LyrArc Article Gist
UK about a third of children living in poverty in 2025. This means Labour's Starmer government has to advance from a weak base and the benefit cuts are a step backwards. The reason given is worsening finances. It is also true that Reform UK is not giving the issue priority and it is increasing in popularity in the Conservative voter base, giving Labour second thoughts about its programs. After the migrant issue is tackled and Britain like the US faces up to its long term future and its responsibilities, investments in childcare and education become a major priority as it is in Asia.

LyrArc Article Gist
Professor Patterson of Harvard University has some serious observations on what has happened and what could be the way forward in America as it faces the lack of opportunities for a better life for minority communities trapped in cities with a deteriorating quality of life.  Between 1985 and 2000 a higher percentage of black children, about two thirds of black children, grew up in high poverty segregated areas than in the period between 1955 and 1970, according to a Pew Trust study of 2009. This affects everything from social mobility, life chances, potential for downward mobility. Particularly so because by 2016 the gap between black and white incomes has worsened, says professor Patterson. With this segregation has become worse in America at the level of neighborhoods where people actually meet, he says, citing a 2015 paper by Daniel Lichter of Cornell University.  In some ways segregation says Dr. Patterson is worse than in the 1960's. This could be because of downward social and economic mobility. Events such as the mortgage financial crisis of 2009 with bad decisions by the banking industry disproportionately hurt the black and minority communities. The trade imbalance and shift of manufacturing overseas hurt manufacturing jobs for white and black communities. Weakness in education and health services also hurt poorer communities of all races and color. In some ways the work of presidents Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson in the 50's and 60's may have created more hope and a sense that "a rising tide lifts all boats" in economic opportunities that may have been lost in the work of presidents after Clinton with loss of jobs in manufacturing for ordinary black and white Americans alike. The bad decisions by the banking industry and selling of bad mortgages, worsening health care options with overpricing in the medical field, all compounding the effect on  ordinary Americans. In a separate interview in the Harvard Gazette professor Patterson says de-ghettoization, moving to the suburbs is one way to better opportuntiies in the suburbs. For this to happen more moderate income housing is needed in the suburbs. A cultural change in attitudes comes with a shift to neighborhoods where communities can interact and meet. For this to happen strict zoning laws that prevent moderate income housing in suburbs such as in California and many other states needs to change. As professor Orlando Patterson says here in the Harvard Gazette and in the WSJ more Americans with liberal views need to put their money where their voices are. A stronger economy, education for changes in cultural attitudes in classrooms, cultural literacy, more manufacturing in America to create better middle class wages and jobs for Americans of all communities giving industry a role, and more of the affluent putting their money where their voices are for better integrated living in the suburbs not just for a few, are ways to bring better life for Americans.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman reviews Acemoglu and Robinson's new book, "Why Nations Fail." Acemoglu says that nations fail when wealth and opportunities are concentrated in the hands of few people, that a condition for societies to succeed is to create opportunities for more people. For this to happen it is important to create inclusive political and economic institutions. This is an important insight, but for Western society this is an insight as old as Adam Smith when he pointed out the importance of this aspect of western societies after the feudal period in his "Wealth of Nations." For Smith it was the failure to create inclusive societies that led to the gradual unravelling of societies in the river valleys of the Yangste and the Ganges, in China and India, of increasing poverty and the gradual disappearance of what constituted the middle class in India and China. Chapter 8 titled "Of Wages and Labor" in the "Wealth of Nations" makes specific reference to this.

LyrArc Article Gist
A report released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows growing income inequality in 34 OECD countries. OECD Secretary General, Angel Gurria says: "The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries. This study dispels the assumptions that the benefits of economic growth will automatically trickle down to the disadvantaged and that the greater inequality fosters greater social mobility. Without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth, income inequality will continue to rise." Countries with the largest ratios between incomes at the top and the bottom, are the United States, Turkey and Israel, roughly 14 to 1. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have ratios of 6 to 1, with their ratios up from the 1980's. Gaps in Chile and Mexico are at 25 to 1. The study covers the period from 1980 to 2008. Overall inequality went up by 25% in the U.S. from 1980. In 2008 the top ten percent in the U.S. earned $114,000, 15 times than incomes for the bottom 10%. The top 1% of Americans saw incomes go up from 1980 to 2008, increasing from 8 percent to 18 percent. The richest 1% having $1.3 million in after tax income, and the lowest 20% making $17,700. The trends have accentuated an increase at the highest end- the top 1% and top 10% of the people- and a sharp decrease for the bottom 20%, which can be grasped from the $17,700 and the $1.3 million, both at extreme ends. The study attributes the rise in inequality to a growing gap in wages for highly skilled workers as technology advances, a surge in foreign direct investment and a looser regulatory regime that reduces employee protections leading to wage premiums for financial jobs and smaller incomes for workers at the bottom. Income groups and professions and sectors that had the greatest influence in government were able during this period to get the greatest protection for incomes, and able also to maximize their incomes. Incomes in the financial sector increased dramatically in the last decade, as a result of deregulation leading to higher risk and speculative activities in the financial sector, leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Financial crises further depress incomes at the lower end. Similiar income inequality trends can be seen for India and China. China has a Ginni coefficient of 0.5 according to researchers at Beijing Normal University, up from 0.3 three decades ago- a Ginni Coefficient above 0.4 is considered destabilizing. Another factor that played a part in these countries is corruption and lobbying by special interests for favored treatment of sectors or groups. Austerity measures taken in Europe and in the U.S. are likely to widen income gaps by depressing the lower end income groups, creating social unrest, especially in the absence of efforts to stimulate growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
A recent book "The Spirit Level" has become popular in Britain. It says that countries with greater disparities in income also do worse in a number of social indicators, from higher murder rates to lower life expectancy. It also affects the consensus in society which is a necessary underpinning for sustained economic development and economic growth. Inequality when it affects the middle class and reduces the size of incomes in the middle, or creates stagnation in incomes, poses large risks for society and affects economic growth. In the US the home foreclosure crisis and the lack of bargaining power of wage earners in the middle class has created this problem. This is exacerbated by the banking crisis and bad loans in the banking system. Studies show that slow growth in college graduating rates in the USA after 1970 compared to the period 1900-1970, has increased inequality, especially with today's knowledge economy. Germany is also affected by this problem as wages for workers have remained stagnant with the labor reforms. Interestingly a combination of economic growth and payments to the poor have increased the size of the middle class and its incomes in Brazil. The austerity policies in Britain will affect incomes and income growth in Britain for the middle class. In China the gap is widening quickly between the urban areas and the rural areas. And the policy of residency permits- the hukou system-which limits internal mobility from rural areas to the cities and towns, makes the inequality all the more glaring. The lack of democratic election makes the situation worse in China compared to Brazil, because free elections in Brazil enabled leaders from the working classes such as Luiz Inacio Da Silva and Ms. Rousseff to emerge as heads of government. These leaders pursued policies that would explicitly bring a more shared prosperity in Brazil compared to the leadership in China. In China policies are determined by entrenched interests in its model of development- the state-owned companies and banks and their managers, local and government officials of the Communist party, and businesses with the networks and connections with the Communist party and local governments. This is why the ginni coefficient which measures inequality has dropped significantly in China, putting it in the rank of developing countries with poor records in equality. Inflation in China, India and Africa also affects the poor and lower middle classes to a greater extent. Current trends suggest that rebuilding the middle class in the developed countries and providing fairer distribution in developing countries will be of serious importance in coming years. Especially with the likelihood of more economic crises which tend to adversely affect the middle and lower classes disproportionately....

LyrArc Article Gist
Galston cites a Federal Reserve Board of Chicago 2014 study showing setbacks for black people in achieving improvement in income status. Even for children born into middle income black families about 55% are expected to fall below middle income status compared to 36% for children of white middle income families. The problem is not just the gap as Galston points out but what it says for the declining income mobility for the white middle class when 36% are likely to see declining status and prospect for the future, and 23% will see no improvement. Overall it shows a lack of income and social mobility for whites and minorities alike compared to the past improvements since the 1960's, not a bright prospect and less hope for the future the way things are, and why so many of the establishment candidates and existing policies are being questioned by voters.