Barbara Ehrenreich

According to the National 1）Coalition for the Homeless， in 1998—the year I started this project—it took， on average nationwide， an hourly wage of$8.89 to afford a one-bedroom apartment， and the 2）Preamble Center for Public Policy was estimating that the odds against a typical welfare recipients landing a job at such a “l(fā)iving wage” were about 97 to 1. Why should I bother to confirm these unpleasant facts？

In the spirit of science， I first decided on certain rules and 3）parameters. Rule one， obviously enough， was that I could not， in my search for jobs， fall back on any skills derived from my education or usual work—not that there were a lot of want ads for essayists anyway. Two， I had to take the highestpaying job that was offered me and do my best to hold it； no Marxist 4）rants or sneaking off to read novels in the ladies room. Three， I had to take the cheapest accommodations I could find， at least the cheapest that offered an acceptable level of safety and privacy， though my standards in this regard were hazy and， as it turned out， 5）prone to deterioration over time.

全美流浪者聯(lián)盟在一九九八年指出——也就是我進(jìn)行這項(xiàng)計(jì)劃的那年，取全美境內(nèi)的平均數(shù)來計(jì)算，一個(gè)人需要賺到八點(diǎn)八九美元的時(shí)薪，才能租得起一間帶臥房的公寓。另外，公共政策前行中心則估計(jì)，在接受國家福利救濟(jì)的人之中，每九十七人中只有一人能得到這種工作，賺得“讓人活得下去的薪資”。我干嘛還要費(fèi)事去證實(shí)這些令人難過的事實(shí)呢？

秉持著科學(xué)精神，我首先定了一些原則和界限。很顯然地，第一項(xiàng)原則就是在找工作的時(shí)候，任何用得上我所受的教育或平時(shí)工作經(jīng)驗(yàn)的工作都不能選——但這么說的意思可不是招聘專欄作家的廣告就有一大堆。第二項(xiàng)原則是，我必須在所有能做的工作中找到薪水最高的，并盡我所能保住它。意思就是，我不能擺出馬克思主義者的架勢大罵雇主一番，或溜班躲在女廁所里讀書。第三項(xiàng)原則是，我必須在安全性和隱私性尚可的前提下，盡可能找到最便宜的住所。雖然我在這方面的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)有些模糊，而且后來也證明，我的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)隨著時(shí)間的推移越降越低。

Finally， I set some 6）reassuring limits to whatever 7）tribulations I might have to endure. First， I would always have a car. In Key West I drove my own； in other cities I used Rent-A-Wrecks， which I paid for with a credit card rather than my earnings. Yes， I could have walked more or limited myself to jobs accessible by public transportation. I just figured that a story about waiting for buses wouldnt be very interesting to read. Second， I r u l e d o u t homelessness as an option. The idea was to spend a month in each setting and see whether I could find a job and earn， in that time， the money to pay a second months rent. If I was paying rent by the week and ran out of money I would simply declare

the project at an end； no shelters or sleeping in cars for me. Furthermore， I had no intention of going hungry. If things ever got to the point where the next meal was in question， I promised myself as the time to begin the “experiment” approached， I would dig out my ATM card and cheat.

So this isnt the story of some death-defying“undercover” adventure. Almost anyone could do what I did—look for jobs， work those jobs， try to make ends meet. In fact， millions of Americans do it every day， and with a lot less 8）fanfare and 9）dithering.

最后，為求安心，我設(shè)下一些底線，以免我遇到的考驗(yàn)超乎我的承受能力。第一，我一定要有車子。在基韋斯特（佛羅里達(dá)）我是開自己的車，在其他城市則利用租車服務(wù)，這筆費(fèi)用我用信用卡而不是工作收入來支付。沒錯(cuò)，我是可以多走些路，或把可能的工作機(jī)會限制在大眾交通工具能抵達(dá)的地點(diǎn)。但我只是覺得，一個(gè)老是在寫等巴士的故事，對讀者來說大概沒什么吸引力。第二，我摒除流浪街頭這項(xiàng)選擇，因?yàn)檫@個(gè)計(jì)劃的主要用意在于：在每個(gè)城市各待上一個(gè)月，看我能否在這個(gè)城市找到工作，并在當(dāng)月賺得足以支付下個(gè)月房租的薪水。若我付完某一周的房租之后就完全沒錢了，我會立即叫停這個(gè)計(jì)劃，不會去住流浪者庇護(hù)所或睡在車上。此外，我也無意讓自己餓肚子。我在這項(xiàng)“實(shí)驗(yàn)”開始的前夕就向自己保證，若事情真的發(fā)展到我錢包空空，連吃下一餐飯都成問題，我會去挖出我的銀行卡，然后偷偷大吃一頓。

所以，這本書并不是關(guān)于什么視死如歸的“臥底”冒險(xiǎn)經(jīng)驗(yàn)。我做的事幾乎任何人都做得來：找到工作，把這些工作做好，努力量入為出，使收支平衡。事實(shí)上，這正是幾百萬美國人每天都在做的事情，只是他們既不像我這樣虛張聲勢，也沒有像我一樣猶豫不決、戰(zhàn)戰(zhàn)兢兢。

I am， of course， very different from the people who normally fill Americans least attractive jobs， and in ways that both helped and limited me. Most obviously， I was only visiting a world that others inhabit full-time， often for most of their lives. With all the real-life assets Ive built up in middle age—bank account， IRA， health insurance， multiroom home—waiting indulgently in the background， there was no way I was going to “experience poverty” or find out how it “really feels” to be a long-term low-wage worker. My aim here was much more straightfoward and objective—just to see whether I could match income to expenses， as the truly poor attempt to do every day. Besides， Ive had enough unchosen encounters with poverty in my lifetime to know its not a place you would want to visit for touristic purposes； it just smells too much like fear.

當(dāng)然，我和從事這些全美最不吸引人工作的人非常不同。這些不同之處一方面對我有幫助，一方面也限制了我。最明顯的不同就是，我只是去造訪一下這個(gè)世界，但這些人往往一輩子的大部分時(shí)間都得待在里面。此外，我還有至今所累積的實(shí)際資產(chǎn)當(dāng)靠山，比如銀行存款、退休儲蓄、健康保險(xiǎn)和一個(gè)有好幾個(gè)房間的家，因此根本不可能做到什么“親身體驗(yàn)貧窮”，或了解身為一個(gè)長期低收入勞工的“真實(shí)感受”到底是什么。我做這件事的目標(biāo)是更直接而客觀的：看看我可不可以像真正的窮人每天都必須做的那樣讓收入和支出平衡。此外，我一生中曾與貧窮不期而遇過多次，深知那不是一種你會想像游客般體驗(yàn)一下的生活，那種生活充滿太多恐懼的滋味了。