The New York Times (5/25/11) is reporting, perhaps accurately, that Newt Gingrich may have trouble living down his $500,000 credit line at Tiffany’s. But this sentence by Sheryl Gay Stolberg is so Timesian:
The way some voters out in the rest of America might see it, he’s a guy who paid more for jewelry than some people pay for their houses.
It will no doubt come as a surprise to folks at a newspaper that reports (1/1/97) that $100-a-bottle wine was an “everyday occurrence,” and told readers where they could have dinner for two for under $100 as “an experiment for lean times” (12/10/08; Extra!, 2/09), but the median price for a single-family house in the United States in 2011 is $158,700. That means that Gingrich was spending over three times more on jewelry than most people pay for their houses.
The “rest of America”—the New York Times should come visit us some time.
Fair is “spot on” as they say about the NYT. My house got all
the way up there to $200,000 before the great Wall Street debacle.
With a little bit of luck, I think it might go for the $158,000 figure
except that there aren’t many buyers these days. The problem
with the NYT is there’s nobody there who knows what’s going on
in the rest of the country. Big sale on Stauffer’s TV dinners this
week at Kroger’s–just $ 2 a piece!
I hear you, Richard. My instinctive feeling about this is that those of us who find a ‘bargain’ dinner in a restuarant for under $100.00 not a ‘bargain’ and not feasible are supposed to think that it is ‘just us,’ we must be personally failing in some way. We are to get the impression that, if a mainstream newspaper thinks that advising their readers that a hundred bucks spent for a bottle of wine is a commonplace experience for their readers during an economic crisis, then those of us who could not even consider such an extravagance must be outside of the mainstream and therefore personal failures. That way we feel embarrassed and personally at fault, and maybe do not think to critisize or question the institutional failures that are undermining our basic survival. Does that make sense?
Not that I think spending $100 on a bottle of wine is ever indicative of anything but deep-seated silliness.
That is so Timesian though. They are always writing about cultural “trends’ that don’t affect 99 percent of America and implies that they are widespread whether it’s writing about the social life of girls in Manhattan private schools or upper class kids in Connecticut agonizing that someone else will get their school’s allotment of places at Yale. Their wedding/engagements page is a hoot â┚¬” so NOT like America.
That caught my eye when I read it in the Times, too. When “some people” are actually most homeowners, the writer and his/her editor are out of touch.
Maybe they are just pandering to their readers? I don’t know. Never read their rag, living in Mid Missouri as I do.
In general, our so called “Leaders” are completely out of touch with average Americans and would shudder to have to even THINK about doing what I have to do to survive. The difference between our ruling elite and the rest of us is about like the difference between average Americans and dirt poor, staving people in the 3rd world, just a couple more rungs down the hardship ladder.
I check the house sales in my suburban Ohio newspaper yesterday and only 7 out of 49 went for more than $250K. None went for over $500K.
I read FAIR as often as I can because we need the critique of our information but I hear the small thunder of a quibble in the criticism of the NYT reporter who described Gingrich jewelry account as “spending more for jewelry than Americans spend for their houses”.
The sentence is accurate and concise and is not improved by being measured against the average cost of American Homes.
With the airwaves full of anonymous billionaire propaganda Fair should be able to aim their considerable arrows at better targets
Gosh im on board with you load of libs on this one(hell just froze over).I am all for people spending, and spending to ignite this economy.It is their money and if they want to buy five million in gold or birkenstocks ,I see that side.But when i see Newt spending on frivolous crap…..or Kim Cardashian getting a 2 million dollar rock…Or the Obama’s spending oodles on vacations(of our money)…..The pragmatist in me…that part of me that sees people in pain ,and distress is disgusted.For the love of God spend if you must on this stuff.But Kim hide your ring for instance.It is too ostentatious for these times.Newt if the reports are accurate im surprised.I would think you more salt of the earth, and less a part of paris hiltons rat pack.I read that when Clinton left office he was 10 million in the hole.Within 8 years he topped 100 million.Gore was heading for a billion before his self created green panic industry collapsed.Obama is worth …well you get the point.We obviously live in a different world than our political elite
I’m probably naive but I’m getting more and more concerned with how out of touch the reporters are at all of the media outlets. It’s crazy. Another story in the Times the other day about college graduates not being able to get the jobs they might have been expecting carried a sort of “hmmm, maybe things are sorta bad out there” tone to it. How can the Times be so out of touch? What’s going on over there? Don’t they have reporters in Cleveland, Columbus, Milwaukee, Topeka, Omaha, etc. etc. etc.? What is driving their “see no evil” mentality? Is all of America in denial about its economic crisis? How long will Americans wait for the private sector to create jobs? Why are we letting politicians off the hook on the jobs problem? Are we really willing to let millions of people just watch their lives dwindle away without any productive work? Look, not everyone can start his own business and obviously there are not enough jobs. Why are we allowing the government to sit and do nothing on this? Americans are in deep denial, as far as I can tell, about the extent of the crisis the country is in. Corporations are making huge profits right now – why would they start hiring people again? There’s no good reason to do so unless demand increases; there’s no sign of that. Americans should wake up and demand that the government act to create jobs. This is really ridiculous. We’re our own worst enemies. The government, my friends, is us! Why are we so opposed to doing something for ourselves when we most need it? What on earth has gotten into people’s heads?
Michael e,”We obviously live in a different world than our political elite”
———————
At least one-third of the freshman lawmakers in Congress are millionaires, a new analysis by Roll Call says, with 15 of the 112 newcomers likely among the richest on Capitol Hill.
Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a longtime attorney general in Connecticut, tops the list of freshman lawmakers with a minimum net worth of $64 million. Blumenthal is the only Democrat in the newspaper’s list of 15 wealthiest freshmen.
Among the wealthy GOP newcomers: Rep. Jim Renacci of Ohio, who is worth about $34 million, and Rep. Diane Black of Tennessee, who is worth nearly $29 million.
yikes! I know it is common knowledge that it takes a boat load (yacht load?) of money to attain public office but if this is ‘representative government,’ who is represented and more to the point, who isnt?
Joe…Im sorry but the government does not “create” even one job.Unless you mean in the great money shuffle.The most they can do is allow for the recreation of wealth(and of course you hate that).Obama has been touting a slight bettering in the economy.Almost all of that is corp profit.And you hate that.And that is why your group can not understand how to “fix”our problems.
A reader says
There have been some in depth analysis at times by different sources showing tax statements /holdings and the such, of our elected officials,and it is stunning.On the whole they are massively rich.I have seen lists putting Dems on top ,and i have seen the opposite.It is irrelevant. They are damn near all rich. Exceedingly so.Obama is slated to raise 1 billion for his campaign run.The country has 350 million people.Im trying to do the math, and prove how under current campaign finance laws you can raise that much money.Remember John kerry with his 17 cars…4 boats….11 houses…..How can they even fathom normal peoples problems?
…or John Mcain who couldn’t remeber how many houses he owned.
That should say remember, of course….sure wish FAIR had a preview function
—————-
In the last congress there were 237 millionaires, 99 of the 100 Senators with the rest in the House. Most of these folks do lots of investing and they have seen their income going up briskly while much of the rest of the country has seen wages stagnate.
The current population is about 310 million. $3.25 per person gets you over a billion dollars.