI-
I was actually referring to two of your comments. The first was one you made at my blog, in which you claimed to “celebrate gay people,” which I thought was a rather odd comment to make:
http://www.southernappeal.org/index.php/archives/6715/comment-page-1#comment-359084
which you made in response to this comment of mine:
http://www.southernappeal.org/index.php/archives/6715/comment-page-1#comment-359070
This is what I meant when I said that you celebrate homosexual behavior.
The second comment was a post at your personal blog, in which you celebrate this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Indecent-Theology-Theological-Perversions-Politics/dp/0415236045
I will let others read the description and reviews of this book, and judge for themselves whether a person who honestly cared about the Church’s teaching on homosexuality would ever praise this author’s work. And while I am certainly sorry for her passing, that isn’t the issue (as you well know). The issue is your unqualified endorsement of this author’s work:
http://catholicanarchy.org/?p=741
That’s what I am calling others attention to with my comments here. If you want to take that as an insult, then by all means please do, you have certainly earned it.
Finally, if you want to ban me from this blog, and show everyone what a coward you truly are, then have at it. You’ll note that I allow all of your nasty comments about me to remain at my blog; but that’s because I believe they say more about your character (or lack thereof) than mine.
Blackadder
A bit related tangentially in terms of comparative finances is something that fascinated me as to how Saint Paul was treated by the Romans in Acts at the end of that book. With the Jewish leaders trying again to have him killed, Paul announces to the Roman leader that he is a Roman citizen and is appealing to the Emperor. All motions against him are then ended/he is given a centurion to escort him to distant Rome/ and once there at a house, the Romans give him a guard for two years while he awaits his appeal to the emperor. Try to imagine any modern country that would go to such lengths (financial and gracious) based on an appeal as citizen to the ultimate leader of that country.
bill–
I am confused as to what this has to do with the conversation but I will gladly engage your comment… :)
My father brings that same point up whenever we discuss Christianity & state relations. I think the far more interesting and challenging point in Acts is that the Church takes Paul in and offers him hospitality after he has been over-seeing the public execution of their friends.
j.edwards
Don’t misunderstand that I am praising Rome in all areas; I’m not…some of their best philosophers like Seneca believed in infanticide and yet Jerome nevertheless called him “our Seneca” and praised his advice on marriage and sex (the Stoics saw intercourse as moral only when intending children…Jerome’s position also but not that of the modern Popes thank God).
The financial aspect of what Paul went through though is, like the original post, concerned with comparative financial anomalies not of geography in my example but of very different time zones.
Imagine the US giving you a precinct police chief to escort you to Washington D.C. because you said you were appealing to the president as a citizen and then giving you a guard for two years while your case is appealing to the president. For all our money here in the US (less now), we don’t give women with an order of protection against a violent husband a guard for one week let alone two years as was given to Paul.
“Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when Republicans will not be asked to get back, when Conservatives can stick around — when Liberals will be mellow —- when Libertarians can get ahead, man — and when ‘Michael’ will embrace what is right.”
Fedder – I’m now so pleased that this has come up, because you are showing your own lack of intellectual abilities as well as your contempt for other human beings and (very protestant) attempts at exclusion.
Are you not able to distinguish between “celebrating gay people” and celebrating gay sexual behavior? The rest of us are. Maybe you should get on board with what the Catholic church teaches about homosexuality.
Are you also not able to read? Read my post again and see whether I “praised” her work. I, in fact, read The Queer God in December and did not like it. She was, nevertheless, a pioneer in her field, which I think is an important one. What I did was to recognize her death. If you have a problem with that, then you are a sick human being.
If you really wanted to “call others attention” to those comments and/or posts, be a man. You should have linked to them in the first place instead of this passive-aggressive garbage. You are the one whose character is fully on display here for all to see. I have nothing to hide; I use my real name consistently on this blog and others, unlike you who has used not one but MULTIPLE online aliases.
I don’t have the ability to ban you from VN, only my own posts. But I would not ban you. Your hateful, passive-aggressive comments are accusation enough against you.
I, in fact, read The Queer God in December and did not like it.
Can we expect a forthcoming review?
No.
God is male, a single parent to an only son. He likes to capriciously bestow his favor on football teams, R&B stars and nations engaged in war. For a god opposed to homosexuality he certainly surrounds himself with a lot of men, including his all-male ground crew. :-P The only woman of importance in the story never got to have sex.
Insofar, the “queer god” may be an apt term – although apparently a self-hating “queer” in denial. The psychopathology of those behind this anthropomorphology behind all this is quite fascinating for the mental health professional. In general, introspection is called for when your god shares all your ressentiments.