Are you broke?

[Wombaticus Rex]

That said, I do think black folks and white folks in the US would probably have very different definitions of "broke."

Why? Broke means having no money anywhere I've been, bud, and I'm pretty sure most if not all black people in this country are aware of words like "hungry" and "starving."

[divideandconquer]

That said, I do think black folks and white folks in the US would probably have very different definitions of "broke."

Why? Broke means having no money anywhere I've been, bud, and I'm pretty sure most if not all black people in this country are aware of words like "hungry" and "starving."

I assumed most of the people posting here are not homeless. Am I wrong? So when you say "having no money", do you mean, not a dime to your name? In other words, homeless, starving and/or eating out of trash cans, etc. Or, do you mean having more debt than income, no savings, etc.?

[Elihu]

If I may at this point: witey if you are sick of it all keep a little more of it at home and render to your any brother in need. beware the state. do it quickly simply honorably to the bes of your ability and then enjoy how you feel : ) there is a war on you know watch yer butts

[Freitag]

It gets in the way of the books I want to write

What books do you want to write, Monster?
(You were Monster? Right?)

p.s. I'm broke...in more ways than one.

(Yes I used to post as Monster.) After I finish the nonfiction book I'm working on (job-training material) I've got lots of fiction ideas. I'm going to start with a paranormal-themed cozy mystery series. Then I'll move into regular mystery and thrillers. I might even try erotica because some authors are doing really well there. It's the golden age of the self-published author and I just want to try my hand at it because I've been a reader my whole life and I want to write the kinds of books I enjoy. And I'm tired of my J-O-B.

[Dioneo]

That said, I do think black folks and white folks in the US would probably have very different definitions of "broke."

Why? Broke means having no money anywhere I've been, bud, and I'm pretty sure most if not all black people in this country are aware of words like "hungry" and "starving."

White people, being statistically better off financially than black people, are more likely to whine about being "broke" when lacking enough money for their pet luxuries. Black people, being overrepresented in the economic underclass, are more likely to understand broke as really and truly "having no money." That of course does not mean that that applies to all white people at all times, or vice versa.

Jesus, it's not that complicated.

ON EDIT: Everyone here has an internet connection. No one here is "broke." Give me a fucking break.

[Luther Blissett]

The Average Black Family Would Need 228 Years to Build the Wealth of a White Family Today
Just as past public policies created the racial wealth gap, current policy widens it.
By Joshua Holland

If current economic trends continue, the average black household will need 228 years to accumulate as much wealth as their white counterparts hold today. For the average Latino family, it will take 84 years. Absent significant policy interventions, or a seismic change in the American economy, people of color will never close the gap.

Those are the key findings of a new study of the racial wealth-gap released this week by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and the Corporation For Economic Development (CFED). They looked at trends in household wealth from 1983 to 2013—a 30-year period that captured the rise of Reaganomics, expanded international trade and two major financial crashes fueled by bubbles in the tech sector and housing prices. The authors found that the average wealth of white households increased by 84 percent during those three decades, three times the gains African-American families saw and 1.2 times the rate of growth for Latino families.

To put that in perspective, the wealthiest Americans—members of the Forbes 400 list—saw their net worths increase by 736 percent during that period, on average.

If those trends persist for another 30 years, the average white family’s net worth will grow by $18,000 per year, but black and Hispanic households would only see theirs grow by $750 and $2,250 per year, respectively.

“[Economist] Thomas Picketty said that, left uninterrupted, we would move toward a hereditary aristocracy of wealth,” says Chuck Collins, one of the study’s authors. “What he didn’t say is that in the United States, that would be almost entirely a white aristocracy of wealth.”

The study looked at financial wealth—stocks, bonds, and the like—real estate and business capital, but excluded durable goods like cars and consumer appliances. Like other studies of the racial wealth gap, it excluded Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and other people of color because of limitations in the underlying data.

Recent years have brought a heightened focus on income inequality, but while they’re related, wealth inequality is far more pronounced. According to a study published by Demos last year, the median income for whites in 2011 was around 50 percent higher than it was for blacks and Latinos, but whites’ median household wealth was around 16 times greater.

It took 400 years of slavery, segregation, and institutionalized discrimination in the labor and housing markets to build the wealth gap that we see today. For example, by the time the Fair Housing Act made discrimination in housing illegal in 1968, people of color had missed out on decades of robust growth in the housing markets (and much of the next generation missed out on that wealth building in the 20 years it took to fully implement the law). “The racial wealth divide is how the past shows up in the present,” Chuck Collins tells The Nation. “We have a deep legacy of wealth inequality that undermines the whole idea that we have a meritocracy—that there’s an equal playing field.”

The racial wealth gap continues to grow not only because of income inequality—whites have more dollars to sock away—but because accumulated wealth is a mechanism for transmitting economic success from generation to generation. It’s a vicious cycle—poor communities have limited tax bases to fund their public-school systems, which lead to sharp disparities in educational quality. A family with some assets can help their kids pay for an education or put a down payment on a first home or kick them some seed money to start a small business. All of those things help the next generation climb the economic ladder. Wealth also provides an important cushion against unexpected shocks—things like temporary job losses or unexpected medical bills. If you’ve got some wealth, you can weather the storm without getting over your head in debt.

According to Princeton University sociologist Dalton Conley, the wealth of a child’s family is the single greatest predictor of that child’s future economic prospects. Conley, whose data did include things like cars and household goods, found that even white households hovering around the poverty line have a net worth of $10,000 to $15,000, but the typical black family at that income level will often be under water, with a negative net worth. In many cases, that means turning to usurious predatory lenders to stay afloat—an added expense of being poor.

A truly perverse aspect of this story is that just as past public policies created the racial wealth gap, current policy continues to widen it. The federal government spends a fortune subsidizing wealth-building activities like paying for college, saving for retirement or buying a home, but most of those dollars go to people who already have wealth. Since 1994, government spending on wealth-building has more than tripled—from $200 billion in 1994 to $660 billion last year—according to the IPS/CFED study. The costliest of those subsidies is the home-mortgage tax deduction, and a 2013 study by the National Priorities Project found that 77 percent of those benefits go to households with annual incomes between $75,000 and $500,000. Similarly, an estimated two-thirds of all public subsidies for retirement savings go to those with incomes in the top 20 percent of the distribution. We’re spending a fortune on wealth building, but very little of it ends up bolstering the net worths of poor people and people of color.

The persistence—and growth—of the racial gap provides a powerful rationale for reparations for African Americans, who are the furthest behind whites in accumulating wealth and have endured the most brutal forms of racism. Advocates like William Darity Jr., a professor of African-American studies and economics at Duke University, picture a program of reparations as a sort of Marshall Plan for poor communities of color, with major investments in health care and education and local infrastructure and seed money for small-business start-ups.

But the politics of reparations are fraught, and they wouldn’t help close the wealth gap for other people of color, much less for poor whites. The IPS/CFED report calls for a number of policies that would rationalize federal spending on wealth-building activities so that they target those who need the help. They include one proposal that’s been around for a while: giving every baby born in the United States a savings account with a modest sum, and then using public funds to match what low-income households are able to save. When a young person hits 18, the accounts could then be used to help finance a college education, or to buy a first home or start a new business. Any remaining funds would be dedicated to retirement.

There’s certainly room to debate the best policies for addressing the racial wealth gap, but the report published this week confirms that if we do nothing it will just continue to grow, and any semblance of a level economic playing field in the United States will remain ever elusive.

[Elihu]

which one?

[b]The Average Black Family Would Need 228 Years to Build the Wealth of a White Family Today

do you wanna help?

[Wombaticus Rex]

Jesus, it's not that complicated.

Quite so: if your monthly expenses outstrip your monthly income, you're "broke" no matter what that income is. Yet there are clear differences in household income by race. So I'm inclined to agree that how much "broke" means differs by race.

There are definite, and interesting, differences when it comes to internet connections, too. Although the percentage of whites and blacks who own a smartphone is roughly the same, the usage patterns differ in telling ways that speak to community infrastructure and the emergent effects of redlining:

Some 13% of Hispanics and 12% of blacks are smartphone-dependent, meaning they don’t have a broadband connection at home and have few options for going online other than their cellphone. In comparison, only 4% of white smartphone owners rely heavily on their cellphone for online access.

Food deserts, book deserts, wi-fi deserts, credit deserts, criminal justice deserts...

Anyways. Luther's link was interesting but when your numbers are dumping the Trumpenproletariat in with the 1%, things get obviously warped.

To put that in perspective, the wealthiest Americans—members of the Forbes 400 list—saw their net worths increase by 736 percent during that period, on average.

If those trends persist for another 30 years, the average white family’s net worth will grow by $18,000 per year, but black and Hispanic households would only see theirs grow by $750 and $2,250 per year, respectively.

...

Like other studies of the racial wealth gap, it excluded Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and other people of color because of limitations in the underlying data.

The (almost mathematically complete) disproportionate percentage of whites in that "wealthiest Americans" bracket -- and the absolutely exponential gap between their earnings and the rest of United States -- is the source for the projection of 228 years. Remove the outliers (wouldn't it be nice to do that permanently?) and things would change dramatically. The white working class is demonstrably less fucked than their counterparts of other races, but they're also demonstrably fucked.

Hopefully this is seen as basic math rather than a defense of white supremacy or some shit.

[Elihu]

less superfluous gratuitous rhetorical repetitive article posting further in this thread especially, please thx

[stefano]

In America I understand it is tolerated for conscientious objectors to hold back a proportion of their tax, the proportion that goes to war. I first read it in Chommo, I think, as a first-person thing? Like he was talking about it as though it was something he did himself. Although he is Chommo - he might get away with things that others do not. Googling "war tax resistance" throws up a lot of interesting stuff, at any rate.

Would your politics be different if you weren't broke all the time?

I'm very comfortable these days. What with my wife also having a well-paid job, and our living in South Africa, we're in the 1% here (which is less rich than in the US). Still, we can put money away, which is funny because five years ago we were on the bones of our arses - relatively speaking, again. We still had an internet connection and two meals a day - not least because the bank would still lend to us based on our previous jobs and education. But I do suspect financial success has changed my politics in line with Miles's Law: "Where you stand depends on where you sit." At the very least I, although I still consider myself of the left, try to find ways of 'earning' (not the right word, of course) returns on my savings. Which is really where all the problems in the capitalist system come from, right? Because I bank with people who work for people who work for people who work for people who start wars and shit to ensure profitable avenues of investment for Wall Street capital.

I don't know what the answer is, here. Nor is trying to make money from money a fresh invention of global capitalism - it was probably old when Matthew wrote it down as some sort of moral imperative in the parable of the talents.

But I make a profit of three and a quarter cents an egg by selling them for four and a quarter cents an egg to the people in Malta I buy them from for seven cents an egg. Of course, I don't make the profit. The syndicate makes the profit. And everybody has a share.

[backtoiam]

I'm glad you addressed it Wombat because it was glaringly obvious. Everybody is fucked regardless of color.

[Wombaticus Rex]

I'm glad you addressed it Wombat because it was glaringly obvious. Everybody is fucked regardless of color.

That doesn't absolve us of engaging with the facts, though.

[slimmouse]

Somebody recently made an interesting joke, if you can dare to ignore the supposedly racist connotations, that when the african americans were transported to the USA courtesy of sick people, not that long ago, they look lucky by todays standards, since at least they got free transport, accommodation and were guaranteed work, which in all absolute honesty is far better than the plight of many of todays forced migration.

I reckon Larry Pinkney ( sic? ) has a point when he suggests that we as a civilisation are all essentially working on the plantation now.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Somebody recently made an interesting joke, if you can ignore supposedly racist joke, that when the african americans were transported to the USA courtesy of sick people, not that long ago, they look lucky by todays standards, since at least they got free transport, accommodation and were guaranteed work, which in all absolute honesty is far better than the plight of many of todays forced migration.

"Free" is a curious choice of words when you're talking about slavery, bud.

Are you sure that's a joke?

[slimmouse]

Somebody recently made an interesting joke, if you can ignore supposedly racist joke, that when the african americans were transported to the USA courtesy of sick people, not that long ago, they look lucky by todays standards, since at least they got free transport, accommodation and were guaranteed work, which in all absolute honesty is far better than the plight of many of todays forced migration.

"Free" is a curious choice of words when you're talking about slavery, bud.

Are you sure that's a joke?

Well maybe it isnt a joke, maybe its just a god damn fuckn accurate analogy.

Feel free to discuss further. Assuming youre free to do that.