If you are reading Nickel and Dimed, about a woman working at a number of low-income jobs and writing about the experience, you might think of this in the context of recent trends in the jobs market.  Among these trends are the outsourcing the jobs to other countries and the growing divide between high-income knowledge, managerial, and professional jobs and low-income jobs, especially in the service sector, many filled by new immigrants to the U.S.   Another issue is the lack of social supports for workers in low-wage jobs, who have a struggle to get by, and often need to have two jobs or live with a mate, lover, or family members with a job.

If you are reading Fast Food Nation, you might consider this in relationship to the growing problem of obesity, the popularity of junk food, the spread of chains, and the increased use of product placements in films and TV that help provide role models in our celebrity culture.  A recent film called Super Size Me, about a filmmaker, who spends 30 days eating three meals a day, many of them super sized, at McDonald's, and suffers serious consequences, might be of special interest.   Another theme to consider is corporate versus individual responsibility -- an issue raised by the lawsuits against fast food companies like McDonald's, when individuals suffer health problems by eating this food. 

In "Making Place in the Nonplace Urban Realm," Charles Rutheiser describes the efforts to revitalize downtown Atlanta, after the flight of middle and upper income residents to the suburbs and exurbs.  He suggests that much of the new vision for the future ignores Atlanta's past, turning this new development into a homogenized "safe, clean, user-friendly" and "twenty-four hour city."   He even compares this process to the "imagineering" of Disneyworld, in that the cityscape is being turned into a kind of gentrified theme park for outsiders and those with middle and upper incomes, while ignoring the needs of the other city residents.   He also suggests that this approach is occurring in other major cities and is quite critical of this development.   What do you think of this developing trend in modern cities?  Do you agree or not with his grim assessment?  Does this seem to be the trend in the San Francisco, Oakland, or San Jose areas, too?   And what other alternatives would you suggest to these developments, say to deal with the problems of homelessness, poverty, crime, and unemployment in the city as a whole, which he suggests is not being adequately handled by modern revitalization methods.

In Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich spent about a month in three different cities, where she worked as a waitress, maid, and sales assistant, and reports on her experiences.  She concludes by pointing out how difficult it is for low-income employees to get by and advocates policies to provide more social supports or increased wages.   What do you think of her approach?  While she is not an anthropologist but a professional writer, would you consider her book an example of ethnography and advocacy anthropology?  Why or why not?   And what do you think of her personalized description of her own experiences and her point of view that frames the book?  Do you think she can fairly generalize about conditions from her three experiences?   How would you assess the book if you were doing a critique?

Ehrenreich focuses on three settings -- working in a restaurant in Florida, working for a maid service in Maine, and working Wal-Marts in Minnesota.   How representative do you feel her accounts are of these types of work in different parts of the country?   Have any of you had any experience in working in such settings, and what have they been like?   How has your experience compared to hers?  

In her evaluation, Ehrenreich draws some conclusions, such as about the undervaluation of the skills of low-wage workers, the potential health damages of such jobs, and the difficulty of making it due to the high expense of housing.   What do you think of her conclusions?  And in what ways, if any, might they influence public policy? 

In Fast Food Nation, Eric Schlosser describes how fast foods turned into a thriving industry in the 1950s and went through a period of consolidation to turn into the global giants they are today.  Yet he ends by discussing some recent developments that could possibly undermine the power of these companies, such as the mad cow scare and the emergence of a few companies that are countering the trend to consolidation, such as Conway's Red Top Restaurants, committed to selling organic, free-range, grass-fed beef.  Then, there are the low carb and vegetarian movements and Schlosser's suggestion that consumers have the power to walk away.   Also, in recent years, a growing number of lawsuits have been launched by consumers, such as claims that the food has made them obese or caused illness or injury.  So what do you think about the way this industry developed, and what might happen to it now? 

Running a franchise is supposed to increase the chances of an independent entrepreneur making a success of a business.  Yet, as Schlosser describes, the real statistics show a higher rate of failure, while the company's contract requires the franchisee to follow all sorts of rules, pay royalties to the company, and under various circumstances, the company can terminate the contract, if the franchisee doesn't perform well enough or challenges the company's rules.   Meanwhile, as more and more franchisees sign up and new franchises are located closer and closer together, the franchisees have more competition and their chances for success are reduced.   Yet the system continues to attract franchisees, seeking their shot at the American -- and now global -- dream of success.  This system has some parallels with some earlier social structures we studied, such as the agricultural state or feudal lords requiring complete fealty and a share of the crop from the serfs or peasants living on the land.    So what are your thoughts about this system and how it works? 

Schlosser describes how the fast-food industry has exploited low-wage employees, and has not only overworked them, but provides often dangerous working conditions. Then, if employees get injured or ill, the companies often don't provide the needed health care or financial support, or the employee is fired for no longer being sufficiently productive.   Schlosser also suggests that the companies have been able to get away with their mistreatment of employees due to their great power and influence with the government.  So what do you think?   Is this just the free enterprise system at work?  Can't employees simply leave if they don't like the job?  Or should the companies and the government do something to increase employee wages or support, because the vast size of these companies means they should be subjected to more regulation as a matter of public policy?   Or should any changes be up to the influence of the media through their negative stories and to consumers, who can show their displeasure by buying elsewhere?   (Some of these same issues are raised in Ehrenreich's book Nickel and Dimed, and the current issue of Business Week has a cover story on the working poor).