Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America

What are your thoughts on the ethical implications of Ehrenreich’s journalistic methods? Do you believe that the experiment was conducted in accordance with the highest principles of honesty? Would you alter any aspects of the experiment and, if so, in what ways would you revise the experiment if you were to conduct it?

Housing is one of the biggest obstacles Ehrenreich deals with within the book. How has the housing crisis changed since the book was published in 2001? Have there been any improvements? In what ways is it worse now than it was then? What are the likely implications of these changes for workers now?

In the book, relationships between managers and employees are often unhealthy, with managers often mistreating or even outright verbally abusing their employees. What are some steps that could be taken to protect employees from abuse and/or exploitation by their managers?

Many of the low-wage workers rely on family, or live in unusual situations that enable them to share the costs of living with family or friends. How do you view the role of family versus government? Where does family responsibility end and when should the government intervene and provide support?

Ehrenreich’s background and identity shape the kinds of jobs that she is offered and how she functions in these jobs. How did her identity as a white woman in her fifties shape the experiment? How might it have been different if she were a different race, gender, ethnicity, or age?

The “money taboo” that Ehrenreich refers to is one of the deterrents to workers unionizing, as American society discourages people from sharing information about their pay with their coworkers, friends, or family. What role does the “money taboo” play in suppressing wages of low-wage workers, and how can the money taboo be challenged?

Economic calculations of poverty portray a certain narrative about poverty—that it has been stable at around thirteen percent (200). These statistics are important because they influence policy decisions. However, Ehrenreich’s book tells a far different story about poverty in the late-20th century—that it has been growing, even while the media and government tout that the American economy is booming, and prosperity is growing as it never has before. In your view, how should poverty be calculated? What would be a fair way of assessing poverty rates in the US?

How would Ehrenreich’s experience be different in today’s economy?