Don’t Buy It

Language frames the way we think, shaping our understanding of systems like the economy and even influencing political outcomes. What if the words we use are the real tools of power?

1. Inequality in America long predated the 2007 financial crash

Decades before 2007, economic inequality was already growing in the United States. Real wages remained stagnant even as corporate profits and productivity soared. This left middle and lower-income groups struggling to keep up while wealth concentrated in the hands of a small elite. By the time of the crash, the top 20 percent of Americans owned 84 percent of the nation’s wealth.

This imbalance had a psychological impact, leaving individuals in unequal societies less happy and more discontent. Economically, as disposable income shrank, consumer spending slowed, reducing economic growth. The financial collapse simply magnified these pressures. By 2009, one in four American households had zero or negative net worth, jumping to 40 percent for African-American households. Still, government aid excluded struggling individuals while bailing out powerful banks.

Economic strain before and after 2007 revealed a deep fault line in American economics. The system primarily benefited the wealthy while providing little to no safety net for households in trouble.

Examples

• The stagnation of wages contrasted by soaring corporate profits over decades.
• In 2009, 25% of U.S. households faced zero or negative wealth, showing how inequality worsened.
• African-American households saw an even sharper increase in financial distress post-crash, rising to 40%.

2. Public outrage post-2007 failed to drive progressive policy changes

The financial collapse of 2007 outraged the public, sparking increased awareness and engagement around economic issues. A staggering 70 percent of Americans followed news about the economy in October 2008. This unrest appeared to favor a progressive vision of fairness, echoed in Barack Obama’s successful “change” campaign.

Progressive voices gained more attention as left-wing economists began to counter conservative views more visibly. Despite this, conservatives dominated the political outcome. They shifted the narrative, portraying government intervention as the cause of the crisis rather than the solution. This perspective won over voters, as seen in the 2010 Tea Party movement and Republican victories in Congress.

Progressives missed a chance to turn public frustration into lasting policy change, whereas conservatives skillfully used language to reinforce their anti-regulation stance.

Examples

• Barack Obama’s 2008 election ride on messages of hope, equality, and fair change.
• In the 2010 midterms, Republicans regained Congress with an agenda of reducing government intervention.
• Polls like the 57% Bloomberg survey showed voters absorbed free-market messaging: tax and spending cuts as paths to recovery.

3. How metaphors shape our thinking

We rely on metaphors to understand complex ideas, comparing them to familiar concepts. This is especially true for abstract areas like economics. Research by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson highlights that metaphors influence us significantly, appearing in our speech up to every 10–15 words.

Take how metaphors alter perspectives. Stanford psychologists found when people read about crime as a “beast,” they supported harsher punitive measures. But when framed as a “virus,” they preferred preventive strategies. The way we label issues changes how we act on them.

Metaphors about the economy have real-world implications. The way we discuss economic problems can drive who or what we blame—and ultimately, what policies we support.

Examples

• Terms like “a green thumb” help clarify intangible abilities through metaphor.
• Crime described as a “beast” versus a “virus” changes whether people favor punishment over prevention.
• Using active, deliberate economy-related imagery shapes support for intervention or passivity.

4. Conservatives use strategic metaphors to win economic debates

Conservatives excel at using language to frame the economy as a self-regulating “living system.” Words like “recovery,” “ailing,” or “fragile” describe economic issues in a way that downplays human accountability. This positioning reinforces ideas that markets naturally heal themselves, deterring calls for regulation.

Conservatives also link economic outcomes to moral virtue. They paint wealth as a reward for hard-working individuals and poverty as a failure of character. Such narratives make government aid seem undeserved and dependent on others’ sacrifice.

This strategy was visible when Senator Bob Corker opposed foreclosure relief by arguing responsible taxpayers shouldn’t fund the “bad behavior” of irresponsible homebuyers. By framing economic issues this way, conservatives redirect blame while championing neoliberal ideals.

Examples

• Post-crash, Republicans described the economy as “ailing” to justify non-interventionist policies.
• Terms like “bad behavior” implied moral failings for those seeking economic relief.
• Neoliberal ideals were framed as natural, not political, through these metaphors.

5. Progressives can redefine economic debates with the “car” metaphor

To counter conservative language, progressives can introduce a new metaphor: the economy as a car. A car stuck in a rut, out of control, or needing a jumpstart creates imagery that supports government regulation and intervention.

Cars need rules, roads, and repairs to function properly, just as the economy requires leadership and governance to serve everyone fairly. If the economy seems to lack a driver, it risks chaos, suggesting that oversight—a key progressive tenet—is essential. Phrases like “different starting points” or “carrying baggage” further highlight inequality as structural, not individual.

This approach challenges the conservative notion of an economy that functions naturally and rewards virtue without bias.

Examples

• Comparing the economy to an "unstable car" suggests the need for intervention.
• Phrases like “rules of the road” emphasize regulation to avoid crashes.
• Metaphors showing uneven starting points stress systemic inequality.

6. The term "crisis" weakens progressive economic arguments

When progressives call 2007 a “financial crisis,” they unintentionally downplay how long systemic issues were building. The term implies a sudden event that resolves naturally, aligning with conservative messaging against intervention.

Instead, progressives could use terms like “blunder” or “damage,” which suggest accountability and deliberate action. Similarly, “financial reform” might send the wrong message. Reform implies tweaking the existing system, not overturning harmful neoliberal principles.

Strong alternative language can prompt discussions about deep restructuring and fairer economic systems.

Examples

• “Crisis” evokes unexpected and uncontrollable events, weakening arguments for structural change.
• Words like “overhaul” spark visions of radical systemic change.
• Alternative phrases like “economic damage” point to deliberate causes and preventions.

7. Passive voice conceals accountability in economic failures

The passive voice hides culpability by focusing on outcomes rather than actions. Common phrases like “the dollar fell” or “houses were foreclosed on” obscure the people behind such events. This linguistic choice subtly suggests these events were inevitable.

Depersonalized language affects public perception. For example, saying “banks foreclosed homes” instead of “people lost houses” changes how fault is assigned. The first framing holds institutions to account, while the second removes blame from those with power.

Specific and active language uncovers bad actors and helps elevate public empathy for those harmed.

Examples

• “The unemployment rate rose” sidelines the policies and decisions driving job losses.
• “People are losing their homes” avoids naming banks as foreclosure agents.
• Active voice invites accountability, highlighting intentional actions others might ignore.

8. Vertical metaphors reinforce economic hierarchies

Metaphors about “the top” or “the bottom” influence how Americans view inequality. Associating success with being “up” and failure with “down” subtly implies a natural hierarchy, reinforcing conservative ideas.

Instead, progressives could use language emphasizing imbalances or barriers rather than vertical rankings. Barriers suggest man-made obstacles that can be removed, while imbalances evoke the natural human tendency to seek equilibrium. These framings shift focus from hierarchy to fairness.

Metaphors about breaking barriers also reflect historical successes, such as Martin Luther King Jr.’s rhetoric advocating against racial segregation.

Examples

• “Barriers” move away from hierarchical ideas, creating imagery of equal access.
• “Imbalance” frames inequality as something solvable, not inherent.
• Historical use of barriers in civil rights fights proves its effectiveness.

9. Language shapes perceptions of social mobility

Despite rising inequality and shrinking social mobility, many Americans still believe in the “American Dream.” This idea persists due to the strategic language used to frame the narrative around opportunity.

Terms like “freedom” or “hard work” reinforce belief in meritocracy. However, progressives can challenge this by framing inequality as blocks to opportunity, not a lack of effort or choice. Words about systemic barriers, like “blocks” or “traps,” appeal to deeply-held ideas of fairness and individual dignity.

Shifting language around mobility would help reshape views about economic fairness in America.

Examples

• The American Dream is maintained by powerful narratives of self-reliance.
• Systemic barriers linked to opportunity highlight structural inequalities.
• Changing metaphors can help dismantle myths surrounding meritocracy.

Takeaways

1. Use active language to assign accountability in economic narratives.
2. Shift metaphors from hierarchy (e.g., "top/bottom") to fairness (e.g., "imbalances" or "barriers").
3. Challenge conservative metaphors by framing the economy as a controllable, man-made system like a car.