Podcasts about american inequality

In this episode, host Kent Hance welcomes Senator Phil Gramm, a former senator and economist, to discuss his book, "The Myth of American Inequality." The conversation highlights their shared experiences in Congress and focuses on Gramm's critique of government statistics on income inequality and poverty. Gramm argues that the narrative of the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer is misleading, presenting data to support his claims. He emphasizes the importance of accurate data in shaping public policy and advocates for work requirements in government assistance programs to promote self-sufficiency. Timestamps by PodSqueezeIntroduction of Senator Gramm (00:00:04)   The speaker introduces Senator Phil Gramm, highlighting their friendship and shared congressional experiences. Senator Gramm's Background (00:01:21)   Gramm discusses his origins in Fort Benning, Georgia, and his academic background in economics. Overview of "The Myth of American Inequality" (00:02:03)   Gramm introduces his new book, challenging the narrative of growing income inequality in America. Government Statistics on Poverty (00:02:27)   Gramm critiques government statistics, showing discrepancies in poverty rates despite increased welfare spending. Transfer Payments and Income Reporting (00:04:25)   Discussion on how the Census Bureau underreports transfer payments, skewing income inequality statistics. Real Income Inequality Statistics (00:06:05)   Gramm presents revised statistics showing income inequality is not as severe as reported. Poverty Rate Misconceptions (00:07:49)   He argues that the actual poverty rate is significantly lower than commonly believed. Economic Mobility in America (00:08:47)   Gramm emphasizes that most children from poor families improve their economic status as adults. Living Standards Comparison (00:09:26)   He compares modern lower-income Americans' living standards to those of historical kings. Wealth and Opportunity Perspective (00:10:28)   Discussion on how wealth accumulation by individuals does not detract from others' wealth. Envy and Economic Perspectives (00:10:49)   The speakers discuss the societal issues of envy and how it affects perceptions of wealth. The Role of Government Assistance (00:13:30)   Gramm argues that government assistance programs often fail to reach those truly in need. Welfare Reform Insights (00:15:52)   He proposes extending work requirements to all means-tested programs to encourage employment. Job Market Discrepancies (00:16:28)   Discussion on the mismatch between job openings and unemployment rates in the current economy. Personal Responsibility and Opportunity (00:17:21)   Gramm shares personal anecdotes emphasizing the importance of hard work and opportunity. Need for Accurate Data (00:18:03)   He stresses the importance of accurate data in informing public debate on economic policies. Government Transfers and Income Distribution (00:19:40)   Gramm discusses the significant amount of money transferred to needy individuals in America. Book Collaboration and Insights (00:20:03)   Gramm mentions his co-authors and their contributions to the book's findings. Critique of Income Tax Reporting (00:23:24)   He critiques how tax data is reported, emphasizing the importance of context in income discussions. Discussion on Taxation and Billionaires (00:25:12)   Senator Gramm critiques the misconception that taxing billionaires can significantly fund government needs. Middle-Income Tax Burden (00:26:14)   Speaker 1 highlights how middle-income earners, not billionaires, bear most of the tax burden. Clinton's Tax Increase (00:26:50)   Discussion on the tax increase under Clinton, affecting middle-income Americans, not just the wealthy. Job Creation vs. Government Benefits (00:27:45)   Speaker 1 shares experiences of losing workers to unemployment benefits that paid more than construction jobs. The Myth of American Inequality (00:30:11)   Speaker 1 emphasizes the book's argument against the narrative of growing inequality in America. Capitalism vs. Socialism (00:30:32)   Comparison of North and South Korea illustrates the benefits of capitalism over socialism. Reagan Budget Cuts Discussion (00:32:09)   Plans to discuss Reagan's budget and tax cuts in a future episode. Funny Anecdote about Locked Keys (00:32:41)   A humorous story about Speaker 1 locking his keys in the car at the White House.

John Early, a mathematical economist and adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, joins Chelsea Follett to discuss popular misconceptions about inequality in the United States and the measurement errors behind them.

My guest on this episode of the podcast is Princeton sociologist Shamus Rahman Kahn, who is the author of a number of books, most notably for our purposes Privilege: The Making of an Adolescent Elite at St. Paul's School.I described the book, in a previous post, thusly:Privilege is an extraordinary book. People throw that word around too easily, but I really mean it in this case. It blew my mind in a way that it hadn't been blown in a long while. Khan is a very good writer of sentences, an insightful theorist, and perhaps above all an observer of rare acuity. He just sees a lot more, and a lot more clearly, than most people would in a similar context, even if they went in with similarly ethnographic objectives. The result is a book packed with striking insight and fascinating detail. As it happens I went to a high school that wasn't too different from St. Paul's. It wasn't as fancy, didn't cater to quite as many sons and daughters of the high elite, but it was similar enough for me to vouch for Khan's descriptions. They ring true. He captures with nuance what such places, which are so easy to caricature, are actually like.The post that I wrote about Privilege was by far the most popular thing I've written for this newsletter, which is a testament to my own eloquence, to the fascination of the subject, and to the intensity and insight with which Kahn explored it. Shamus and I had a great conversation. We talked about the book; his experience as both a student and a teacher at St. Paul's School; his training at the University of Wisconsin; his good timing in the selection of subjects; what it feels like to be of the elite; and much more.Show breakdown (according to AI - I have no idea how closely this tracks the reality, but it feels better than nothing)00:00 Introduction to the Podcast and Guest01:07 Discussing the Book 'Privilege'02:44 Exploring Elite Education and Inequality04:35 The Role of Quantitative and Qualitative Research17:21 Personal Background and Experience at St. Paul's30:21 Changes in Elite Education Over Time46:55 The Origins of Meritocracy48:40 Challenges of Meritocracy49:18 Meritocracy and Social Mobility51:40 Ethnographic Insights on Privilege52:57 Understanding Inequality56:32 The Role of Education in Inequality57:08 Class and Political Mobilization01:01:37 American Inequality and Historical Perspectives01:02:25 The Astor Family and American Finance01:09:07 The Influence of Wealth in Politics01:15:54 Navigating Elite Institutions01:17:44 The Future of Elite Coordination01:26:22 Concluding Thoughts on Elites and Power01:29:27 Closing Remarks and Outro Get full access to Eminent Americans at danieloppenheimer.substack.com/subscribe

Former U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm discusses his book The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate, which he co-authored with statistician John Early and economist Robert Ekelund. The book details how faulty government data has led to a massive misperception about wealth and poverty in the U.S. The Myth of American Inequality won the 2024 Hayek Book Prize awarded by the Manhattan Institute. In politics, Phil Gramm served three terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, initially as a Democrat, and later as a Republican. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1985 and retired from office in 2002. Before entering politics, Phil Gramm taught economics at Texas A&M University.

Fast food is part of American life. As much a part of our background as the sky and the clouds. But it wasn't always that way, and over the decades, the fast food landscape has changed in quite profound ways. Race is a key part of that picture. A landmark exploration of this has been published by today's guest, Dr. Naa Oyo Kwate. She is an Associate Professor in the Department of Africana Studies and the Department of Human Ecology at Rutgers University. Her book, recently published, is entitled White Burgers, Black Cash: Fast Food From Black Exclusion to Exploitation. The book has been received very positively by the field. And was recently named the best book in the field of urban affairs by the Urban Affairs Association.   Interview Summary I was so happy to see your book because people have talked about the issue of race off and on in the field, but to see this kind of scholarly treatment of it like you provided has been really a welcome addition. Let me start with a general question. Let's begin with the fast food situation today and then rewind to where it began. Are there patterns to where fast food restaurants are located and who fast food is marketed to? Absolutely. There's quite a bit of research, and you just alluded to the work that's been done in the field. There's a lot of research that shows fast food is most dense in African American communities. Not every study has the same finding, but overall that's what the accumulated evidence shows. On the one hand you have the fact that Black communities are disproportionately saturated with these outlets. Then there's also the case that apart from the physical locations of the restaurants, fast food is strongly racialized as Black in terms of how it's portrayed to the public. It [Fast Food] relies on images of Blackness and Black cultural productions such as Black music for its marketing. These sometimes these veer into racial caricature as well. One of the things I talked about in the book briefly is the TV commercial character Annie who Popeye's introduced in 2009. They basically created this Black woman that Adweek at the time was calling "feisty," but it's really just this stereotypical idea of the sassy Black woman and she's in the kitchen frying up the chicken for Popeye's. And actually, some of the language that was used in those commercials really evokes the copy on late 19th century and Aunt Jemima pancake mix packaging. It's a really strong departure from fast food's early days, the way that fast food is now relying on Blackness as part of its core marketing constructs. I'm assuming that it follows from what you've been saying that the African American community has disproportionately been targeted with the marketing of these foods. Is that true of children within that community? Research shows that in terms of fast food marketing at the point of purchase. There's more - display advertising for example at restaurants that are in Black communities. And then there's also been research to show, not in terms of the outlets themselves, but in terms of TV programming that there tends to be more commercials for fast food and other unhealthy foods during shows that are targeting Black youth. How much of the patterning of the fast food restaurants is due to income or due to the amount of fast food consumption in these areas with many restaurants? Almost none of it really. It's not income and it's not the amount of fast food that people are consuming. In fact, one of the main studies that led me to start researching this book, because I was coming to it from public health where there was a lot of research around the disproportionality of fast food restaurants. We actually did a study in New York City, some colleagues and we published it in 2009, where we looked at how fast food was distributed across New York City's five boroughs. And restaurant density, we found, was due almost entirely to racial demographics. There's very little contribution from income. So, the percentage of Black residents was what was driving it. That was the biggest predictor of where fast food was located. It wasn't income, income made very little contribution and if you compared Black neighborhoods that were higher in income to those that were lower in income, they basically had about as much fast food exposure. Then if you compare them to white neighborhoods matched in income, Black neighborhoods still had more. So, it wasn't income, it was race. There are other areas that were high in fast food density like Midtown and downtown Manhattan where you have commercial and business districts, transportation hubs, tourist destinations. So, you expect fast food to be in these really dense and kind of busy commercial areas, but the only residential space that had comparable density were Black and brown neighborhoods. The assumption that many people have is that, okay, well if it's not income, then it's probably demand. So probably fast food is just dense in those neighborhoods because Black people eat so much fast food. But again, the data do not bear that out, not just in our study, but in others. And in fact, apart from the study we did specifically on fast food, we did another study where we looked at retail redlining for a number of different kinds of retail sectors. And again, demand is not what situates, you know, where stores are or are not. And then when I got to this project, just digging through the archives, you find that until the industry really went in on targeted advertising to increase the numbers of visits that Black people were making to fast food restaurants and the average check size that they were spending, Black consumers were mostly using fast food as a quick snack, it wasn't a primary place for meals. So it's really the case that the restaurants proceeded the demand and not the inverse. It is an absolutely fascinating picture. My guess is that what you've just said will probably come as a surprise to some people who are listening to this, not that fast food isn't dense in particular neighborhoods, but that it's particularly dense in neighborhoods by race just because people generally think that fast food is popular everywhere. So, let's talk about why this occurred and dive a little more deeply into what your book does and that's to provide a historical view on how and why this evolved. So, what did the early history look like and then what happened? So, the book traces what's basically a national story, but I focus particularly on certain cities like Chicago, New York and DC. But it's tracing how fast food changed racially and spatially from the early 1900's to the present. I break out that early history into what I call first and second-generation chains. So, they opened in urban and suburban areas respectively. The birth of the first generation fast food restaurants took place in what is termed the Nader of race relations in the US from the end of the Civil War to the 1930s. So, this is a time during which you see Plessy versus Ferguson, for example, ushering in legal segregation. Lynchings are at their worst. You have the destruction of Greenwood in Tulsa, Oklahoma. That's taking place and other notable incidents and forces that were undermining Black life at the time. It's during that context that the first generation restaurants are born. And so, these are burger chains like White Castle, that was the first actually big burger chain. People often assume it's McDonald's, but it's actually White Castle in 1921. And then there are knockoffs of White Castle, like White Tower and Little Tavern, which was an East coast brand. And then there were also other restaurants that were not burger chains, but more like hot shops was more of a sit-down restaurant. And then you had Horn and Hardart, the outlets where they had auto mats. So, you know, this was kind of high tech at the time, but you would go in and the food was behind little glass compartments and you would put in your requisite number of nickels and then take out your little plate of food. These were all the restaurants that I'm calling first generation restaurants. So, you had quite a bit of diversity in terms of what they were serving, but they were all in urban centers. They were not franchised. They were corporate owned outlets and most importantly everything about them was white, whether figuratively in terms of who dined and worked there or literally in the architecture and the design and the name like White Castle. That veneer of whiteness was doing two things. On the one hand, trying to offer the promise of pristine sanitary conditions because this is a time when food production was rife with concerns. And then also it's trying to promise a kind of unsullied social whiteness in the dining experience. So, first generation then leads to second generation fast food, which begins in the suburbs instead of the urban centers. Second generation fast food starts to grow in the early 1950s. These are the brand names that are most synonymous with fast food today: KFC, Burger King, McDonald's. So, for example, Ray Crock launches McDonald's as a franchise in the all white suburb of Des Plaines outside Chicago near O'Hare airport. And he set to fly over prospective sites looking for church steeples and schools, which to him were an indication of a middle class and stable community, but of course, racializing that as white. Because you could have Black neighborhoods with church steeples, but that was not where the restaurants were going. So, what ends up happening with second generation fast food is that it takes this theme of purity and shifts so that it's not just the purity of simple kind of fuel for the working man, but instead the purity of white domestic space. And where first-generation restaurants targeted working adults, the second went after families and children. Fast food then becomes more than just food - it's about fun. Those are the two key ways to think about the early history. One could obviously find many, many, many examples of different racial groups being excluded from the economic mainstream of the country. For example, areas of employment, and my guess is that being excluded from the marketing applied to consumer goods and lots of other things. But do you think there's something special about food in this context? Oh, that's a good question. It's interesting because fast food. It's food, but it's more than that the way that fast food initially excluded Black people. One of the things I talk about in the early part of the book is James Baldwin going to a restaurant and trying to order a burger and being rejected and facing discrimination. And the idea that it's not just that you can't get a burger, it's not the same thing as if you try to buy, I don't know, a ham sandwich or something. But like what burger means something more than that, right? It's bigger than a burger is Ella Baker said. Fast food is kind of like the closest thing we have to a national meal. It sort of occupies a special place in the heart of America and is symbolic of this quintessential all-American meal. And the notions of a good and simple life that we purportedly have in this country. So, it means more I think the way that fast food was positioned as something that was totally wrapped up in this exclusionary whiteness. Your book traces the long pathway that fast food traveled going from exclusion in the beginning and then later exploitation. Can you describe a couple of the key turning points? Well I would say that it wasn't like a light sort of got switched on that caused fast food to shift abruptly from utterly excluding Black people to then pursuing them full throttle the next day. It was quite a long and bumpy pathway and really American retailers in general have continually had to discover Black consumers and the fact that they exist over and over. And then sort of trying to think like, oh, how do we reach them? We don't understand them, like they're this enigma kind of thing. Fast food was doing the same kind of thing. There was both what the industry was doing and then there were also pull factors that were causing fast food to be drawn into Black communities as well. There are a lot of turning points, but I would say if you start fairly early in the history, a key one was after second generation fast food got going. Where suburban fast food right, is trying to position itself as this white utopia. But almost immediately that notion was fraught and unstable because concerns quickly arose around teenagers. They were money makers but they were also rowdy. Their behavior, hot rodding and goofing off in the parking lot and so on, was off-putting to the adult diners. So, it became this difficult kind of needle to thread of like how are we going to track this consumer segment that's foundational to the enterprise but do so under conditions that would keep them in line and not mess up the other potential revenue that we have going. As the kind of nuisance of fast foods became more pitched, municipalities began introducing ordinances to control fast food or even ban it. And that made the suburbs harder to get into or to maintain a foothold in. Corporations then start looking more at the cities that they were avoiding in the first place and the Black communities there that they had excluded. So that happens fairly early and then some other key turning points occur throughout the 1960s. Here we have urban renewal, you have urban rebellions taking place and during the late 1960s when these rebellions and uprisings were taking place, this is the time period when you get the first Black franchisees. Into the 1970s you have oil crises, then you have the burger and chicken wars as the industry called them in the 1980s. And this was referring to corporations battling each other for market share. So, all throughout the history there were different turning points that either accelerated the proliferation of fast food or sort of change the way the industry was looking at Black consumers and so on. Now in some discussions I've heard of this issue off and on over the years from people who have looked at the issue of targeted marketing who have talked about how there was a period of time and you made this clear, when Blacks were excluded from the marketing and they just weren't part of the overall picture of these restaurants. Then there was a movement for Blacks to be included more in the mainstream of American culture so that it was almost seen as an advance when they became included in the marketing. Black individuals were shown in the marketing and part of the iconic part of these restaurants. So that was seen as somewhat of a victory. What do you think of that? It's true and not true. I mean when fast food decided to finally start actually representing Black people in its marketing, I think that is important. I do think that the fact that they were finally making ads and conceiving of campaigns that saw Black people as part of the actual consumer base at which they were, yes, that that is important. But it's also the case that corporations are never doing anything for altruism. It's because they wanted to shore up their bottom line. So, for example, Burrell Advertising is the biggest African American ad shop based in Chicago. They get the McDonald's account and so they're the first ones to have a fast food restaurant account. They begin their campaign in 1971 and at that time, their advertising actually positioned Black families as regular people doing everything everybody else does and going to the restaurant and enjoying time together as a family and so on. And I think those kinds of images were important that they were creating them, but again, at the same time it was only the context in which Burrell got that account. The reasons why McDonald's was reaching out to Black consumers was because, again, in the early 1970s white suburbs were becoming more saturated, and McDonald's needing to expand. Then you have the oil crisis in which people are not driving as much, and Black people because of racism are centered in urban centers and not in the suburbs. So that makes a logical place for them to go and so on. So, it's not without its vexed context that those new advertising images and opportunities were taking place. Okay, thanks. I know that's a complicated topic, so I appreciate you addressing that. You know, something you mentioned just a few moments ago was that when Blacks started to become owners of franchises, can you expand on that a little bit and say what was the significance? Yes. First of all, cities were changing at that time. White residents were moving to the suburbs, multiple public and private policies were keeping the suburbs white and white residents were moving to white suburbs. So, Central City was changing, right? The neighborhoods that had been white before were now changing to become predominantly Black. And so, the fast food outlets that were located in those neighborhoods found their client base changing around them. And many of those operators, and indeed their corporate superiors, were uninterested in and uninformed about a Black consumer base at best and outwardly hostile at worst. You end up with as neighborhood racial transitions are taking place, white operators are now in communities they never meant to serve. Som as urban uprisings rack one city after another, Black franchisees are brought on kind of as a public face in these changing urban areas. The primary goal was to really have Black franchisees manage the racial risks that corporate was finding untenable. They realized that it wouldn't do to have white managers or franchise owners in these neighborhoods. So, they bring in Black franchisees to start making that transition. And then after fast food becomes more interested in trying to deliberately capture more Black spending, Black franchisees become even more important in that regard. For their part, the Black franchisees were seeking out fast food outlets as a financial instrument, right? This was a way to contest and break down unfair and pervasive exclusion from the country's resources. So, it was never about how much fast food we can possibly eat, right? Again, with the demand issue. So, Black franchisees are basically trying to get their part of the pie and then the federal government is heavily involved at this point because they start creating these different minority enterprise initiatives to grow Black small business. And so, it wasn't only the Black franchisees, but also Black franchisors who were starting their own chains. So, for example, former NFL Player Brady Keys started All Pro Chicken, as just one example. So, this idea of expanding fast food franchising to Black entrepreneurs who had been shut out on its face, seems like a laudable initiative. But again, it's like this is not just altruism and also the way that franchises were positioned in this kind of like you can get into business and do so in a way that's low risk because you know you don't have to start from scratch. You're buying into a thriving concern with name recognition and corporate support and all that. And all of that sounds good except you realize that in fact the franchisees are the ones who have to bear all the risk, not corporate. That's what the government was doing in terms of trying to put in all this money into franchising is really. It's like that's the response to the real life and death failures, for example, around policing, which was always at the heart of these uprisings. You have these real life and death concerns and then the government's responding with giving people access to fried chicken and burger outlets, which nobody was asking for really. Not only was the method problematic, but the execution as well. Just because Black people had more access to the franchises doesn't mean that the rest of the racism that was present, suddenly disappeared, right? The theoretical safety of a franchise didn't bear out in practice. Because of course they still couldn't get access to credit from lending institutions to launch their restaurants because they still didn't get support they needed from corporate, which in fact there are still lawsuits to this day by Black franchisees because the communities in which they're operating were still contending with deep inequality. All of that meant that that whole project was not likely to work very well. And you know, it's no surprise that it didn't. You mentioned chicken several times. In fact, there's a chapter in your book entitled Criminal Chickens. Can you tell us more? Yes, Criminal chicken is towards the end of the book. So, the book is organized in three parts. Part one is white utopias, part two is racial turnover, and part three is Black catastrophe. In each of those you see how Blackness is problematic, but in different ways. So Criminal Chicken is really dealing with the fact that by the 1990s, fast food had become pervasive in Black space and was thoroughly racialized as Black. And so, since fast food has saturated these neighborhoods, of course Black residents began to consume it more. With that, a program reigns down from the dominant society over Black people's alleged failure to control themselves and an assumed deviant predilection for unhealthy dietary behaviors, whether fast food, but also the same kind of discourse circulated around soul food. And the tenor of the discourse really raises W.E.B. DuBois's age-old question, which is how does it feel to be a problem? That was really the tenor of the conversation around fast food at that time. The chapters about the ways in which Black people's consumption was frequently characterized as deviant and interrogating the paradoxes around the symbolic meanings of fast food. Because like what we talked about earlier, Black people are basically being criticized for eating something that's supposedly at the heart of Americana. It's a kind of a no-win situation. On the one hand, certainly overseas, fast food continues to enjoy this kind of iconic status of America and American Burger and so on. Even within the country's borders it still retains some of that allure as something emblematic of American culture. But it's also now more fraught because, you know, we're in a moment where local and organic foods and so on are held in high esteem and fast food is the antithesis of that and it's industrial and mass produced and homogenized and has all these nutritional liabilities. So, basically, it's looking at the changing ideas around fast food and race and how that intersected with Black consumption. That's so interesting. I'd like to wrap up with a question, but I'd like to lead into that by reading two quotes from your book that I think are especially interesting. Here's the first. It is painfully logical that Black communities would first be excluded from a neighborhood resource when it was desirable and then become a repository once it was shunned. And then the second quote is this. The story of fast foods relationship to Black folks is a story about America itself. So, here's the question, are there ways that you can think of that fast food and food systems could be reconceptualized to help address issues of justice and equity? I would say that addressing justice inequity in food systems of which fast food is a part, is really about dealing with the other systems that govern our daily lives. Meaning, it's not an issue of trying to fix fast food, right? So, that is a discreet industry it behaves more equitably with communities because what it has done over the history that I trace in the book is it's not so unique in its practices and it also can't have taken the trajectory it did without intersecting with other institutional concerns. So, for example, housing is instructive because you know, of course you can't exploitatively target Black consumers unless residential segregation exists to concentrate them in space. And to do that, obviously you need a lot of different institutional policies and practices at play to produce that. And in a similar way, housing went from exclusion in the form of rank discrimination, resource hoarding, redlining, the denial of mortgages, all of that, to exploitation in the form of subprime lending. And Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor talks about predatory inclusion and I type that in the book because I think it's also a useful way to think about fast food as well. So, if you're thinking about equity in food systems, then you have to think about why is it that resources including food, but also beyond food, in this country are distributed the way that they are. And I think you can't get at the issues of justice that play out for fast food or injustice without addressing the key issues that reverberate through it. And so that's false scarcities that are created by capitalism, the racism that undergirds urban policies around land use, around segregation, deeply ingrained ideas in the American psyche about race and but also about other things. So, for me really, reconceptualizing fast food is really reconceptualizing how we live in America.   Bio   Naa Oyo A. Kwate is Associate Professor, jointly appointed in the Department of Africana Studies and the Department of Human Ecology at Rutgers. A psychologist by training, she has wide ranging interests in racial inequality and African American health. Her research has centered primarily on the ways in which urban built environments reflect racial inequalities in the United States, and how racism directly and indirectly affects African American health. Kwate's research has been funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and by fellowships from the Smithsonian Institution, among others. Prior to her first major book, White Burgers, Black Cash: Fast Food from Black Exclusion to Exploitation, she published the short work Burgers in Blackface: Anti-Black Restaurants Then and Now, which examines restaurants that deploy unapologetically racist logos, themes, and architecture; and edited The Street: A Photographic Field Guide to American Inequality, a visual taxonomy of inequality using Camden, NJ as a case study. Kwate has been a National Endowment for the Humanities Fellow at the Newberry Library, and has received fellowships from the Smithsonian Institution, the European Institutes for Advanced Studies, and elsewhere. She is currently writing a book investigating the impact of corner liquor stores in Black communities from 1950 to date.  

"How Government Biases Policy Debate"

Perhaps the biggest evidence that capitalism in America doesn't work, at least not for everyone, is growing income inequality and the persistence of poverty. But what is the current state of poverty and inequality in the United States? Why do debates still persist about whether poverty has been eradicated? What do the numbers and official statistics tell us, and should we believe them? What do personal stories and experiences with poverty tell us that data cannot? If poverty has indeed been eradicated, what led to that achievement – and if it still persists, what more can be done to abolish it?Last year on this podcast, we did a series about this topic, and we found these episodes to be surprising and more informative than most of the debates about poverty you'll hear on the news. So, we wanted to condense that series down into a single episode that captures all of the highlights. The first speaker is former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX), who argues in his recent book, "The Myth of American Inequality," that poverty is vastly overstated because official government data does not include transfer payments. The second is Princeton sociologist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Matthew Desmond, who argues in his recent book, "Poverty, by America," that poverty is a terrible scourge, that we have made no progress, and that it is a moral outrage.The result is a nuanced, surprising, and informative debate on a multifaceted but important issue – leaving our hosts, as well as, by extension, our listeners – to formulate their own takeaways on what we can all do about them.Episode notes:Listen to the complete conversation with Sen. Phil GrammListen to the complete conversation with Dr. Matthew Desmond

“If you read it, you will realize that many of the arguments being made against American capitalism are invalid. You will realize that this country of ours is even greater than you think.” Senator Phil Gramm joins Cole to discuss his book, The Myth of American Inequality. Gramm's book explores the data which prove income inequality in the United States is far lower than what most Americans are led to believe. The conversation covers the statistics that support Gramm's position and how the American Dream remains strong.

No matter which indicator you're using, American inequality has been increasing in recent decades. Whether you're measuring the growing wealth gap, the stagnant wages of the middle class, or the concentration of wealth and power among a small group of elites, every indicator unfailingly suggests that inequality is getting worse. Nobel Laureate Angus Deaton joins the podcast to talk about his recent book on the subject, Economics in America: An Immigrant Economist Explores the Land of Inequality, in which he explains how his own experience as an immigrant has shaped his understanding of American inequality and its impact on upward mobility. Angus Deaton is a renowned economist and author known for his groundbreaking work in the fields of poverty, inequality, and health. He is a 2015 Nobel Prize Laureate and is currently a Senior Scholar and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Professor of Economics and International Affairs Emeritus at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. Twitter: @DeatonAngus Economics in America: An Immigrant Economist Explores the Land of Inequality https://bookshop.org/p/books/economics-in-america-an-immigrant-economist-explores-the-land-of-inequality-angus-deaton/19785471?ean=9780691247625  Nick's new book, Corporate Bullsh*t, is out now! https://www.corporatebsbook.com  Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Twitter: @PitchforkEcon Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Nick's twitter: @NickHanauer

The life expectancy of Americans has fallen in recent years after a long period when it had been increasing. There are a number of factors which contribute to the fall. The Covid pandemic, with over 1m deaths, made a significant impact on lowering the average life expectancy. In comparison with other peer countries, the USA also did not return to pre-Covid levels at the same rate. However there are also other important factors driving this, namely gun deaths and drug deaths as a result of opioid overdoses. And another major contributor to lower life expectancy in the States is inequality in the US healthcare system. In this edition of The Inquiry Tanya Beckett explores why US life expectancy is falling. She hears from Jeremy Ney an adjunct professor at Presidio Graduate School in San Francisco and author of American Inequality, a data project that highlights US inequality and regional divides. Dr. Mark Rosenberg helped set up the Centre for Disease Control's National Centre for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC) and is a key proponent of research that examines how to reduce gun violence. He explains how gun deaths among young people have a big influence on the average life expectancy numbers. Dr. Judith Feinberg, is a professor at West Virginia University School of Medicine - her experience of working with communities with high levels of opioid problems makes her an authority on the extent to which drug overdose deaths impact average life expectancy. Ellen Marra is a professor of health economics at Harvard University - she says that diseases such as cancer and cardio deaths are big factors in lower life expectancy, compared with the number of gun and opioid deaths. CREDITS Presenter Tanya Beckett Producer Phil Reevell. Researcher Bisi Adebayo Editor Tom Bigwood Image: USA Birthday Cake, Credit: Getty Images

In his recent book "The Myth of American Inequality," former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm (along with co-authors Robert Ekelund and John Early) challenges conventional wisdom on the state of income inequality in the United States. Gramm argues that the gap between the rich and the poor is not as wide as often claimed because it is measured incorrectly, thus biasing public policy debates. On this episode, he joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss the data and evidence behind his claims, as well as implications on the pursuit of equality of opportunity, the "war on poverty," and the role of government in shaping economic outcomes. This is the first of a two-part series on poverty and inequality in America. Stay tuned for a forthcoming episode with sociologist Matthew Desmond for a perspective opposite from Sen. Gramm and his co-authors.Bonus: While in Congress, Sen. Gramm was one of the sponsors of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, a piece of legislation that some consider to have significant ramifications on both the 2008 financial crisis and a direct line to the recent SVB banking meltdown. Keep an eye out on our handle @StiglerCenter on Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube for additional Capitalisn't content on this topic.

0:00 - 6-5-23-50-10 14:02 - The Great Disintegration: Big Blue Cities  34:11 - What is a man? 45:39 - Dan urges listeners to take a moment to look around during pride month and report back what they see  50:15 - American economist, author, professor, and co-director of the Program on the American Economy and Globalization at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, Donald J Boudreaux, explains The Myth of American Inequality and Stagnation. Get more from Don at his blog cafehayek.com 01:02:25 - Senior Research Fellow for Defense Programs at The Heritage Foundation, Dakota Wood, responds to Zelensky's claim that Ukraine is ready for counteroffensive  01:15:51 - Dan & Amy say toodaloo to Chuck Todd 01:20:28 - Megyn Kelly's awakening on trans…where's the harm? 01:40:25 - Dan & Amy go through some of the changes at the "new" CDC  01:49:02 - Capitol Police stop children's choir from singing the National Anthem 01:54:55 - Hannah E. Meyers, fellow and director of policing and public safety at the Manhattan Institute, on big blue city crime and The New York Chokehold That AOC Ignored. Follow Hannah on twitter @HannahElkaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jeremy is the author of American Inequality, a biweekly newsletter that uses data visualization to highlight U.S. inequality topics and to drive change in communities. His work has been published in TIME, Bloomberg, and the LA Times. He was a dual-degree masters student at MIT Sloan and the Harvard Kennedy School and was formerly a macro policy strategist at the Federal Reserve. He now works at Google and lives in Brooklyn. Episode Notes Jeremy on Twitter | Op-ed in Time American Inequality newsletter: americaninequality.substack.com Federal Reserve Bank of New York Food Deserts and Inequality Technology and Disability: The Relationship Between Broadband Access and Disability Insurance Awards Some coverage of the map: American Inequality Paul Krugman David Wallace-Wells LA Times Related Episodes Episode #228: Ethan MollickEpisode #224: Pieta Blakely and Eli HolderEpisode #191: Sarah Williams iTunes Spotify Stitcher TuneIn

Jeremy is the author of American Inequality, a biweekly newsletter that uses data visualization to highlight U.S. inequality topics and to drive change in communities. His work has been published in TIME, Bloomberg, and the LA Times. He was a... The post Episode #238: Jeremy Ney appeared first on PolicyViz.

A recent report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that American life expectancy is the lowest it's been in two decades at 76.4 years. And Americans live shorter lives than people in other wealthy nations like Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom. That's across all demographic groups, meaning even the richest Americans live shorter lives than their counterparts in other countries.  There are a lot of reasons for this, including poor diets, lack of access to health care, gun violence, car crashes and deaths from COVID-19. But there are also many potential solutions, some the United States could borrow from other countries. Guests: Jeremy Ney is the author of American Inequality, a newsletter that uses data visualization to cover inequality in the United States. He was previously a macro policy strategist at the Federal Reserve.  Colin Planalp is a senior research fellow at State Health Access Data Assistance Center, which is a state health policy research center in the University of Minnesota School of Public Health.  Paul Mellick is an associate professor and the chair of the Department of Health and Exercise Science at the University of St. Thomas.

Stories included in this episode:  1 - American Inequality is (Finally) Lessening 2 - Column: The Unspoken Reason Why Many Doctors and Nurses Are Quitting 3 - Why This Indictment Can't Stop Donald Trump From Being Elected President 4 - Column: What Congress Must Do Now to Speed Up the Green Energy Transition

The U.S. economy might be slowing, but things are looking up for lower-income workers.

Larry Mantle and LAist film critics Lael Loewenstein and Wade Major review this weekend's new movie releases in theaters, streaming, and on demand platforms. FilmWeek: ‘Air: Courting A Legend,' ‘Tetris,' ‘Unzipped: An autopsy of American Inequality' And More  “Air: Courting A Legend” Wide Release “Tetris” Streaming on Apple TV+ “Unzipped: An Autopsy of American Inequality” Laemmle Monica Film Center [Santa monica]  “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” Wide Release “Pretty Baby: Brooke Shields” Streaming On Hulu   “One Day As A Lion” In Select Theaters “Rye Lane” Streaming on Hulu  “Space Oddity” In Select Theaters “Murder Mystery 2” Streaming on Netflix  John Horn Interviews Actor Kyra Sedgwick About Directing Her New Film ‘Space Oddity'Kyra Segwick has a plethora of on screen performance credits, including TV crime series The Closer and comedy show Brooklyn Nine-Nine. Now, taking her talents behind-the-scenes, Sedgwick is making her first directorial debut in the Sci-Fi rom-com movie Space Oddity, a film about a young man traveling to Mars… or not. John Horn sits down with Sedgwick to talk about the film and how she feels about her new role behind the cameras. 

Today on AirTalk, a New York grand jury indicts Trump. Also on the show, LA City Council member Mark Ridley-Thomas is found guilty; LA County's COVID eviction protections end; FilmWeek; and more. New York Grand Jury Indicts Trump, How Does This Impact Other Cases He's Facing? (0:15)  Mark Ridley Thomas Is The Latest LA Politician Convicted On Corruption Charges. How Does City Council Move Forward? (17:08) LA County's COVID Eviction Protections Are No Longer After Today. What Are Your Rights? (33:36)  FilmWeek: ‘Air: Courting A Legend,' ‘Tetris,' ‘Unzipped: An Autopsy of American Inequality' And More (51:35) John Horn Interviews Actor Kyra Sedgwick About Directing Her New Film ‘Space Oddity' (1:22:08)

Larry Mantle and LAist film critics  Lael Loewenstein and Wade Major review this weekend's new movie releases in theaters, streaming and on demand platforms — in three minutes or less!  

A former U.S. Senator and Representative from Texas, and Visiting Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, Phil Gramm, joins Paul E. Peterson to discuss Gramm's new book, “The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate.” “The Myth of American Inequality,” co-authored with Robert Ekelund and John Early, is available now from Rowman & Littlefield.

Senator Phil Gramm is a former U.S. Congressman and Senator from Texas, as well as the former chairman of the Senate Banking Committee between 1991 and 2001. Prior to this, he was a Professor of Economics at Texas A&M University. He is now a Senior Partner at US Policy Metrics and a nonresident Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Holding a Ph.D. from the University of Georgia, he is an economist by training, and his latest book is titled The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases the Policy Debate.

Hour 3: Editor at Real Clear Politics J. Peder Zane joins Mark Reardon to discuss his latest article titled, "The Myth of American Inequality". Then, Todd Graves, Chairman of the Stanley Herzog Charitable Foundation and founding partner of Graves Garret LLC in Kansas City, shares his latest piece in the Kansas City Star that shares how Missouri school choice programs, not teachers' unions, could be the solution to the state's education problems. Later, Mark brings you the Audio Cut of the Day!

Kent's guest in this episode is the author of The Myth of American Inequality, former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm. Senator Gramm uses official government statistics to argue that the rich in America are not getting richer and the poor are not getting poorer, Americans are living better today than at any time in history, and the American dream is alive and well.  

This mismeasurement of income inequality has given us costly and unjustified policy interventions to boost redistribution. That's the argument from the book coauthored by Cato's John F. Early, The Myth of American Inequality. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

According to former Senator Phil Gramm, inequality in the U.S. is grossly overstated largely because it fails to take into account massive government aid to low income earners. The implications of this are huge, especially given the current debate about remaking capitalism. Don't miss this important conversation.

Breaking News, The Best Of 2022 Interviews, The Myth of American Inequality, The Latest News On Your Money, And Multiple Grammy Award Winner & Petra's Former Lead Singer Talks About His Latest Projects Click Here to Download December 20, 2022 – Hour One 3 Very Independent and Compelling Hours of Experts, and Authors Pursuing The […] The post December 20, 2022 first appeared on The Bill Martinez Show.

This week on DisrupTV, we interviewed Senator Phil Gramm, author of The Myth of American Inequality, Jonathan Reichental, founder, professor, and author, and Linda Yates, author of The Unicorn Within. DisrupTV is a weekly Web series with hosts R “Ray” Wang and Vala Afshar. The show airs live at 11:00 a.m. PT/ 2:00 p.m. ET every Friday. Brought to you by Constellation Executive Network: constellationr.com/CEN.

In 2021, San Antonio's poverty level hit 17%, higher than the national average which was recorded as almost 13%. Race may also play a factor in poverty, with Black and Hispanic groups seeing the largest percentages. A recent rise in poverty in older communities has also come to light, and some economists have voiced their concern and believe it may just get worse from here.

Senator Phil Gramm claims in his new book - The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate, that  everything you know about income inequality, poverty, and other measures of economic well-being in America is wrong. In this provocative book,  Gramm,  former US Senator and senior leader at the Bureau of Labor Statistics challenges the prevailing consensus that income inequality is a growing threat to American society.  In addition to  discussing his book, Senator Gramm also discusses  issues of bipartisanship or the lack thereof in current American Politics with Radio Free Galisteo's 's John Shannon.Buy the Book: https://www.amazon.com/Myth-American-Inequality-Government-Biases/dp/1538167387Support the showFollow Radio Free Galisteo on Instagram at: @radiofreegalisteo. We're on twitter here: https://twitter.com/FreeGalisteo or @FreeGalisteo. We're now on Mastodon: @radiofreegalisteo@mastodon.world - Support the show by going to www.RadioFreeGalisteo.com and clicking on our Patreon support button.

On this episode, Ben sits down with former Texas Senator Phil Gramm to discuss his new book, The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate. Ben and Senator Gramm examine why they believe census poverty measures do not paint a full picture of the modern economic situation in America, why government programs that disincentive work are a far greater issue than inequality, and the long-term drawbacks of entitlements. Later, Ben shares an article that argues there is no compelling evidence that modern hurricanes are more forceful and damaging due to climate change. Follow Ben on Twitter: @BDomenech Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week on Hubwonk, host Joe Selvaggi talks with John F. Early, economist and author of the newly released book, The Myth of American Inequality, about the history of income inequality, its true size, and trends. They also discuss how census data used in policy decision-making misses nearly all the effects of government intervention and distorts the truth about […]

Joe Selvaggi talks with economist and author of the newly released book, "The Myth of American Inequality," about the size and trends in income inequality, and how the census data used to determine policy misses nearly all the effects of government intervention and distorts the income American families actually have to spend.

What You Need to Know is the comparison from 1894 to 2022. We are in a similar situation as in 1894. They were in a recession back then. There was a problem with wheat, inflation, silver, the stock market tanked, banks closed, businesses closed, etc. Their problem was economics. What did they do? They went to the polls in 1894 and punished the party in power and that party in power was the Democrats. We are in 2022 but it's almost like 1894 again and it's time for us to go to the polls and make our voices heard! Former Senator Phil Gramm, served six years in the US House of Representatives and eighteen years in the US Senate where he was Chairman of the Banking Committee, unpacks surprising data from his brand new book — The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate. Senator Gramm has found that in the last 7 years there's been an unexpected shift in income equality - unexpected, unless you're MAGA. Buy your own copy of The Myth of American Inequality here.  Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller (USMC, Ret.), Father, American, Marine, shares his brand new book — Crisis of Command: How We Lost Trust and Confidence in America's Generals and Politicians. Scheller explains that in his book he identifies the problems with the military but he gives a path forward to get the military back on track. Purchase your own copy of Crisis of Command here.  Wrap up: Have a great weekend!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Guests: Ryan Torn, Professor of Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, On to discuss Hurricane Ian. Blane Holt, Air Force Brigadier General, On to discuss President Harris' visit to the DMZ. Phil Gramm, Former US Senator (R-TX), On to discuss his book "The Myth of American Inequality." And ... Your thoughts on the latest in the news.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Join the Hoover Book Club for engaging discussions with leading authors on the hottest policy issues of the day. Hoover scholars explore the latest books that delve into some of the most vexing policy issues facing the United States and the world. Find out what makes these authors tick and how they think we should approach our most difficult challenges. In our latest installment, we will feature a discussion between former Senator Phil Gramm, John Early and John B. Taylor the George P. Shultz Senior Fellow in Economics at the Hoover Institution on Senator Gramm's and Mr. Early's latest book The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate co-authored by Robert Ekelund.  ABOUT THE AUTHORS Senator Phil Gramm is an economist by training and has had a long and distinguished career in public service, academia and the private sector. Senator Gramm was the vice chairman of UBS Investment Bank, where he provided strategic economic, political and policy advice to important corporate and institutional clients. He served in the US Congress representing Texas for more than two decades, first as the 6th congressional district representative to the US House of Representatives, then later as senator. His legislative record includes landmark bills like the Gramm-Latta Budget – which reduced federal spending, rebuilt national defense and mandated the Reagan tax cut – and the Gramm-Rudman Act, which placed the first binding constraints on federal spending. As chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Sen. Gramm steered legislation modernizing banking, insurance and securities laws. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act amended the 70-year-old Glass-Steagall Act,  allowing banks, security companies and insurance companies to affiliate through a financial services holding company.  Sen. Gramm taught economics at Texas A&M University for 12 years before becoming a member of Congress. He has published numerous articles and books on subjects ranging from private property, monetary theory and policy to the economics of mineral extraction. As a visiting scholar at AEI, he will be working on a comprehensive plan to fix the US economy through reform of the tax code and entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare. John F. Early is a mathematical economist, president of the consultancy Vital Few, LLC, and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute. Early has also served twice as assistant commissioner at the Bureau of Labor Statistics where he directed the statistical design, economic analysis, and survey operations for the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES), Point of Purchase Survey (POPS), and estimates of pre‐retail price changes. ABOUT THE BOOK Everything you know about income inequality, poverty, and other measures of economic well-being in America is wrong. In this provocative book, a former United States senator, eminent economist, and a former senior leader at the Bureau of Labor Statistics challenge the prevailing consensus that income inequality is a growing threat to American society. By taking readers on a deep dive into the way government measures economic well-being, they demonstrate that our official statistics dramatically overstate inequality. Getting the facts straight reveals that the key measures of well-being are greater than the official statistics of the country would lead us to believe. Income inequality is lower today than at any time in post- World War II America. The facts reveal a very different and better America than the one that is currently described by policy advocates across much of the political spectrum. The Myth of American Inequality provides clear and convincing evidence that the American Dream is alive and well. 

*John hopes that one of his favorite Florida destinations is still standing, and Nick Gale has some fun sitting in for Kim. *Senator Phil Gramm takes on the biggest questions facing the economy while previewing his new book "The Myth of American Inequality. *ABC News Entertainment Correspondent Jason Nathanson breaks down Rolling Stone Magazine's top 100 TV shows of all time. *Audio of Joe Biden from back when he was a Senator shows that the President was much tougher on crime than he is now. *Plus, we officially welcome Jane Clauss to the WLS family and ask how she is handling the morning commute.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

*John hopes that one of his favorite Florida destinations is still standing, and Nick Gale has some fun sitting in for Kim. *Senator Phil Gramm takes on the biggest questions facing the economy while previewing his new book "The Myth of American Inequality. *ABC News Entertainment Correspondent Jason Nathanson breaks down Rolling Stone Magazine's top 100 TV shows of all time. *Audio of Joe Biden from back when he was a Senator shows that the President was much tougher on crime than he is now. *Plus, we officially welcome Jane Clauss to the WLS family and ask how she is handling the morning commute.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of Potomac Watch, Paul Gigot sits down with economist and former Senator Phil Gramm about his new book The Myth of American Inequality, why government has failed to truly address the poverty problem in America, and why Republicans could learn from Democrats' understanding of "nitty-gritty" economic programs.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

While AOC, Bernie, Elizabeth and their fellow travelers decry "income inequality", a new book claims America's problem is too much income EQUALITY. And as Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders and Warren foment rage toward "millionaires and billionaires", that's not where our coming troubles lie. Here's why: If you include so-called transfer payments to the poor and you subtract the cost of taxes from working folks a bit higher up the income scale, per capital income is roughly equal. This episode of Right Angle previews the idea behind the new book, "The Myth of American Inequality", by Phil Gramm, John Early and Robert Ekelund, available starting September 15, 2022. Scott Ott, Stephen Green and Bill Whittle have hosted a news panel discussion show — now five times weekly — since 2009, thanks to our Members. To join these producers, unlock access to Backstage content, Member-written blog, forums and comments, tap the big green button at https://BillWhittle.com To make a one-time or recurring donation without joining, tap the big blue button at https://BillWhittle.com Access the complete Right Angle archive at: https://billwhittle.com/category/shows/ra/

This week, we are going to hear a presentation from the USF Lecture Series at Allen County Public Library. We'll hear from Weston Cutter, Professor of English at the University of Saint Francis, examining systemic practices that have created inequality in this country, contrast between stories and data, and how our community was impacted by redlining. Special thanks to Allen County Public Library and to Access Fort Wayne for organizing this event, and providing audio for this program. Our music is by Mark Waldick, Noah Campodonico, Kurt Roembke, and Hope Arthur. Our web producer is Loyal Vandenburg. Our production assistants are Monica Blankenship, Meihkai Bowers, Steve Mullaney, Kyle Norbeck, Diahmynd Thomas, Mikaela Veltum, and Sydney Wagner.

S4E22 | "Social Distancing Science, CRT in Schools, & The Real Problem Behind American Inequality" by Waters Church

Jesse Jackson ran a strong populist campaign for president in 1988, advocating bold new policies and programs to address inequality. This prompted establishment skeptics to scoff, “Where ‘ya gonna get the money?” Jackson answered directly: “Get it from where it went.” He meant from corporations and the rich, which had long been rigging the economic system and government policies to shift income and wealth from the workaday majority to themselves. Thirty years later, that shift has become an avalanche: Just three men – Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett – now own more of the nation’s wealth than the 165 million Americans who make up the bottom half of our population. This extreme (and expanding) separation of the few from the many is why progressive policy makers today are calling – as Jackson had – for big, forward-thinking populist solutions. But again, the smug forces of the status quo scoff, “Where ‘ya gonna get the money?” The answer is the same one Jackson offered decades ago, but this time two new factors are in play: (1) from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, we now have specific, easy-to-understand proposals to tax multi-millionaires and billionaires to pay for the structural changes needed to open opportunities for the poor and middle class; and (2) the public now enthusiastically supports such a tax – a recent poll found two-thirds of Americans (including a majority of Republicans) favoring Sen. Warren’s plan for a tax on those who have fortunes above $50 million. This is Jim Hightower saying… Inequality will not fix itself. As the American majority has had to do periodically in our history, We The People must intervene to keep greed and wealth concentration from suffocating our society’s essential democratic values of fairness, justice, and opportunity for all. A wealth tax is the place to start. “For or Against, Taxing the Rich Rouses Passion,” The New York Times, October 2, 2019.

Income inequality has become a hot button issue in this last decade. Concerns range from the idea that it will destroy civilization to simply "It just isn't fair!" Well, this episode will present four common claims about how income inequality is "unfair" and answer them" The rich are getting richer and the poor are staying poor. The United States is the worst offender for income inequality. The poor and middle class are being cheated out of much of the wealth their labor creates. Economic growth that fuels income inequality leaves the poor behind. Sources Cited: US Census Bureau, "https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-270.html (Income and Poverty in the United States: 2019)" Phil Gramm and John F. Early, Wall Street Journal, "https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-inequality-1533855113 (The Myth of American Inequality)" Nat Levy, Geekwire, "https://www.geekwire.com/2019/walmart-posts-514b-revenue-year-plans-double-grocery-pickup-delivery (Walmart posts $514B in revenue for the year, plans to double down on grocery pickup and delivery)" MacroTrends, "https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/WMT/walmart/net-income (Walmart Net Income 2006-2020 | WMT)" Walmart, "https://corporate.walmart.com/newsroom/company-facts (Company Facts)" Kim Souza, Talk Business & Politics, "https://talkbusiness.net/2019/04/walmarts-top-five-executives-earn-68-73-million-last-year (Walmart's top five executives earned $68.73 million last year)" The Financial Express, "https://www.salaamgateway.com/story/growth-fuels-income-inequality-in-bangladesh (Growth fuels income inequality in Bangladesh)" Manuel Hinds, Quartz, "https://qz.com/96836/inequality-can-be-a-good-thing (Inequality can be a good thing)" Scriptures Cited: Exodus 20:15,17 Jeremiah 22:13,17 ***** Like what you hear? https://www.truthspresso.com/donate (Donate) to Truthspresso and give a shot of support! *****

This season, Stuart Shapiro has invited our newest faculty members to share their research. In this episode, the last in this series of seven, he welcomes Professor of Public Policy Jermaine Toney, who studies the relationship between race, family wealth, parental income, and the income and prosperity of future generations. Professor Toney discusses the importance of understanding the past and the current systematic gaps that still weigh on Black households and talks about developing policy solutions for these inequalities. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/ejbtalks/message

Historian Paige Glotzer discusses the segregated suburbs and what the history of Baltimore's Roland Park Company has to do with today's inequality. The post Financing American Inequality: A Conversation with Paige Glotzer appeared first on Edge Effects.

Create Your Wealth. Inequality in America Exists. Crash Course on the Economics. If you missed part 1: Season 1, Episode 39: https://www.buzzsprout.com/619930/2734540-motivation-your-income-inequality-in-america-you-are-being-left-behind.mp3?blob_id=9296143&download=truePodcast video is here: https://youtu.be/szY4jaVR2KcBUSINESS INQUIRIES: Eric@stopstrugglingnow.com

The Context of White Supremacy welcomes Professor Colin Gordon. Focusing on the history of American public policy and political economy, Professor Gordon is a distinguished part of the University of Iowa's history department. His new book, Citizen Brown: Race, Democracy, and Inequality in the St. Louis Suburbs, explores the decades of White Supremacist policies that produced the killing of Michael Brown Jr. in 2014 and the collective abuse targeting black citizens of the St. Louis area. We'll discuss Professor Gordon's class on the "History of American Inequality." Gus observed that Mr. Gordon's book is chock full of metaphors. He rarely indicts White people directly and pussyfoots with jargon like "uneven citizenship." #PlantBasedEatingCountersRacism INVEST in The COWS – http://paypal.me/TheCOWS Cash App: https://cash.app/$TheCOWS CALL IN NUMBER: 605.313.5164 CODE 564943#

Wednesday, October 23rd 8:00PM Eastern/ 5:00PM Pacific The Context of White Supremacy welcomes Professor Colin Gordon. Focusing on the history of American public policy and political economy, Professor Gordon is a distinguished part of the University of Iowa's history department. His new book, Citizen Brown: Race, Democracy, and Inequality in the St. Louis Suburbs, explores the decades of White Supremacist policies that produced the killing of Michael Brown Jr. in 2014 and the collective abuse targeting black citizens of the St. Louis area. We'll discuss Professor Gordon's class on the "History of American Inequality." Gus observed that Mr. Gordon's book is chock full of metaphors. He rarely indicts White people directly and foots with jargon like "uneven citizenship." #PlantBasedEatingCountersRacism INVEST in The COWS – paypal.me/TheCOWS The C.O.W.S. Radio Program is specifically engineered for black & non-white listeners - Victims of White Supremacy. The purpose of this program is to provide Victims of White Supremacy with constructive information and suggestions on how to counter Racist Woman & Racist Man. TUNE IN! Phone: 1-605-313-5164 - Access Code 564943# Hit star *6 & 1 to enter caller cue

Denise Fairchild, Author of Energy Democracy Host John Farrell speaks with Denise Fairchild, President of Emerald Cities Collaborative and author of Energy Democracy. Denise and John delve into the connections between the environment, the economy and equity. They also discuss: The benefits of decentralizing control of and ownership over our energy system. What is energy democracy and what does it look like to achieve energy democracy? Parallels between the abolition movement and the fight for energy democracy How do we undo past harm to communities of color to ensure they have access to the money and resources to transition to clean energy and engage in energy democracy? How a bottom up approach to clean energy can scale rapidly   Energy democracy is a way to reimagine, re-engineer, rebuild our economy. It acknowledges the intersectional relationship between the environment, economy and equity. And recognizes that fixing income inequality, fixing racism, fixing gender inequality, fixing environmental degradation really requires changing an economy that's screwing up everything.   Related Resources Energy Democracy Emerald Cities Collaborative How Homeownership Became the Engine of American Inequality by Matthew Desmond Democratizing the Electricity System How ILSR defines energy democracy and the 4 steps to get there The big picture, ILSR's anti-monopoly and pro-local approach to advancing energy democracy Transcript John Farrell: Welcome to Building Local Power. I'm your host, John Farrell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. For this episode We're talking energy democracy. It's not just a concept, but a wonderful book edited by Denise Fairchild and Al Weinraub and Denise, President of the Emerald Cities Collaborative, joins me today to talk about the book. Welcome, Denise. Denise Fairchild: Well, thank you John. Glad to be on the program and have a conversation about this important topic. John Farrell: Yes. Well I just want to say thank you again for taking time and thank you for putting together this book. It was delightful. I really enjoyed reading it, especially as I work on energy democracy issues through the Institute for Local Self-Reliance and many of the organizations that we collaborate with. I was hoping that we could start with a story of how energy democracy is playing out. You know, is there something happening out in the world that you see sort of embodying this notion of energy democracy that you draw inspiration from? Denise Fairchild: Well, you know the book itself that Al and I put together really is a book of stories. There's stories of all the wonderful efforts that are going on in the grassroots frontline communities, really trying to bring energy into a clean energy future that's owned and controlled by communities. So I mean we, you know, the voices of nontraditional environmentalists, as you might think about it, are, it's just what the book is about, from the young suburban high school students who just wanted to put solar on their roofs and accidentally politicized an entire community that is now fueling a national co-op movement. I mean, I love that story, but then there's, there's a story of immigrant refugees, Chinese immigrants, basically monolingual populations on the west coast that are not only fighting Chevron and in the fossil fuel industry because it's keeping them in the hospital with respiratory and asthma cases. But they are, these are folks that are now at the forefront of California's progressive energy policies. But what's most even compelling about that, is that they're also participating in rallies for black lives matter as an example, because they're seeing the connections between the environment, the economy and equity. That is all sort of rooted in this notion of how our economies is screwing everybody or even the fight of the local clean energy alliance, which is fighting to make community choice a reality are really about community and not...

The inaugural episode of Reentry Radio comes from the September 2014 session of the Occasional Series on Research in Reentry, which focused on children of incarcerated parents. The episode begins with a presentation by Dr. Sara Wakefield, co-author of “The Prison Boom - Mass Incarceration and the Future of American Inequality". Dr. Wakefield is followed by commentary and discussion by a distinguished panel of experts including Jean Kjellstrand, Tanisha Douglas, Tanya Krupat, and Deborah Sills Iarussi.

The U.S. prison population has expanded significantly over the last three decades. In this podcast, University of Minnesota sociologist Christopher Uggen talks about the links between crime, punishment, and inequality and discusses how the criminal justice system can mediate transitions in and out of poverty and adult social roles.

Americans seem to be more concerned about economic inequality today than they have been in living memory. The Occupy Movement (“We are the 99%”) is only the most visible sign of this growing unease. But what are the dimensions of inequality in the United States? How have they changed over the past century? Are we living in a new Gilded Age in which the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer? In his “book” (it’s really an innovative website) Growing Apart: A Political History of American Inequality (Institute for Policy Studies, 2013), Colin Gordon sets out to answer these questions. Using an interesting array of charts, graphs, and videos, Gordon tells the story of inequality in the U.S. in modern times. Gordon shows that in recent decades the poor have been getting relatively poorer and the rich have been getting relatively richer. The “gap”–already considerable–is growing. In this interview we discuss growing inequality and the reasons behind it. We also touch on what is perhaps the most important question in the debate: does inequality as it is found in the U.S. really matter economically, spiritually, and politically? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Americans seem to be more concerned about economic inequality today than they have been in living memory. The Occupy Movement (“We are the 99%”) is only the most visible sign of this growing unease. But what are the dimensions of inequality in the United States? How have they changed over the past century? Are we living in a new Gilded Age in which the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer? In his “book” (it's really an innovative website) Growing Apart: A Political History of American Inequality (Institute for Policy Studies, 2013), Colin Gordon sets out to answer these questions. Using an interesting array of charts, graphs, and videos, Gordon tells the story of inequality in the U.S. in modern times. Gordon shows that in recent decades the poor have been getting relatively poorer and the rich have been getting relatively richer. The “gap”–already considerable–is growing. In this interview we discuss growing inequality and the reasons behind it. We also touch on what is perhaps the most important question in the debate: does inequality as it is found in the U.S. really matter economically, spiritually, and politically? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/digital-humanities

Americans seem to be more concerned about economic inequality today than they have been in living memory. The Occupy Movement (“We are the 99%”) is only the most visible sign of this growing unease. But what are the dimensions of inequality in the United States? How have they changed over the past century? Are we living in a new Gilded Age in which the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer? In his “book” (it’s really an innovative website) Growing Apart: A Political History of American Inequality (Institute for Policy Studies, 2013), Colin Gordon sets out to answer these questions. Using an interesting array of charts, graphs, and videos, Gordon tells the story of inequality in the U.S. in modern times. Gordon shows that in recent decades the poor have been getting relatively poorer and the rich have been getting relatively richer. The “gap”–already considerable–is growing. In this interview we discuss growing inequality and the reasons behind it. We also touch on what is perhaps the most important question in the debate: does inequality as it is found in the U.S. really matter economically, spiritually, and politically? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Americans seem to be more concerned about economic inequality today than they have been in living memory. The Occupy Movement (“We are the 99%”) is only the most visible sign of this growing unease. But what are the dimensions of inequality in the United States? How have they changed over the past century? Are we living in a new Gilded Age in which the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer? In his “book” (it’s really an innovative website) Growing Apart: A Political History of American Inequality (Institute for Policy Studies, 2013), Colin Gordon sets out to answer these questions. Using an interesting array of charts, graphs, and videos, Gordon tells the story of inequality in the U.S. in modern times. Gordon shows that in recent decades the poor have been getting relatively poorer and the rich have been getting relatively richer. The “gap”–already considerable–is growing. In this interview we discuss growing inequality and the reasons behind it. We also touch on what is perhaps the most important question in the debate: does inequality as it is found in the U.S. really matter economically, spiritually, and politically? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Americans seem to be more concerned about economic inequality today than they have been in living memory. The Occupy Movement (“We are the 99%”) is only the most visible sign of this growing unease. But what are the dimensions of inequality in the United States? How have they changed over the past century? Are we living in a new Gilded Age in which the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer? In his “book” (it’s really an innovative website) Growing Apart: A Political History of American Inequality (Institute for Policy Studies, 2013), Colin Gordon sets out to answer these questions. Using an interesting array of charts, graphs, and videos, Gordon tells the story of inequality in the U.S. in modern times. Gordon shows that in recent decades the poor have been getting relatively poorer and the rich have been getting relatively richer. The “gap”–already considerable–is growing. In this interview we discuss growing inequality and the reasons behind it. We also touch on what is perhaps the most important question in the debate: does inequality as it is found in the U.S. really matter economically, spiritually, and politically? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Americans seem to be more concerned about economic inequality today than they have been in living memory. The Occupy Movement (“We are the 99%”) is only the most visible sign of this growing unease. But what are the dimensions of inequality in the United States? How have they changed over the past century? Are we living in a new Gilded Age in which the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer? In his “book” (it’s really an innovative website) Growing Apart: A Political History of American Inequality (Institute for Policy Studies, 2013), Colin Gordon sets out to answer these questions. Using an interesting array of charts, graphs, and videos, Gordon tells the story of inequality in the U.S. in modern times. Gordon shows that in recent decades the poor have been getting relatively poorer and the rich have been getting relatively richer. The “gap”–already considerable–is growing. In this interview we discuss growing inequality and the reasons behind it. We also touch on what is perhaps the most important question in the debate: does inequality as it is found in the U.S. really matter economically, spiritually, and politically? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices