income disparities

Fuck this narrative.

It erases disabled people. The elderly. Children.

It’s classist, ableist, racist, and just wrong.


Fuck capitalism, liberalism, and political ideas of worth and value.

Edit: Seriously wish I knew I could edit sooner! 1. “How is it racist?” It’s racist due to white supremacist policies. POC make significantly less than white people. It’s a big wage gap. Redlining. Gentrification. The New Jim Crow. Systemic and institutional racism. Discrimination in hiring and promoting, housing, loans, and so forth. Whites in general owe a lot to generational wealth, something POC were long excluded from. POC often don’t get the same recognition or compensation for their work. School to prison pipeline, racist policing, unfair sentencing, the much higher percentage of Black, Indigenous, and other POC in prisons compared to their resourcing respective general population percents is a huge problem. It makes it much harder for POC to “move up the ladder,” more likely to live in poverty, and have a harder time escaping poverty. 2. Why liberalism? Because liberalism has become neoliberalism, moved farther right, become less interested in effective measures and actual justice. 3. But communism kills people and anarchism doesn’t work! Okay, I’m not going to debate this point, only say that there is enough food, housing, and other basic needs to take care of everyone. To be continued…
Regardless of how Americans identify themselves ideologically, the majority embrace ideas that some might call socialist. For example, 74% think corporations have too much influence; 73% favor tougher regulation of Wall Street; 60% believe that “our economic system unfairly favors the wealthy;” 85% want an overhaul of our campaign finance system to reduce the influence of money in politics; 58% support breaking up big banks; 79% think the wealthy don’t pay their fair share of taxes; 85% favor paid family leave; 80% of Democrats and half the public support single-payer Medicare for all; 75% of Americans (including 53% of Republicans) support an increase in the federal minimum wage to $12.50, while 63% favor a $15 minimum wage; well over 70% support workers’ rights to unionize; and 92% want a society with far less income disparity.
Keep women in academia by providing childcare, historian urges universities
Childcare is the single biggest problem for female academics, but too little is done to help, suggests Cambridge University historian Patricia Fara
By Ian Sample

And presumably most of the women are not having the children all on their own.

And it is not just academic environments that are problematic!

A leading British historian has called on universities to provide more support for childcare to reduce the number of women who leave academia before they reach the peak of their careers.

Starting a family remains one of the greatest obstacles for women who are building their careers as university researchers, but too little is done to help them, said Patricia Fara, a historian at Cambridge University and president of the British Society for the History of Science.                       

Because income disparity means men still often receive larger salaries, it is women who typically take on much of the responsibility for childcare, including the morning drop-off and collecting them from school. A 2016 report into pay inequality from the Institute of Fiscal Studies found that women in Britain earn on average 18% less than men, and that the gap balloons after women have children.

The pay gap widens steadily for 12 years after the birth of a first child, leaving women on 33% less pay per hour than men, the report found.

Done With the Debate Tournament

Overall, it went very well, seeing as though the con side has an extreme disadvantage to the pro. In fact, my coach was saying that in TAB, they were having 70% of the ballots turn up pro. In pre-lims, we went 6-1, which was surprising since we won all 5 of the con rounds we did, and the one we had lost was when we had gone pro. In octofinals, we were forced to go con…and lost. 1 out of the 3 judges in octofinals voted for us, which is still an accomplishment I think, since the con argument is complete BS.

What was really cool though was that my teammates barely made it into octo-finals with a 4-3 record, and then ended up winning all the break rounds and winning the entire tournament. Maybe debate is the only thing that our school can win. Our football team gets so more funding than debate, but they lose almost all of our games :/

That other Black sitcom right now:  The Carmichael Show

I knew there was a sitcom on network TV about a Black family that wasn’t Blackish, but I hadn’t actually looked up anything about it.  Now I’ve watched the first two seasons of The Carmichael Show on Netflix, and if you haven’t gotten into it, put it on your list before the season three premiere next month.

Jerrod Carmichael is a stand-up comedian with a family sitcom in the tradition of Bill Cosby, Roseanne Barr, Tim Allen, Grace Butler, etc, but this isn’t a Black sitcom I’ve seen before.  Roc, Everybody Hates Chris, and Family Matters are the first three Black sitcoms that come to mind when I picture an average family (unlike the Huxtables or the Bankses), but they didn’t really do topical episodes.  Episodes of The Carmichael Show have names like “Guns” and “Gender” and “Gentrification” and words that don’t start with G, like “Prayer.”  And this is an average Black family in the South written by a guy from North Carolina, so that carries another layer of interest since I can’t name any family sitcoms set in the South off the top of my head (and Designing Women is the only one that comes to mind at all).

Check out this clip where the Carmichaels are trying to impress their pastor over dinner and Jerrod’s girlfriend is outed as a non-Christian.

Keep reading

Why is diversity important in the practice of law?

A couple of months ago, I applied to a scholarship that asked me to answer the previous question. It was angry, it was honest, and I thought it wasn’t going to be PG enough for the committee. Yesterday, I found out I DID get the scholarship. While I am very thankful to have received it (it means I can afford to buy my textbooks next semester) I have often come back to the essays that I wrote in order to remind myself… why the hell I’m doing this in the first place. So as usual I thought I’d share

Why do you believe that diversity is important in the practice of law?Despite many advances, our country is still confronting an incredible dissonance of identity. We call ourselves the land of the free and home of the brave; yet we quantify how much “freedom” our citizens deserve based on their skin color, religion, and income, and refuse to let some of us call this our “home” even when crossing oceans and borders just to get here was the bravest thing we’d ever done. No one understands a struggle, as well as the ones that live it. Who better to understand our country’s issues than those that live in a dissonance of identity every day like minorities in this country do? Who better to shape the definition of America, than those that struggle with being “too” American and American “enough” every day of their lives?

Our laws, regulations, and public policies are the framework in which our society is built on and lives through. The law is words put into action. Those with the power to make law, decide what it means, and what it should be, determine who our country is and who our country will be. We need more diversity in the practice of law so that when those important decisions of policy and law are made, our experience and issues are taken into serious consideration without being dismissed, not simply for ourselves, but for the future prosperity of our country. A fragmented community cannot grow, and without resolving our issues with race, immigration, religious differences, and income disparities, we will never be united enough to prosper.

What can we do to promote and support diversity in the legal profession?

Give us examples to follow. Give us a lot of examples to follow. Help more minorities get to and through law school. Then help them succeed even after law school. We can expose our children to what they could dream to accomplish every day, but without seeing themselves in a concrete example, in someone that looks like them, and speaks like them, and has experiences like theirs, those ambitions will remain abstract dreams and not realities.

When I was 16 I saw Elle Woods graduate from Harvard Law School in the film Legally Blonde and I knew that I wanted to be a lawyer. By 18, despite having graduated as a National Hispanic Merit Scholar, at the top of my class, and with a full scholarship, I also knew that I could never go to law school. I didn’t know any lawyers; my parents didn’t know any lawyers. Elle Woods was blonde and rich and I was brunette and poor. That’s what life had taught me in those two years, that’s how strong and pervasive the lessons of inequality continue to be in our country.

It wasn’t until ten years later that my high school students would finally help me unlearn that terrible lesson. My students were refugees, immigrants, band geeks, cheerleaders, gang leaders, mothers, fathers, orphans, and poets. They would come into my classroom tired and sleepless because they were working all night, because the baby hadn’t stopped crying all night, because they hadn’t stopped crying all night for the mother they left behind in El Salvador. But when I told them that education would help them reach their goals, that they could go to college and most importantly that they could graduate from college, they believed me. They believed me because I look like them, and speak like them, and I can never say no to a bag of Takis or a plate of pupusas just like them, and I had done it. With my braids and Spanish accent, I had graduated.

My last day in my classroom, I sat on the floor and cried because I couldn’t bear the thought of leaving them, until Guadalupe told me, “Miss D. if you can’t do it then how do you expect us to do it? You said we could and we can, so now you have to, too.”

I’m a first-generation American, first-generation college graduate, Mexican-American woman and English is my second language, and in 2019 I will be a law school graduate. Because underneath every single one of my identifiers that I am so proud of, there is an entire population of Americans that didn’t have the privilege and blessings that I did to be able to overcome the obstacles that every single one of those identifiers puts before us. Because I cannot let the world say that any part of who I am limits me; I cannot say it for myself or for all my students that inspired me to fulfill my dreams. That’s what keeps me up at night, even after 12 hours of studying, even after ramen noodles and no sleep. To be a more diverse law community, we need more diverse students becoming lawyers, because once we do we will never forget that this is not just about us… this is about everyone like us that couldn’t and everyone after us that should.


Because there are endless trumpposters on this site i swear i have never posted to before, yet have me blocked for whtaeever reason, such as the OP, preventing me to reblog shit; ill just cappost to @siryouarebeingmocked @thespectacularspider-girl

I hope this answers your question:

London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan said urgent action needed to be taken in light of the “shocking” statistics, as the British capital prepares to celebrate Pride weekend.

“I want London’s LGBT+ community to feel truly valued, happy and safe in our great city and know how important these spaces are to its well being,” said Khan in a statement.

Many LGBT pubs and nightclubs are thriving businesses but rent hikes from landlords and construction for London housing and public transport projects have forced many to close their doors, the report said.

Some of the city’s iconic gay bars, such as the Black Cap pub in north London and the Joiners Arms to the east, have closed down as part of plans to redevelop them.

Ben Campkin, senior lecturer in architecture at UCL, said LGBTQ spaces remain vital, despite social media making it easier for LGBT people to communicate.

“The … evidence we have collated disputes unsubstantiated but often repeated claims that LGBTQ+ spaces are no longer needed, or have been replaced by digital apps, which tend only to serve small sections of these communities,” said Campkin.

“Where they have survived, LGBTQ+ spaces are extremely valuable… and the consequences of closures are acutely felt.”

Petitions and protests at the closure of historic central London venues have drawn support from hundreds of patrons, but they have limited power to resist large property owners and off-shore investors leading redevelopment projects, the report said.

Campkin recommends London’s boroughs should recognize the importance of LGBT venues in their local plans and conduct assessments when developments threaten gay bars, nightclubs or music venues.


Straight liberals who cant stop jerking themselves off to queers are shocked to find out that moving into gay neighbourhoods to get closer to and live in  “progressive and diverse” areas (see: diverse but not around the poor brown people that mostly inhabit contemporary urban London) where they feel can see gay people hold hands and be neighbours to drag queens, so they can feel awesome flying their rainbow flag in solidarity with their new neighbours and feel leftier than thou; has the effect of driving rent and real estate costs up or having gay spaces snapped up by developers to cater to these well-off straight people wanting to be close to the exotic and fun gay culture they purport to great allies to.

Ask any gay person or drag queen what they feel about this and they will sneer and roll their eyes at the increasing rate that straight women come to their clubs and bars to try and befriend drag queens (especially in this post-rupaul era) and  evade the aggressive straight men at their own venues. Hell, sometimes they bring their “accepting and totally cool with gay people” boyfriend. Past that, the queer community looks at the new condos and stores that pop up in their neighbourhood with resent, as their community gradually erodes away to these hordes of straight people transforming a historically gay area into a “trendy spot”

It’s hilarious, the hamfist method that Sadiq Khan and London’s council will try and save the queer community in their city, when it’s their own civic planning, rapid demographic changes, and income disparity that is to blame for the rapid destruction of the queer community they desperately want to protect.

We No Longer Hold These Truths To Be Self Evident

Out of all the countries in this world, the United States and France should be the two places where obscene wealth, vast income disparities and the presence of a moneyed elite should be considered unacceptable. Why? I’ll postulate.

A wealthy upper class is a de facto extension of the system of aristocracy. Wherein one group of people is considered inherently superior to others. This is normally tied to monarchies with their nobility and landed gentry. Kings, Tsars, Pashas, Raj, Hetman, Khans, Emperors. These are part of the history of most of the world. With them come social stratifications as favors are dispensed to the rich and influential in return for loyalty and support. Disparity is ingrained in the culture and society. It’s deeply ingrained into the narrative. The aristocracy is better. By birth. The poor are like children, lacking the ability to be anything more than livestock.

America was founded through a revolution that had as one of it’s tenets a rejection of monarchy and aristocracy. “All men are created equal” wasn’t about race or ethnicity. It was deliberate defiance of the authority of kings. Now, granted, in the southern states a sort of nouveau aristocracy was established, but anywhere that the purchase and possession of human beings is not only accepted but stridently defended, equality is already subverted.
France, in turn, had a revolution directly inspired by the American one, to reject the monarchy and establish an egalitarian brotherhood. Which, well, didn’t go entirely smoothly, but you’ll notice there’s no king or queen of France.
The thing here is, in America in particular, the notion of an egalitarian society was rather quickly replaced by a narrative of, rather than fairness to all, an equal opportunity to become wealthy. Even though the likelihood of that was very small, for the first 150 years it was easy to propagate. America had a vast territory, seemingly limitless land and untapped resources. Yet oddly, the majority even then were poor or at best lower class. And then, as now, the poor were blamed for their condition. “Lazy”, “unintelligent”, “inferior”.
Racism was blatantly used to divert attention. First with the indigenous people (savages)and then enslaved Africans (like children, incapable of taking care of themselves). Following that every successive wave of immigrants were vilified. Then, as now, they could be blamed for stealing jobs. Rather than holding responsible those hiring them. Look at any depiction of the Irish in America from the 1840’s to the 1890’s. They’re shown as being ape-like physically and portrayed as ignorant,drunken and violent. Italians were dirty drunken anarchists. Germans were dull goofy drunkards. Jews were sinister dirty money hoarders. The Chinese were lecherous thieving drug addicts.Every new group was stereotyped as inferior so that the preceding group would not look upwards socially for the source of their woe. Instead of recognizing the commonality of the oppressed, the poor are directed to target those who are, socially, most like them.Racism is the controlling classes best defense. “Sure you’re poor and have no opportunity, but at least you’re not like THEM. Look at them, just animals. No, you’re better than them. Of course you’re not as good as US, but hey ignore that.”

What’s a bit odd is how this manipulation of the social strata actually accelerates after the American Civil War. This war was, both North and South, quite widely seen as a “rich man’s war”. After the initial patriotic fervor subsided idealism also became less prominent. In both North and South the wealthy could avoid service or conscription. Through the payment of cash (in the North it was $300. A years wages for a poor man) or deferment for owning large numbers of slaves, a vital business or the favor of a politician. In addition to the resentment caused by this, millions of men who might have spent their entire lives within a few miles of where they were born were exposed to the vast and diverse geography of the nation. They were also exposed to new ideas and people from a wide array of backgrounds and cultures. The concept of being American was broadened and deepened. It became something more than just those people immediately around you and some shadowy distant government.
So of course the elite began the continuing campaign of propaganda and deflection. Justifying their exploitative practices and elevated status by selling a fantasy of an easy ability to become like them simply through hard work. Which, if it was nothing more than that, hard work, would mean the poor would be a fractional minority of the populace.

Sadly, we seem to be learning nothing from our own history here. All the gains of the fierce struggle of the labour movement have been eroded and are vanishing. The truth of the reasons anti-trust legislation was needed is overlooked in the age of mergers and buyouts. As children we’re taught to share but as adults we’re conditioned to accept greed and admire opulence and obscene wealth. The majority of people are middle to working class. Why would we, those people, independently come to the conclusion that fairness and equality of opportunity and the meeting of basic needs is something bad? America is the only developed country where food, education, shelter, and health care are seen as optional privileges. Who really benefits from this attitude? Think about it.
France, well, France is a bit better. Socialism and liberalism aren’t curse words or evil there. They aren’t as obsessed with money. They actually believe people should enjoy life. We mock them for not being as productive, for not working as hard. But hard work isn’t exactly making Americans happy. Nor is it, in the overwhelming majority of cases, making us ‘rich’. Not to say I’m giving you a pass France. Your treatment of North African immigrants and the descendants from your former colonies? Yeah, that’s not plus points there.

On Economic Disparities: Cause, Effect, and Race

For as long as I can remember, I’ve heard white people say the reason blacks are economically worse off than whites is because “they are lazy” or some other negative stereotype.  If pressed to explain why they believe this, they will point to impoverished, urban areas, high unemployment rates and higher use of social safety net programs by blacks than whites.  If these are the criteria for being “lazy,” there are a lot of lazy white people where I grew up.  White people who would never, ever label themselves as “lazy” and would be incensed if anyone were to call them such, but who are unemployed, live in rundown, falling apart homes, and survive only because they receive subsidies from the government every month.  Even though they meet their own criteria for “lazy,” they don’t think of themselves as lazy because to them, there are good reasons, causes for their situations: “I got laid off and there are no other jobs around.”  “I hurt my back in 2008 and haven’t been able to work full-time since.”  “There just aren’t any good paying jobs around anymore.”  The reasons they give for their economic situations never include, “I’m lazy” and almost always include some external, out of their control cause for their situation.  But, when it comes to minorities, especially blacks, their economic situation is viewed by whites to be completely in their control, “all they have to do is get a damn job.”  For blacks, their economic situations are always self-chosen.  Except they aren’t. 

The average white household’s wealth is $142,000.  The average Hispanic household’s wealth is $13,700 and the average black household’s is $11,000.  This income disparity between whites and minorities is not the result of whites being better, harder workers or minorities being “lazy.”  This wealth gap is the result of decades of public and private policies intentionally geared to make sure minorities are not treated equally, especially economically.  There are specific causes that have led to the effect of the average white household having nineteen times as much wealth as the average black household. 

It is fairly easy to connect the dots to show how and why this wealth gap was created and maintained.  For most Americans, their wealth is in the value of their home.  Most people don’t have $142,000 in the bank or in stocks.  The average savings account balance is barely over $4,000.  Less than half of Americans have money in stocks, including 401Ks.  More people own cats than own stocks.  For the average American, their wealth is directly related and tied to the value of their home.  This is why when the mortgage crisis hit in 2008 it impact was so devastating. It wasn’t like when the dot-com bubble burst in 2000 where those affected were a small percentage of people who owned tech stocks. Because the financial crisis of 2008 was tied to mortgages, it impacted millions of homeowners who saw their largest asset drop significantly in value overnight.  Because wealth is so connected to home ownership for most people, it is easy to see how and why the gap between whites and blacks is so wide.

In order to understand why the average white household has more wealth in their homes than black households, you can go back to the various Homestead Acts of the late 1800s, but a look at more recent policies will do.  All you need to do is go back to the late 40s and early 50s to see how government and private sector policies greatly helped one group of people build wealth while intentionally excluding the other.  Directly after World War II, there was a massive home construction boom.  In part, this was the result of the GI Bill.  Benefits of the GI Bill included low-cost mortgages, low-interest loans to start a business, cash payments of tuition and living expenses to attend university, high school or vocational education, as well as one year of unemployment compensation. By 1956, 2.2 million Americans had used the GI Bill to attend college and another 5.6 million used it for some kind of training program.   Besides almost no global competition, the GI Bill is regarded as the main factor in creating what would become the largest middle class in the world by the mid-1950s.  A middle class that was exclusively white.  

While the GI Bill did not specifically discriminate against blacks, it was administered and overseen by whites and rarely given to black veterans.  By 1946 of the 100,000 black veterans who applied for the GI Bill to attend college, only 20,000 were granted.  Of the 67,000 low-cost mortgages administered under the GI Bill, only 100 went to blacks.  Because of the all-white American Legion and VFW’s strong ties to the VA, blacks were largely excluded from the benefits available to white veterans.  To make matters worse, banks and mortgage companies refused to lend to blacks making the GI Bill a worthless benefit to them.

This intentional exclusion from the GI Bill and its benefits had and continues to have effects on the wealth gap between whites and blacks.  Because of the government’s and bank’s direct involvement in helping white veterans get better educated, they were able to get better-paying jobs.  Because white veterans were able to purchase affordable housing, they were able to not only save but build wealth over time.  While opportunities for white households were being created and nurtured, opportunities for black households didn’t exist.  This was/is especially true for housing.

Levittown, New York is a good example of how whites were able to build wealth through the GI Bill and racial discrimination.  Levittown is a suburb on Long Island that was built specifically to fill the need for housing after WWII and to take advantage of the mortgage benefits offered to veterans through the GI Bill and FHA.  Levittown was a planned community built between 1947-1951 by William Levitt, considered the father of modern suburbia.  By 1951, Levitt and Sons built over 17,000 homes in Levittown and the surrounding areas.  None of these homes sold to blacks.  In fact, Levittown had racially restrictive deeds that prevented anyone from selling their home to minorities.  If a black family who couldn’t get a loan from a bank or help from the FHA had cash, they weren’t allowed to purchase a home in Levittown.  This didn’t happen just in Levittown but in thousands of subdivisions around the country.  

While white families were building wealth in their homes in subdivisions like Levittown, blacks were forced to rent in very specific, often rundown areas.  While whites were using the GI Bill to college and technical degrees which opened up opportunities for good paying jobs, blacks were excluded from these keeping their economic status stagnant and low.  While whites increased their earnings potential and saw their homes rise in value, increasing the local tax base, this allowed for better schools for their children to be built.  Because blacks were forced to rent often in run-down areas, they were at mercy of local and state policies that didn’t care about improving the educational opportunities for their children.  Even though Brown v Board of Education was decided in 1956, areas like Levittown did not integrate.  As late as 1960, no blacks lived in Levittown and even today, some sixty-eight years after the first home was built there, less than 1% of its residents are black. 

How did this segregation effect economic disparities?  In the late 40s, early 50s, if you were white, you could move into places like Levittown with assistance from the government.  This assistance not only allowed you to own your own home and build wealth as its value appreciated over time, but it kept your costs down.  With government help, white families in Levittown spent $60 a month on their mortgage while homeowners in other areas who were not able to take advantage of FHA or VA help paid $75 a month for a similar home.  That is 20% less each month homeowners in Levittown had to spend on their mortgages.  If you were a black family who was lucky enough to get a mortgage on a home, not only did you pay more the same home, you often paid a lot more because the interest rate was much higher.   For a black family, this meant there was less money to save or invest.

Fast forward a couple of generations and you can see why the average white household has nineteen times more wealth than the average black household.  Those homes in Levittown and in white suburbs across the country increased in value.  A home that cost $7,990 in 1950 is now worth $300,000+ in Levittown.  If your parents or grandparents bought a home in Levittown in the early 50s, their worth increased by roughly three hundred thousand dollars if they still own their home.  Even if they sold their home anytime between 1980 and 2007, they still made a lot of money.  The policies and opportunities that allowed them to invest in a home, something black families of their generation were unable to do greatly increased their wealth.  When you add the policies and opportunities whites received to get better educated, it is easy to see how and why their wealth is nineteen times greater than blacks. 

There were additional advantages to being able to own your own home that helped increase the wealth gap between whites and blacks.  Because whites were able to purchase homes, they were able to leverage the value of their homes if they needed.  If you purchased a home in 1950 for $8000 and by the time your children are getting ready to attend college, the value of your home increased significantly and if you didn’t have the money to pay tuition, you could leverage the increased value of your home by taking out a second mortgage and use that money to invest or pay for your children’s education.  Since they were forced to either rent or own homes in areas that didn’t appreciate in value like homes in white neighborhoods, black families didn’t have an asset to leverage. Because of the direct, intentional assistance by the government to their parents, white children in places like Levittown grew up with a distinct economic advantage black children didn’t have.  With this advantage, they were able to get better educations, better jobs, purchase their own homes and pass this advantage to their children. 

If you want to know why the average white household has $142,000 of wealth and the average black household only $11,000, home ownership is one of the main reasons.  It isn’t because whites are smarter or harder workers.  It isn’t because blacks are “lazy.”  It is because whites were intentionally aided by the government.  It is because whites got a lot of assistance and subsidies along the way to help them build a strong financial base.  It is because blacks were intentionally excluded from almost all of the programs that helped whites build their wealth.  This is the reason why there is a huge wealth gap between whites and blacks.  There are direct causes, causes outside of black families’ control that are the reasons behind their lack of economic success, lower test scores, higher unemployment, etc.  It is not because of personal choices.  It is not because of lack of moral fiber.  It is not because of a poor work ethic.  It is because the system was and in many ways still is designed to limit their opportunities to succeed.  

Even though it is now illegal to discriminate when it comes to housing, education, and employment, it still happens on a large scale. Leading up to the financial crisis, minority borrowers were often charged much higher interest rates.  This means their costs were higher and they had to purchase a less expensive home than a white person with similar credit scores/income.  If a black family’s income allows them to afford a $200,000 home but because of a higher interest rate they have to settle on one that costs $150,000, the long-term impact is significant.  Take two families, one white, one black.  They both make the same income, but because lenders charge the black family a higher interest rate, they can’t afford the same home.  The white family buys a home worth $200,000.  The black family buys one for $150,000.  Even if they live in the very same neighborhood and their homes appreciate in value equally, ten years down the road the white family has increased their wealth a good margin over the black family, even though they both earn the same income.  After 10 years at 5% appreciation a year, the white family’s home will be worth $325,000 and the black family’s will be worth $244,000.  Two identical incomes, two very different outcomes.  Go back to when black people couldn’t even purchase homes in white neighborhoods and the difference is $325,000 to $0.  This is why the wealth disparity between whites and blacks is so large.

Even though it is illegal to discriminate, have racially restrictive deeds, redline…policies still exist that make it more difficult for blacks to purchase homes.  One of the ways this is done is through credit scoring.  Because of starting from an economic disadvantage, many minorities have lower credit scores than whites.  This isn’t because of their lack of responsibility, but rather their lower starting point.  If a white family gets into financial difficulty, say one of the parents loses their job, if they have a home with equity, they can tap into it and use it to pay their bills while another job is found.  If their oldest needs braces, they can use the value of their home to help make the payments and on time.  Black families, on average, do not have this safety net so when difficult financial times occur, they often get behind on payments which negatively affects their credit.  Financial institutions know this and use it to their advantage to charge higher rates for the people who are most vulnerable.  

I witness first hand how credit scores were used to harm those who could least afford it.  When I worked at an insurance agency, we did a lot of marketing to very specific areas in Detroit.  Areas where the people kept up their homes and had been living there for many years.  Areas that didn’t have a lot of damage claims.  These areas were predominately black. When we ran an estimate on someone who lived in these area’s auto or home insurance, the determining factor in how much they paid, if they hadn’t had prior claims, was their credit score.  Someone who had never made an insurance claim in thirty years could pay significantly higher premiums if their credit score wasn’t high enough.  Insurance is something you have to pay for or you don’t get it.  It shouldn’t matter what your credit score is.  If you fail to make a payment, it is canceled.  Why would you charge someone more for a six-month policy if they have a lower credit score?  The answer is because they can.  When insurance companies could no longer charge higher rates based on neighborhoods or zip codes; redlining, they came up with a way to charge higher rates to the very same people; credit scoring. This is how racism survives after an avenue for it is shut down.  It morphs into a new policy that accomplishes pretty much the same as the one that was stopped.  The racist views and policies that prevented black families from places like Levittown to purchase homes and create wealth still exist and still have the same effect, they have just taken on new forms.

Add mass incarceration policies targeting blacks and it is easy to see the financial repercussions all of these have had on the economic outcomes for black families.

When someone tells me the reasons white households have nineteen times more wealth than black households is because whites work harder and blacks are lazy or whites care more about education than blacks or whites made better choices, I am certain they don’t know what they are talking about.  They don’t understand the history of home ownership in America.  They don’t understand the causes of the wealth disparities between whites and blacks, they only focus on the effects.  The causes are fairly obvious.  They aren’t difficult to grasp.  But, in order to understand the causes, white people have to admit they have specifically benefited from government and private policies at the expense of minorities.  They have to admit black people are not poor because they choose to be poor, but because we, as a country, have intentionally made and continue to keep them poor.  White Americans have to admit they are the cause of the economic effects on black families.  White America doesn’t want to do this.  They don’t want to admit they are often the problem when it comes to the struggles and situations minorities face each and every day.  Instead, they come up with bullshit reasons why blacks are inferior because it is easier to blame someone else for your actions than look into the mirror.  Easier, but outright immoral.  To be the cause of someone’s struggles, someone’s difficulties and blame them for their situation is seriously fucked up.

Sunday things

▪️ Reddit has introduced me to two of my new favorite phrases: “weaponized politeness” and “percussive maintenance.”

▪️Husband is done with this cycle of night shift as of Wednesday afternoon. I can make it until then.

▪️ There are 85 days until my CBE packet is due. I can get another extension but it will cost us $150. No thanks. I need to bust my ass on this. Which means I really need to figure out how to get good at using small pockets of time during the day. It takes me so long to get into “work mode.”

▪️ I’ve been feeling really bad about the income disparity between our household and seemingly everyone else’s household in town. It’s been weighing heavily on me. But the other day I realized, I don’t have to match my house to what I see in decor blogs. I used to love COLOR. Not grey/Carrera marble everything. (Although I still love our new grey/fake marble bathroom) So I’m trying to embrace the idea of leaning in to our 1950s ranch home’s natural charm instead of trying to think of ways to force it into being something it’s not. The only thing is trying to factor in resale value to this plan, as I definitely see us trying to sell at some point. So then the issue becomes weighing a more eclectic style against appealing to a future buyer as we slowly make improvements. 🤔

anonymous asked:

Poses dramatically in askbox I heard you had some headcanon about aph America. Have you ever thought about how he fared during the Great Depression?

I’ve actually spent a lot of time thinking about income disparity & how it relates to nations. Their “bosses” are obviously aware of their existence, and I tend to think that the leaders of nations wouldn’t want the personification of their nation living in shabby conditions if they put any priority at all on how their nation is perceived by the rest of the world, so I think that at some point the nations would be gifted with nice homes & would have some sort of allowance from their bosses, though this would obviously change from nation to nation… Generally, I think that the standard of living for a nation would probably be pretty similar to a fairly high-ranking government/military official. However, the nations are supposed to be representatives of their entire populace, not just the privileged elite. So using the French Revolution as an example, I think that Francis would have been spending a lot of time hanging at Versailles where he had access to plenty of food, wine, etc, but when the peasants were starving  Francis could eat as much as he wanted but it would be tasteless and would never be enough, he would still feel like he was starving.

In the 18th & most of the 19th century, I think that Alfred would have been pretty well-off, but very self-conscious about the fact that he wasn’t as wealthy as the western European nations. His house would have been very nice and certainly impressive enough to Americans & his neighboring nations, but any time Antonio, Francis, Arthur, etc visited they would probably make at least one off-hand comment relating to how “quaint” it is. So I think that Alfred definitely developed a complex over this, and was eager to flaunt his wealth once he started coming into money in the late 19th/early 20th century.  He def would have spent a lot of time rubbing elbows with the barons of industry (even more than he was spending with his actual bosses), and I tend to imagine that he went full Jay Gatsby by the 1920s, living in some ostentatious mansion and throwing big parties just to flaunt his wealth while hiring other nations like Lithuania to do his housekeeping in some obnoxious powerplay move.

So when the Great Depression hit, Alfred would still be living pretty comfortably, but definitely cutting waaaay back on expenditures, having to suck it up and admit to other nations that he couldn’t afford to throw his money around like he had been. He probably tried to stave off the hunger for a while through attempting to overeat, but eventually would have just given up on trying. He probably had nightmares about choking on dust during the dust bowl, would wake up shivering as though he had spent all night sleeping on the street even when he was comfortable in his home, etc. It wasn’t the first time he had to deal with financial troubles or starvation by any means, but I think it would have been a big blow to his ego and put him in a pretty bad mental state. And in the long term, it really didn’t help with his anxiety & paranoia regarding the spread of communism, since workers groups gained traction during the depression & that caused a reactionary backlash where the right would spend decades trying to dismantle the New Deal for being “too socialist” when it’s really vanilla as fuck when compared to other nations.

Mainly I think the depression caused Alfred to go into a very severe state of depression himself, up until WWII gave him a distraction & is what ultimately allowed his economy to recover. So even though Alfred dragged his feet when it came to entering the war, he was full of way too much energy when he showed up in Europe and that was pretty exasperating to the rest of the Allies who were injured and war-weary by that point.


(The title is in latin)

-Things are going rough lately

Pain & losses haunt me greatly

Foots in the door but my grip slips daily

Is my escape buried in the centre of a pill?

Is my blood thick enough to stain this steel?

The noose tightens as my dreams slip out of view

Did I ever have a chance was it true?

Or was the system designed for me to lose?

-I’ve seen sinners prosper

But don’t envy or follow

they glamorize their exterior

and believe the materialism they exhibit to be superior

but with further investigation I find beauty without depth to just be decoration

-One thing that strikes my nerve

The media’s contradiction are absurd

Black teens playing the same role

and ending up as blurb

Mentality and income disparity, I blame

when you die it’s always the same

people move on but the cycle will never change

wasted talent at such a young age

Mama didn’t have you just to fill a front page


Capitalism is shit

Which makes the US shitty. I’m going to be posting every week why capitalism is toxic to our society. Every time I read about real people being affected by capitalism, it makes me disgusted. 

For instance, one main problem is income disparity. Especially with big corporate companies making millions of profit a day but retail workers and employees make about $6-7 per hour. And their pay is decreasing over time with their hours slashed to part time work because corporate companies don’t want to spend any more money on them. Indeed, greed is being a commonplace nowadays. 

It’s not only in the business world, there’s also capitalism in healthcare and hospital. Growing up, I learned that doctors and nurses make good money, but in reality, the people who make the most money in the hospital is the business operator who make billions a day. Their motto is to get as much patients in the hospital but not willing to staff enough employees to meet the demands. While trying to cut the salary for employees so they can make as much profit as possible. 

And just last week, I’ve read about how companies tried to make profit out of hurricane victims by increasing food and water prices tenfolds. They also increased the airplane tickets from $200 to $3,000. Some people couldn’t afford it so they were trapped in the state with little to no resources. It’s messed up but thats what capitalism is like. 

Greed. It’s a disgusting attribution, and it makes society greedy. That’s how minimum wage stays the same for years while more young people can’t afford to live on their own. 

Interesting Things Disney Descendants Could Explore (But We’ll Probably Never See)
  • Arendelle and Agrabah as major trading ports, being the center of most commerce and economic activity in Auradon, beating even that of the capital. How did Aladdin, Jasmine, Elsa, and Anna handle the sudden influx of so many foreign traders, many of them with drastically advanced or ancient technologies than them, not to mention the culture? Did they adapt quickly to the new technologies, or did they suffer major culture clash between a new generation that was eager to get into computing, and one that liked their ledgers and ink just fine? What do their cities look like now, physically, especially that Agrabah now knows the magic of air-conditioning and Arendelle indoor heating and insulation?
  • Exactly what happened to Peter Pan and Neverland? Do they remain isolated from the rest of Auradon, or was it opened up to the point where you don’t have to take the second star to the right, and straight on till morning? Do you fly in there, do you board a ship, do you use an impressive underground tunnel? Has it become a tourist spot, like I wrote in the Girlfriend Gauntlet, their business relying mostly on people vacationing there? Or is it just an Island Nation, nothing really special about it, just more tropical? Do people still not age, or was that magic also neutralized? What happened to the native population of Native Americans, how did they integrate into Auradon?
  • What happened to Ancient Greece (Hercules)? Did the Pantheon also give up their powers and no longer have control over the environment, like Apollo no longer hauls the sun across the sky in his chariot? What happened to Demi-Gods if they still exist, the more benign mythological creatures like Satyrs and Nymphs? Do they also suffer from a lack of civil rights like the Sidekick League in the first book? Did Aphrodite start her own personal line of perfumes and fashion, the only thing she hates about is her perennial inexplicable theme song? (”Aphrodite/ Aphrodite/ Aphrodite…!/ The Goddess of Love!”)
  • How is Ancient China (Mulan) handling the wave of Feminism? What happens when a traditionally patriarchal society is suddenly shown the benefits of females being integrated into their upper ranks and military, than kept at home to be married off and take care of the children? Did they also suffer a backlash where the males start lagging behind their female peers as they’re no longer sure of their place in the world, now that the future of their families is no longer automatically with them? What happened to their severe penalties like the aborted execution of Mulan for pretending to be a man? How is the Emperor, and what happened to his assistant? Does he use a tablet (digital) instead of a scroll now? How are the ancestors dealing with the temporal clash?
  • What is life like for the other 99% of Auradon? Where do the sons and daughters of woodcutters, shoemakers, and merchants who weren’t lucky enough to be blessed by fairies or marry into royalty go to school? What’s life like for your average citizen of Auradon? Why do they throw away so much perfectly good stuff like more than enough scones to feed an entire Island prison with a sizable population (the Isle of the Lost)? Is the income disparity pre-Great Uniting still existing, exacerbated even, with the peasants still living in mud huts and the royals in their castles? (Though, admittedly, said mud huts now have electricity, insulation, air-conditioning, heating, running water, indoor plumbing, and wifi.)
on income inequality

we’re already pretty accustomed to income inequality - in the US, women make $0.77 to men’s $1. 

then we shouldn’t be surprised by the disparity of income in professional sports. depending on the sport, women make an infinitesimal fraction of their male counterparts’ salaries. 

the fact of the matter is: salaries are based on salary caps, funding, ticket sales, etc, and most women’s pro leagues are in their infancy. at this point in time, women can’t be paid as much as men.

that doesn’t mean it’s fair. women are just as talented, just as athletic, and just as powerful. they’re doing the same things, but being paid way less. 

a bit part of the problem is media coverage. less coverage means less exposure, which means smaller audiences, smaller fanbases, fewer tickets sold, less money, fewer sponsorships, tiny salaries. it also means that fewer girls are seeing their potential role models and are less inspired to take part in sports compared to boys, which leads to fewer high-caliber female athletes. it’s a vicious cycle. 

so the question stands: what can we do about it right now?

we can throw on our jerseys, attend games, and cheer our heads off. we can advocate, support, and spread the word. we can encourage the media to cover women’s sports. we can volunteer as coaches and instructors and encourage young girls to play. we can raise awareness.

that’s how it worked for men’s sports and that’s how it’ll work for women’s sports, however many decades late we may be. 

disclaimer: the figures and charts above may not be not visually accurate, may not display the most up to date information and are based on basic research. view them as interpretations, not fact.


Rally to #SaveNYC: Save #1MillionHomes – Working class New Yorkers are losing their homes to developers, landlords, and gentrification. The affordable housing crisis and gentrification have brought millions of New Yorkers to a breaking point. Hundreds of people gathered in Foley Square to demand stronger rent laws and housing for all.