CeleryKills

Day 1:

Welcome to this little series where we unpack how the U.S. economy went from “rising tide lifts all boats” to “hope you brought a life jacket.” Spoiler: it wasn’t magic, and it wasn’t inevitable.

Let’s start with the moment the American economy quietly changed its personality. For a few decades after World War II, the United States enjoyed a kind of economic golden hour. Factories were humming, unions were strong, wages were rising, and the national mood was something like a collective “we got this.” The government’s main economic goal was to keep people employed and keep the country growing. Inflation happened, but it was treated like a manageable side effect of prosperity.

By the late 1970s, that world was falling apart. The United States was no longer the only industrial powerhouse. Europe and Japan had rebuilt. Oil prices spiked. Corporate America was struggling to compete and not always handling it gracefully. The Vietnam War had left a fiscal hangover. Inflation was rising faster than anyone liked. And the political class was panicking.

This is the moment when the country shifted from an economy built around employment and shared growth to one built around controlling inflation at almost any cost. It was a quiet revolution, but it shaped everything that came after, from inequality to the cost of college to the way people talk about experts today. Over the next several days, we will walk through how this happened and why it still matters.

Day 2: What Actually Broke the 1970s Economy              

The popular story says the 1970s fell apart because inflation got out of control. That is true, but it is also incomplete. The deeper causes were more complicated and, frankly, more human.

Corporate America had grown used to being the only game in town after World War II. When foreign competition arrived, many companies did not modernize or innovate. Instead, they raised prices, fought unions, and demanded tax cuts. This contributed to inflation that had nothing to do with workers buying too many things and everything to do with companies protecting their margins.

At the same time, the United States was fighting a long and expensive war in Vietnam without raising taxes to pay for it. The government essentially put the war on a national credit card. That pushed more money into the economy without increasing productivity, which is a recipe for rising prices.

And then there was the global shift. Japan and Germany were producing better cars and electronics. OPEC was flexing its power over oil. The United States had not prepared for a world where it was no longer the only industrial superpower. The result was a messy combination of inflation, unemployment, and political anxiety. This is the backdrop for the policy revolution that came next.

Day 3: The Volcker Shock and the New Rules of the Game                      

In 1979, President Carter appointed Paul Volcker to run the Federal Reserve. Volcker looked at inflation and decided the country needed tough love. His version of tough love involved raising interest rates to levels that would make a modern homebuyer faint. The idea was simple. Make borrowing expensive, slow the economy, and force prices to stop rising.

It worked, but the cost was enormous. Factories closed. Farmers protested in Washington. Unemployment soared. Entire regions of the country were hollowed out. Yet inflation eventually fell, and the financial world celebrated. This moment marked the beginning of a new economic philosophy. Instead of focusing on full employment, the Federal Reserve would now focus on keeping inflation low, even if that meant higher unemployment or slower wage growth.

This shift did not just change policy. It changed the balance of power in the economy. Workers lost bargaining strength. Corporations and financial markets gained influence. And the country began drifting toward the inequality we see today.

Day 4: The 1980s and 1990s Lock In a New Economic Order                   

Once inflation was under control, the United States embraced a new economic identity. Deregulation became the fashion. Globalization accelerated. Taxes on corporations and the wealthy were cut. Unions weakened. Financial markets grew in size and influence. The Federal Reserve continued to treat wage growth as something suspicious and asset growth as something natural.

The result was an economy that rewarded ownership more than work. Wages flattened. Productivity gains flowed upward. Debt became the way ordinary people kept up. The stock market became the national scoreboard. And the idea that the economy should serve the public gave way to the idea that the public should adapt to whatever the economy demanded.

This was not a conspiracy. It was a series of choices that favored capital over labor and markets over public investment. And those choices shaped the next forty years.

Day 5: How the One Percent Pulled Ahead

When an economy prioritizes low inflation, high interest rates, and financial market stability, the people who own assets tend to do very well. The people who rely on wages tend to do less well. That is exactly what happened.

From 1980 onward, the top one percent captured a huge share of new wealth. CEO pay exploded. Stock portfolios ballooned. Meanwhile, median wages barely moved. The middle class felt squeezed. The working class felt abandoned. And the idea of upward mobility began to feel like a nostalgic story rather than a realistic expectation.

This was not an accident. It was the predictable outcome of an economic system that treats rising wages as a threat and rising asset prices as a sign of health. The gap between the wealthy and everyone else widened, and it has not stopped widening.

Day 6: How Education Became a Paywall 

In a world where public investment is treated as suspicious and inflation control is treated as sacred, higher education became a private responsibility rather than a public good. State funding stagnated. Tuition rose. Student loans filled the gap. A college degree became both a necessity and a financial burden.

Young people were told that education was the key to success, but the price of that key kept rising. Universities expanded amenities and administrative layers. Lenders expanded credit. Students expanded their debt loads. And the idea of education as a public investment in the nation’s future faded into the background.

This created a generation that is highly educated, heavily indebted, and understandably frustrated.

Day 7: Why Anti Intellectualism Took Root

When people feel economically insecure for decades, they start to lose trust in institutions. When those institutions include universities, economists, and policy experts, the result is a cultural shift that looks like anti intellectualism. But the root is not hostility to knowledge. It is hostility to systems that feel unresponsive, expensive, and disconnected from everyday life.

People see experts defending policies that have not benefited them. They see universities associated with debt rather than opportunity. They see a political and economic system that seems to work for the wealthy and not for them. Under those conditions, skepticism becomes a survival strategy.

This is not a moral failing. It is a predictable reaction to an economic model that has left many people behind.

Day 8: The Global Ripple Effect

The United States did not keep its new economic model to itself. Through the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and various policy networks, the United States encouraged other countries to adopt similar approaches. Many nations were pushed toward austerity, privatization, and central bank independence. These policies often benefited investors and local elites while weakening public services and labor protections.

The result was a global economy that mirrored the American one. Inequality widened. Debt burdens grew. Developing countries became vulnerable to interest rate changes in Washington. And the promise of globalization turned out to be unevenly distributed.

Day 9: What Real Solutions Look Like 

If we want to address inequality, restore trust, and build a more stable global economy, we need solutions that match the scale of the problem. That means treating employment as a priority again. It means reinvesting in public goods like education, healthcare, and housing. It means strengthening labor protections and recognizing that wages are not the enemy of stability. It means designing tax systems that reflect the reality that wealth grows faster than wages. It means building an industrial strategy that supports innovation and resilience rather than relying on financial markets to guide the future. And it means supporting global development models that prioritize people rather than creditors.

These are not easy changes, but they are possible. The economic system we have today was built through choices, and it can be rebuilt through choices. The first step is understanding how we got here. The next step is deciding where we want to go.