Category Archives: Ethnicity

Chart of the day: Gender, ethnic pay divides


From the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, average hourly pay figures for American workers:

BLOG Pay

More from the Center:

At the bottom of the distribution, low-wage workers from different demographic backgrounds have relatively similar wages. Low-wage Latinas and African American women earn the least ($8.14 and $8.15 per hour, respectively), while low-wage white men earn the most ($10.00). This clustering of wages at the bottom is likely a result of current federal and state minimum wage policies, which legally mandate employees to be paid at least $7.25 per hour (or more, in many states).

For workers in the middle range of each demographic group, the gender gap is bigger. Median-wage Latinas and African American women are the lowest-wage recipients, earning $12.65 and $14.25 per hour, respectively. In contrast, white men earn the highest median wages, making $21.79. At the top, where the gap is largest, the lowest wages are $28.83 (Latinas) and $32.50 (African American women), while the highest wage is $50.54 (white men), a difference of more than $20.00. The spreading out at the top reflects discrimination across both gender and race.

Chart of the day: Targets of U.S. hate crimes


The latest available breakdown from the Federal Bureau of Investigation:

BLOG Hate crimes
Given the tenor of the current presidential election, we expect the numbers for 2016 may be higher.

And bear in mind that these figures are only for crimes actually reported to police, and given the mistrust of police in minority communities, the actual proportions could be significantly different.

Headline of the day: Dust off grandpa’s Klan robes


Back when esnl was knee-high to a grasshoppers, folks used to joke, “Save your Confederate money! The South will rise again!”

Looks like it’s finally happening, although it was the Republicans, under the first Republican administration, Abe Lincoln, who originally led the war against the Confederate States of America, the rebellious states that fought a war to keep slavery [and, yes, the war really was fought over the issue of whether or not slavery should be allowed in new states joining the union].

Ol’ Abe must be spinning in his grave.

From the Washington Post:

‘Racialists’ are cheered by Trump’s latest strategy

White nationalists, once dismissed as fringe, believe that their worldview is gaining popularity and that the old Republican Party is coming to an end.

Steve Benson: It makes political scents


Some bad news for a garrulous Arizona lawman, via the editorial cartoonist of the Arizona Republic:

BLOG Benson

Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff who wants to bring justice back to the 18th Century, may be headed for the slammer, thanks to the ruling of a federal judge who finally had enough of the 84-year-old bigoted blowhard.

Just who is Arpaio?

From a 2009 New Yorker profile by William Finnegan:

The biggest part of the sheriff’s job is running the jails, and Arpaio saw that there was political gold to be spun there. The voters had declined to finance new jail construction, and so, in 1993, Arpaio, vowing that no troublemakers would be released on his watch because of overcrowding, procured a consignment of Army-surplus tents and had them set up, surrounded by barbed wire, in an industrial area in southwest Phoenix. “I put them up next to the dump, the dog pound, the waste-disposal plant,” he told me. Phoenix is an open-air blast furnace for much of the year. Temperatures inside the tents hit a hundred and thirty-five degrees. Still, the tents were a hit with the public, or at least with the conservative majority that voted. Arpaio put up more tents, until Tent City jail held twenty-five hundred inmates, and he stuck a neon “VACANCY” sign on a tall guard tower. It was visible for miles.

His popularity grew. What could he do next? Arpaio ordered small, heavily publicized deprivations. He banned cigarettes from his jails. Skin magazines. Movies. Coffee. Hot lunches. Salt and pepper—Arpaio estimated that he saved taxpayers thirty thousand dollars a year by removing salt and pepper. Meals were cut to two a day, and Arpaio got the cost down, he says, to thirty cents per meal. “It costs more to feed the dogs than it does the inmates,” he told me. Jail, Arpaio likes to say, is not a spa—it’s punishment. He wants inmates whose keenest wish is never to get locked up again. He limits their television, he told me, to the Weather Channel, C-SPAN, and, just to aggravate their hunger, the Food Network. For a while, he showed them Newt Gingrich speeches. “They hated him,” he said cheerfully. Why the Weather Channel, a British reporter once asked. “So these morons will know how hot it’s going to be while they are working on my chain gangs.”

Arpaio wasn’t kidding about chain gangs. Foreign television reporters couldn’t get enough footage of his inmates shuffling through the desert. New ideas for the humiliation of people in custody—whom the Sheriff calls, with persuasive disgust, “criminals,” although most are actually awaiting trial, not convicted of any crime—kept occurring to him. He put his inmates in black-and-white striped uniforms. The shock value of these retro prisoner outfits was powerful and complex. There was comedy, nostalgia, dehumanization, even a whiff of something annihilationist. He created female chain gangs, “the first in the history of the world,” and, eventually, juvenile chain gangs. The chain gangs’ tasks include burying the indigent at the county cemetery, but mainly they serve as spectacles in Arpaio’s theatre of cruelty. “I put them out there on the main streets,” he told me. “So everybody sees them out there cleaning up trash, and parents say to their kids, ‘Look, that’s where you’re going if you’re not good.’ “ The law-and-order public loved it, and the Sheriff’s fame spread. Rush Limbaugh praised him, and blurbed his book. Phil Donahue berated him.

Racial profiling for immigrant leads to citation

What landed Arpaio is legal hot water was his decision to turn his local local enforcement agent into a ruthless machine for tracking down immigrants.

Which is odd, because immigration violations are federal, not state, crimes.

But hunting down brown people played big with his political base, exploiting the same fears and sensation a certain presidential candidate would later pursue — a candidate Arpaio has endorsed, telling Fox News “He’s our only savior right now.”

The latest from the New York Times:

A federal judge on Friday referred Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his second-in-command for criminal prosecution, finding that they ignored and misrepresented to subordinates court orders designed to keep the sheriff’s office from racially profiling Latinos.

In making the referral to the United States attorney’s office for criminal contempt charges, Judge G. Murray Snow of Federal District Court in Phoenix delivered the sharpest rebuke against Mr. Arpaio, who as the long-serving sheriff in Maricopa County made a name for himself as an unrelenting pursuer of undocumented immigrants.

Sheriff Arpaio and Chief Deputy Jerry Sheridan “have a history of obfuscation and subversion of this court’s orders that is as old as this case,” Judge Snow wrote in his order.

Sheriff Arpaio and Mr. Sheridan had also made numerous false statements under oath, Judge Snow wrote, and “there is also probable cause to believe that many if not all of the statements were made in an attempt to obstruct any inquiry into their further wrongdoing or negligence.”

More from the Arizona Republic:

Snow’s decision, announced in a federal court filing, answers the key question that loomed over more than a year of contempt proceedings: Was the sheriff’s disregard of orders a criminal or civil contempt-of-court violation?

But it creates a whole new set of legal questions for the embattled lawman.

  • Will the U.S. Attorney’s Office accept the recommendation?
  • What will the charge be?
  • If Arpaio is found guilty, will a conviction legally force him to resign?
  • Could Arpaio end up behind bars?
  • Will Snow’s decision affect Arpaio’s odds for a seventh term?

Reached for comment Friday evening, Arpaio said he hadn’t yet read the order but that it was being reviewed by his attorneys.

UPDATE: We found the perfect song for Sheriff Joe, sung in California’s Folsom Prison by the one and only Johnny Cash:

Johnny Cash — I Got Stripes

Trump’s racist idiocy and the Baltimore police


Following up on the previous post comes a blistering takedown of the latest idiocy from Donald Trump, with the Daily Show‘s Trevor Noah contrasting a call by the Donald for black support and his declaration that more police was the solution for black community problems with the brutal reality of embedded in culture and policies of the Baltimore Police Department.

It may be the best thing Noah’s done thus far.

From The Daily Show with Trevor Noah:

The Daily Show – Uncovering Discrimination at the Baltimore Police Department

Program notes:

After Donald Trump calls for heavier policing in African American neighborhoods, Trevor examines racial bias within the Baltimore Police Department.

Interracial couples trigger disgust in brains of many


Following on the heels of yesterday’s posts about racism and racial divides in the U.S. comes new research from the University of Washington revealing that, for many folks, racism is buried deeply in the brain.

The findings aren’t so surprising, but their confirmation is another sad, tragic proof that the “post-racial America” so often decreed by Republicans and others is nothing but a myth.

From the University of Washington:

Interracial marriage has grown in the United States over the past few decades, and polls show that most Americans are accepting of mixed-race relationships.

A 2012 study by the Pew Research Center found that interracial marriages in the U.S. had doubled between 1980 and 2010 to about 15 percent, and just 11 percent of respondents disapproved of interracial marriage.

But new research [Elsevier wants $35.95 to let you read it] from the University of Washington suggests that reported acceptance of interracial marriage masks deeper feelings of discomfort — even disgust — that some feel about mixed-race couples. Published online in July in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology and co-authored by UW postdoctoral researcher Caitlin Hudac, the study found that bias against interracial couples is associated with disgust that in turn leads interracial couples to be dehumanized.

Lead author Allison Skinner, a UW postdoctoral researcher, said she undertook the study after noting a lack of in-depth research on bias toward interracial couples.

“I felt like the polls weren’t telling the whole story,” said Skinner, a researcher in the UW’s Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences.

The research involved three experiments. In the first, 152 college students were asked a series of questions about relationships, including how disgusted they felt about various configurations of interracial relationships and about their own willingness to have an interracial romance. The participants overall showed high levels of acceptance and low levels of disgust about interracial relationships, and pointed to a strong negative correlation between the two.

In the second experiment, the researchers showed 19 undergraduate students wedding and engagement photos of 200 interracial and same-race couples while recording their neural activity. The researchers asked the students to quickly indicate whether each couple should be included in a future study on relationships, a task that was intended to ensure participants were socially evaluating the couples while their neural activity was recorded.

Participants responded faster to images of same-race couples and selected them more often for inclusion in the study. More significantly, Skinner said, participants showed higher levels of activation in the insula — an area of the brain routinely implicated in the perception and experience of disgust — while viewing images of interracial couples.

“That indicates that viewing images of interracial couples evokes disgust at a neural level,” Skinner said.

There’s more, after the jump. . . Continue reading

America’s ethnic wealth divides are growing deeper


BLOG Wealth

The chart is from a sobering new report from the Institute for Policy Studies: The Ever-Growing Gap: Without change, African-American and Latino families won’t match white wealth for centuries.

Key findings from the report:

  • Over the past 30 years, the average wealth of White families has grown by 84% — 1.2 times the rate of growth for the Latino population and threetimes the rate of growth for the Black population. If the past 30 years were to repeat, the next three decades would see the average wealth of White households increase by over $18,000 per year, while Latino and Black households would see their respective wealth increase by about $2,250 and $750 per year.
  • Over the past 30 years, the wealth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans has grown by an average of 736% — 10 times the rate of growth for the Latino population and 27 times the rate of growth for the Black population. Today, the wealthiest 100 members of the Forbes list alone own about as much wealth as the entire African-American population combined, while the wealthiest 186 members of the Forbes 400 own as much wealth as the entire Latino population combined. If average Black households had enjoyed the same growth rate as the Forbes400 over the past 30 years, they would have an extra $475,000 in wealth today. Latino households would have an extra $386,000.
  • By 2043 — the year in which it is projected thatpeople of color will make up a majority of the U.S. population — the wealth divide between White families and Latino and Black families will have doubled, on average, from about $500,000 in  2013 to over $1 million.
  • If average Black family wealth continues to grow at the same pace it has over the past three decades, it would take Black families 228 years to amass the same amount of wealth White families have today. That’s just 17 years shorter than the 245-year span of slavery in this country. For the average Latino family, it would take 84 years to amass the same amount of wealth White families have today — that’s the year 2097.

Next, an interview by The Real News Network‘s Kim Brown of one of the authors of the report, Josh Hoxie , who heads the institute’s Project on Opportunity and Taxation:

A Post-Racial Society With a Racial Wealth Divide?

From the transcript:

HOXIE: Historical policy definitely has played a role in contributing to the racial wealth gap. And one of the interesting things about studying wealth is that it’s really where the result of past policy meets the present that’s impacting people’s lives. So income can tell us a snapshot of where people are at right now, but wealth really gives us that longitudinal view. And as you pointed out, the historical public policies in this country have contributed directly to the growing racial wealth gap we’re witnessing today. And unfortunately, current policies that we have right now also contribute to the racial wealth gap we see today.

Just one example of that is the tax expenditures that we see come out of Congress year-in, year-out, which now total over half a trillion dollars, $600 billion, to be exact. So we’re seeing this money come out that’s designed to be helping people generate wealth. It’s for retirement savings, it’s for home ownership, it’s for things like saving for your child’s college. But the problem is that it’s being skewed into fewer and fewer hands, people at the tippity-top of the economic spectrum who don’t need huge subsidies in order to maintain or generate wealth. People at the bottom are not getting the same amount of help, or anywhere near the amount of help that people at the top are getting.

BROWN: And your report notes that, that there has been tremendous accelerated wealth, growth by the top 1 percent of Americans. You cite the Forbes 400 and you say that they have seen wealth gains of over 700 percent in the last 30 years. I’m curious, because most of the Forbes 400 are white Americans, now, if you were to somehow exclude these very wealthy hundreds of people from this equation, does that change the wealth gap at all? Does that shrink it between when you’re looking at average black, white, and Latino families? Or is the gap still about the same?

HOXIE: Well, it’s certainly true the wealth has concentrated over the past 30 years in an incredible amount into the tippity-top of the economic spectrum. The Forbes 400, as you mentioned, had an average wealth gain of over 700 percent. For context, that’s 10 times faster than the rate of growth for an average Latino family and 27 times the rate of growth for an average black family. So no doubt that money has been concentrating significantly.

And to you direct question, I think there is a role that money concentrating at the top plays in driving the averages up for white families. Because if we look at the median income, or median wealth, excuse me, black wealth over the past 30 years for the median family has actually gone down. So we talk a lot in this report about the average family which, you know, the statistical average is being pulled up by those at the top, and the same is true for white families.

Now, the median white family has gone up, but less than the average, which implies that the top of the spectrum is pulling up that average. But for the black median family and for the Latino median family those rates have been going down. So what we’re seeing is that a typical family that you see on the street is not doing as well as they were 30 years ago when it comes to generating and maintaining wealth.

What more to say?