Friday, December 9, 2016

Trump over performed the most in counties with the highest drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rate

Trump over performed the most in counties with the highest drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rate


BY JAMES HOHMANN
with Breanne Deppisch


THE BIG IDEA: new study from Penn State University suggests a relationship between the opioid epidemic and support for Donald Trump.


The president-elect performed better than Mitt Romney in many places, but he fared best compared to the Republican nominee four years ago in the counties with the highest drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rates.

Shannon M. Monnat, an assistant professor of rural sociology and demography, created a data set with numbers from 3,106 counties. She found this trend to be true nationally but especially so in two regions: In the industrial Midwest, which is how academics refer to the Rust Belt, Trump ran ahead of Romney by an average of 16.7 percent in the quarter of counties with the highest mortality, compared to 8.1 percent in the lowest quartile. In New England, Trump did worse than Romney by an average of 3.1 percent in the lowest mortality counties but better than the former Massachusetts governor by an average of 10 percent in the highest mortality counties.

Drug syringe and cooked heroin (Studio shot)</p>

Drug syringe and cooked heroin (Studio shot)

-- Overdoses, alcoholism and suicide are known by experts collectively as "the diseases of despair." People often (but not always) turn to pills, syringes, the bottle and other self-destructive behaviors when they lose hope, when they don't have the means to live comfortably or when they don't get the dignity that comes from work.

It is intuitive that the least economically distressed counties also tend to have the lowest mortality rates, and vice versa. In this way, alcoholism, overdoses and suicide are symptoms of the deeper social decay that was caused by deindustrialization. This decay led to the fears and anxieties which Trump so effectively capitalized on.

Correlation is not causation, of course. But while the places with the biggest mortality problems are usually the places that have been hit hardest economically, Monnat points out in a footnote: "Even when using statistical models that include 14 demographic, economic, social, and health care factors, the drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rate remains a significant and positive predictor of Trump overperformance nationally."

Trump speaks last night. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)</p>

Trump speaks last night. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

-- I saw this firsthand on the campaign trail all year, in countless interviews with folks who were down in the dumps and struggling to get ahead (or, quite frankly, just get by). Many supported Barack Obama eight years ago because they were desperate for hope and change. They're still desperate, and now they're hopeful Trump can bring the change they're looking for.

-- This really ought to be one of the biggest storylines that everyone takes away from 2016. One big reason that elites along the Acela Corridor were so caught off guard by Trump's victory is that they're so insulated from the stomach-churning scourge of addiction and cycle of brokenness. Washington has never been richer or further removed from the pain of everyday Americans, as Hillary Clinton called them in the video announcing her candidacy. Trump's solutions may not actually help the "the forgotten man" that he talked so much about on the stump. In fact, his administration may very well push policies that ultimately only add to their pain. The tax cuts he wants will disproportionately benefit the most affluent people in the bluest states, for example. But the system has failed them. Trump promised to blow it up; Clinton represented more of the same.

OxyContin pills at a pharmacy. (Toby Talbot/AP)</p>

OxyContin pills at a pharmacy. (Toby Talbot/AP)

-- Three glaring illustrations from the Penn State report:

Scioto County, Ohio: This is the setting for Sam Quinones's book "Dreamland," a blue-collar place with a once-thriving manufacturing base that became the pill-mill capital of America after the nation's first large "pain clinic" opened. The drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rate more than doubled from 32.9 (per 100,000 people) in 1999 to 74.8 in 2014, Monnat notes, and Trump received 33 percent more of the county's vote than Romney.

Mingo County, West VirginiaThe drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rate spiked from 53.6 in 1999 to 161.1 in 2014, making it the seventh highest in the U.S. Trump's share of the vote was 19 percent higher than Romney's. "Mining and related industries employed nearly 40 percent of the county's workers in the 1980s and accounted for two-thirds of the county's earnings. Since then, mining has dropped to 20 percent of employment and a third of wages, and household income has declined by 10 percent. Mingo County now has an adult poverty rate of 23 percent and a disability rate of 32 percent," per Monnat.

Coos County, New Hampshirewhich has the highest drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rate in New England, swung from Obama to Trump: "The share of jobs in manufacturing there declined from 38 percent to 7 percent, and payroll wages from manufacturing dropped from 49 percent to 9 percent since the mid-1980s," Monnat explains.

Here's what you need to know about the life expectancy drop

-- Let this sink in: A federal government report released yesterday shows that life expectancy is now declining in America. Besides war, plague and famine, there have been few moments in all of human history when that has happened. This is more troubling because it is not happening in other western countries. The National Center for Health Statistics found that death rates rose for eight of the top 10 leading causes of death in 2015. Death rates rose for white men, white women and black men. This happened despite a drop in the death rate from cancer, thanks to fewer people smoking and better chemo. "The overall death rate rose 1.2 percent in 2015, its first uptick since 1999," Lenny Bernstein reports. "The number of unintentional injuries — which include overdoses from drugs, alcohol and other chemicals, as well as motor vehicle crashes and other accidents — climbed to more than 146,000 in 2015 from slightly more than 136,000 in 2014. … Deaths from suicide, the 10th-leading cause of death in the United States, rose to 44,193 from 42,773 in 2014."

-- The statistics are staggering. All told, over the past decade, around 400,000 Americans died from drug overdoses, another 400,000 committed suicide and about 250,000 died from alcohol-induced diseases.

Amanda Wendler, 31, is a recovering heroin addict whi lives at home with her mother and stepfather. She recently began taking a monthly shot of Naltrexone -- a drug that blocks the effect of opioids. She first became addicted to prescription drugs after a snowboarding accident when she was a teenager. (Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post)</p>

Amanda Wendler, 31, is a recovering heroin addict whi lives at home with her mother and stepfather. She recently began taking a monthly shot of Naltrexone -- a drug that blocks the effect of opioids. She first became addicted to prescription drugs after a snowboarding accident when she was a teenager. (Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post)

-- While these numbers are painful to see on paper, they are even more heart wrenching when you consider the individual stories behind them. My Washington Post colleagues have produced some truly extraordinary reportage as part of a year-long series called "Unnatural Causes: Sick and dying in small-town America," which set out to explore why death rates are rising so much for whites in midlife, especially women. Each of these pieces merits a second read in the wake of Trump's victory:

  • Eli Saslow told the story of Anna Marrie Jones in Tecumsah, Oklahoma, who died at 54 from cirrhosis of the liver brought on by heavy drinking.
  • Anne Hull wrote about Jessica Kilpatrick, a recovering addict in Warren County, Alabama, and her struggles to stay clean as she works a fast-food job.
  • Eli returned in July with the tale of Amanda Wendler in Farmington Hills, Michigan, and her unending days of waiting for a key injection that could help curb her heroin cravings.
  • A Kentucky undertaker and funeral-home owner ruminated on lost members of their community to Terrence McCoy.
  • Kimberly Kindy and Dan Keating shared the story of Karen Franklin, a 60-year-old in Bakersfield, California, who takes more than a dozen different prescription drugs.
  • Amy Ellis Nutt examined the epidemic of suicide in La Plata County, Colorado, by studying the cases of seven women who took their lives near what's known as the river of lost souls.
  • Lenny Bernstein and Scott Higham investigated the DEA, which caved to industry pressure and slowed enforcement while the opioid epidemic grew out of control. Five former agency supervisors went on the record to blow the whistle on how top agency officials delayed and blocked enforcement actions.
  • Lenny and Scott, along with David Fallis, also looked at the role played by 13 companies that knew or should have known that hundreds of millions of their pills were ending up on the black market.
DJT in DSM. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)</p>

DJT in DSM. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

-- Widening the aperture: For millions of others who are not trying to self-medicate away their blues, the American Dream continues to fade. Working hard and playing by the rules in this country no longer ensures that you'll get ahead. That social compact is broken. Downward mobility is too often the norm.

Consider this disquieting data point: In another study published yesterday, economists and sociologists from Stanford, Harvard and the University of California identified the income of 30-year-olds starting in 1970, using tax records and census data, and compared it with the earnings of their parents when they were about the same age. In 1970, 92 percent of American 30-year-olds earned more than their parents did at a similar age. In 2014, that number was just 51 percent. "My parents thought that one thing about America is that their kids could do better than they were able to do," Stanford economist Raj Chetty, who emigrated from India at age 9, told the Wall Street Journal. "That was important in my parents' decision to come here. … Wages have stagnated in the middle class. When you're in that situation, it becomes very hard for children to do better than their parents." (Check out the Equality of Opportunity web site for some charts visualizing this.)

Barack Obama greets service members after speaking at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa on Tuesday. (Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)</p>

Barack Obama greets service members after speaking at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa on Tuesday. (Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)

-- It's been tough to be a blue-collar worker for a long time now. Our Fact Checker calls out the White House this morning for repeatedly exaggerating the number of manufacturing jobs that have been created during the past eight years. Press Secretary Josh Earnest claims that, during Obama's presidency, the number of manufacturing jobs increased by more than 800,000. But actually, the number of jobs has fallen by 300,000. Glenn Kessler explains the cherry picking that's going on: "Earnest is counting from when the low point in U.S. manufacturing was reached in February 2010. … That was about 1.1 million fewer than when Obama took office — and nearly 2.3 million fewer than when the Great Recession officially began in December 2007. So 807,000 jobs represents the number of jobs created since the low point in Obama's term, not 'while he was in office.'"

Welcome to the Daily 202, PowerPost's morning newsletter.
With contributions from Elise Viebeck (@eliseviebeck).

Sign up to receive the newsletter.

South Koreans cheer after lawmakers approved the impeachment of President Park in front of the National Assembly in Seoul. (Jeon Heon-Kyun/EPA)</p>

South Koreans cheer after lawmakers approved the impeachment of President Park in front of the National Assembly in Seoul. (Jeon Heon-Kyun/EPA)

WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING:

-- South Korean lawmakers voted to impeach President Park Geun-hye, immediately stripping her of her title and temporarily transferring power to a caretaker prime minister. Anna Fifield and Yoonjung Seo report: "Only 56 lawmakers in the 300-seat assembly voted against impeaching Park. Hundreds of thousands have been demonstrating in central Seoul for weeks, calling on Park to step down, and her approval ratings have fallen to 5 percent. The Constitutional Court now has six months to decide whether to uphold the impeachment motion, creating a power vacuum in South Korea at the same time as the United States goes through its own presidential transition. … The scandal centers on allegations that the famously aloof Park — the country's first female president ... took advice from a secret confidante on a wide variety of topics, including North Korean policy and her wardrobe." Park has apologized several times to the public but has refused questioning by prosecutors – she is immune from prosecution while president – but could face charges once she leaves office.

-- "Senate Democrats are threatening to force a brief government shutdown this weekend in an effort to pressure Republicans to include more generous medical and pension benefits for retired coal miners and 'Buy American' language in year-end legislation moving through Congress." Kelsey Snell and Mike DeBonis report: "Government funding is set to run out at the end of Friday and lawmakers are currently considering a stopgap spending bill that would keep federal agencies funded through April 28. The angry Democrats are not threatening to block the spending measure, but to delay its passage past the Friday deadline in hopes they can entice Republicans into further negotiations."

-- Potentially bad news for holiday travel: "Contract workers at Dulles International and Reagan National airports will walk off their jobs sometime this month, joining a growing number of workers across the country staging strikes as part of a national push for better working conditions and a $15-an-hour 'living wage,'" Lori Aratani reports. "Workers voted Thursday to authorize the walkout. No date has been set for the action and it is not clear how long it would last, but a spokesman for the group said it will likely happen before the end of the month. The workers include wheelchair attendants and baggage handlers who work for Huntleigh USA. It is not clear what effect the workers' actions will have on operations at Dulles and National."

GET SMART FAST:​​

  1. The Department of Transportation is considering letting airplane passengers make in-flight phone calls, on the condition that all customers are made aware of the policy before buying their tickets. But many are wary of the idea – a similar measure was floated in 2014, and public response was overwhelmingly negative. (AP)
  2. Russia said that Syria has suspended its offensive in eastern Aleppo to allow civilians to leave the city, after the country reached an agreement with the U.S. to negotiate the safe departure of rebel fighters. State Department officials gave a different account, however, saying both of those assertions are premature but that Secretary of State John Kerry "is in contact" with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. (Karen DeYoung)
  3. The Russian ambassador to Sweden said Moscow has "no plans" to invade the country, seeking to assuage residents spooked by unknown submarine sightings and Russian jets that have entered their airspace during training exercises. But of course they'd say that! (Adam Taylor)
  4. The Arkansas Supreme Court threw out a judge's ruling that would have allowed married, same-sex couples to get the names of both spouses printed on their child's birth certificate without a court order. Current law is not a violation of equal protection, justices argued, because the state has a vested interest in listing biological parents on the document. (AP)
  5. More than a dozen Georgetown students took over the university president's office yesterday, demanding the school cut its ties with Nike over unfair labor practices in Vietnam. The students, who call themselves the Georgetown Solidarity Committee, said they are staging the sit-in to protest working conditions at a factory where Georgetown University apparel is manufactured. (Joe Heim)
  6. The British news website Daily Mail was embroiled in a "fake news" scandal of its own after it falsely accused a Burmese soldier of "torturing a Muslim minority" with a stun gun. In fact, the video took place in Cambodia, and did not involve a Muslim child at all, but a young Cambodian one, as well as a 25-year-old civilian who was arrested for child torture shortly thereafter. (Adam Taylor)
  7. Scientists have discovered a dinosaur tail entombed in a piece of amber – and it had feathersExperts believe the fragment dates back some 99 million years, and say it sheds major light on the fact that dinosaurs weren't all scaly and "Godzilla-style" in appearance. (CNN)
  8. An Arizona judge sentenced a woman to spend Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, and the following day in jail, saying he wanted the 33-year-old – who was reportedly pregnant and under the influence during an aggressive confrontation with officers – to spend her holiday reflecting on the gravity of her actions. (AP)
Russia President Vladimir Putin walks past an honor&nbsp;guard as he attends a session of the Council for Civil Society and Human Rights at the Kremlin in Moscow yesterday. (Sergei Karpukhim/EPA/Pool)</p>

Russia President Vladimir Putin walks past an honor guard as he attends a session of the Council for Civil Society and Human Rights at the Kremlin in Moscow yesterday. (Sergei Karpukhim/EPA/Pool)

THERE'S A BEAR IN THE WOODS:

-- Leading congressional Republicans are preparing to launch a coordinated and wide-ranging probe into Russia's meddling in our election and its cyberthreats to the military, digging deep into corrosive interference in the nation's institutions despite the president-elect's coziness with the regime. Karoun Demirjian reports:

  • Senate Armed Services Chair John McCain is readying a probe of possible Russian cyber incursions into U.S. weapons systems.
  • McCain said he has been discussing the issue with Intelligence Chair Richard Burr with whom he will be "working closely."
  • Foreign Relations Chair Bob Corker, on the shortlist for secretary of state, said he intends to hold hearings next year on the Russian hacking.
  • House Intelligence Chair Devin Nunes: "[Russia]'s always been a priority for me and it will remain a priority for me."

  • House Armed Services Committee Mac Thornberry stressed that his committee has been looking at Russian cyber threats for the last two years and said it will not stop: "We're going to have to all pay more attention to cyber and to Russian activities to influence things through cyber."

Did Russia interfere with the 2016 election? This GOP senator thinks so

-- Lindsey Graham plans to take point on the Senate side in holding Moscow accountable for its belligerent bellicosity. "They'll keep doing more here until they pay a price," the South Carolina senator explains. As he explained to CNN's Manu Raju on Wednesday, "I'm going after Russia in every way you can go after Russia. I think they're one of the most destabilizing influences on the world stage. I think they did interfere with our elections and I want Putin personally to pay the price."

-- Such an aggressive approach puts these lawmakers on a collision course with Trumpwho continues against all evidence to deny that Russia had any role in the election (there is rare consensus across the intelligence community otherwise).Trump has said since Nov. 8 that the U.S. should just "get along" with Putin.

Andy Puzder, at a Carls Jr., eats a turkey burger. (Al Seib/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)</p>

Andy Puzder, at a Carls Jr., eats a turkey burger. (Al Seib/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

TRUMP STAFFS UP:

-- Trump nominated Andrew Puzder as labor secretary, picking a fast-food CEO who has opposed additional overtime pay for workers and raising the federal minimum wage.

-- Puzder has advocated replacing human workers with machines as a way for businesses to reduce costs associated with rising wages and health-care expenses.While machines require regular maintenance and can sometimes malfunction, Puzder said, they are also easier to manage than humans and don't pose the same legal risks. "They're always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there's never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case," Puzder told Business Insider in March. "CKE Restaurants launched a pilot program with Microsoft last year that brought electronic kiosks into 30 Hardee's restaurants, allowing customers to place orders without speaking to an employee," Steven Overly reports.

-- Steven Mufson says organized labor faces its "gravest crisis in decades" and reports that Puzder's selection has fueled growing fears among national labor leaders that Trump is planning a broad assault on unions.

-- "Even for an incoming Republican administration, Trump's personnel choices are striking for what they suggest about how fundamentally he wants to alter the aims of many Cabinet departments," John Wagner writes. "Conservatives — some of whom spent the election season suspicious of Trump's true policy aims — have cheered most of his choices, arguing they will help rein in overreaching agencies in Washington. Liberal critics, meanwhile, are sounding alarms, sometimes in hyperbolic terms. On Thursday, Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro said Trump's choice of Puzder … threatened 'one of our nation's most successful federal agencies' that has ensured 'every American who works hard and plays by the rules can enjoy dignified work and economic opportunity.' Citing Puzder's business practices, DeLauro said that if he is confirmed, 'the fox is in the henhouse.'"

-- But, but, but: Breitbart, Trump's Pravda, is attacking Puzder for his support of immigration reform. The headline on their home page is: "Trump Expected to Tap Labor Secretary Who Prefers Foreign Labor to American Workers."

    Trump walks with Andy Puzder in Bedminster, N.J., last month. (Carolyn Kaster/AP)</p>

    Trump walks with Andy Puzder in Bedminster, N.J., last month. (Carolyn Kaster/AP)


    -- Puzder has been accused of abusing his ex-wife, according to divorce records, reports the St. Louis Riverfront Times. The newspaper unearthed its 1989 story in which Lisa Henning (Puzder's ex) alleged in public records that Puzder "hit her and threw her to the kitchen floor and unplugged the phone after she tried to call police for help during an altercauon in 1986 in their Clayton home. Puzder, in a deposition denied using physical violence and said that his wife was yelling and coming at him, so he 'grabbed her by the shoulders and pushed her back' to prevent her from hurting herself. Puzder said that his wife ended upon the floor. 'I don't know if her foot caught or what happened, but she went down on her back and stayed down on the ground.' Puzder acknowledges that police responded to that altercation."  

    • "After that incident, Henning sought a protective order against Puzder in May 1986, alleging that he 'attacked me, choked me, threw me to the floor, hit me in the head pushed his knee into my chest twisted my ar​m and dr​agged me​ ​on the floor, threw me against a wall, tried to stop my call to 911 and kicked me in the back.' 
    • "Puzder acknowledged that a shouting match with Henning in the late 1970s turned into a plate-throwing fight that caused neighbors to call police to their apartment on South Rosebury in Clayton. He said in a deposition that the argument began over Henning's housekeeping habits."
    • "In his deposition. Puzder denied Henning's allegation that he punched her in an incident in a car in the West End in 1985. 'I recall no such incident," he said in his deposition.'"
    • Puzder told The Riverfront Times: "There wa​s​ no physical abuse at any point in time."
    • Henning now says no abuse happened. The New York Daily News reports: "In a statement issued to the Daily News by a GOP spokeswoman, Henning backed up her estranged husband and said she 'regretted' accusing him of abuse. 'I am disgusted that the media would stoop this low,' she said. 'Andy is one of the finest men I have ever known...He and I have long ago worked out any differences that occurred over thirty years ago and I cannot recall a single incident involving the police. We now enjoy a wonderful relationship.'"

    -- Puzder has also authorized his company to spend millions on sexually-suggestive TV ads that objectify women. Here are just three examples:

    Carl's Jr. | Bacon 3-Way Burger "Fantasty" Commercial
    Paris Hilton Carl's Jr Commercial In 2005
    Carl's Jr. Tex Mex Bacon Thickburger Borderball Commercial 2015

    -- Puzder has vigorously defended these spots in a way that many find offensive:

    -- Ideologically, Puzder is an outspoken devotee of Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead" who apparently identifies with Howard Roark's character:

    -- A Pew Research survey finds low approval of Trump's transition so far, with just 40 percent expressing positive views about the appointments he's made. In comparison, 71 percent approved of Obama's choices in 2008. Wide majorities continue to say he is reckless (65 percent) while 62 percent said he has poor judgment, and 68 percent describe him as "hard to like." Additionally, a full 54 percent said Trump has done too little to distance himself from white nationalist groups that support him.

    Trump addresses the No Labels Problem Solver Convention in Manchester, New Hampshire, in 2015. Lauren Batchelder listens as Trump answers her question. (Reuters/AP)</p>

    Trump addresses the No Labels Problem Solver Convention in Manchester, New Hampshire, in 2015. Lauren Batchelder listens as Trump answers her question. (Reuters/AP)

    -- More than a year after Trump attacked an 18-year-old college student on Twitter, she continues to receive death threats. Jenna Johnson reports on the stunning impact of Trump's online influence: "Her phone began ringing with callers leaving threatening messages that were often sexual in nature. Her Facebook and email inboxes filled with similar messages. As her addresses circulated on social media and her photo flashed on the news, she fled home to hide. 'I didn't really know what anyone was going to do,' said Lauren Batchelder, now 19. … 'He was only going to tweet about it and that was it, but I didn't really know what his supporters were going to do, and that to me was the scariest part.'"

    -- Related: Chuck Jones, the Indianapolis union leader I wrote about in the lead of yesterday's Big Idea, has penned an op-ed for today's Post"I'm the union leader Donald Trump attacked. I'm tired of being lied to about our jobs."

    -- Trump will continue to hold title as executive producer for "The Celebrity Apprentice" when the show returns in January, foreshadowing an unorthodox presidency in which the commander-in-chief has a hand in the world of reality TV.Rosalind S. Helderman and Elahe Izadi report: "Trump's name will be listed in the credits of the NBC show that he once hosted … Such credits in Hollywood often come with a paycheck, though the representative did not disclose whether Trump will be compensated." "Mr. Trump has a big stake in the show," spokeswoman Hope Hicks said by way of explanation, though she gave no further details.

    Many ethics experts express dismay with the ongoing relationship: Trump will "be tempted, consciously or otherwise, to favor NBC or use the White House to promote this source of revenue," said Norm Eisen, who served as ethics counsel to Obama. "It is one more example of why he must do what every president has done for four decades: divest all his interests into a blind trust or the equivalent."

    -- The online fundraising machine that Trump's campaign built with the RNC kept churning after his election victory, bringing in millions in the three weeks after he won. Matea Gold and Anu Narayanswamy report: "Donors gave at least $3.5 million after Nov. 8 to the national party and two joint fundraising committees with the Trump campaign. From Oct 20 to Nov. 28, Trump's campaign and two joint fundraising committees with the RNC brought in a total of $111 million, edging out the nearly $106 million Clinton's campaign raised with its two joint fundraising committees. The cash flow suggests that the donor file the Trump campaign built with the RNC will continue to pay dividends. That list swelled to 10 million email addresses by the end of the campaign, including those of more than 2.5 million donors."

    -- Trump's opaque web of LLCs makes it impossible to fully gauge any potential conflict-of-interest issues he could face as president. From Wall Street Journal's Jean Eaglesham, Mark Maremont and Lisa Schwartz: "[Trump] owns a helicopter in Scotland. To be more precise, he has a revocable trust that owns 99% of a Delaware limited liability company that owns 99% of another Delaware LLC that owns a Scottish limited company that owns another Scottish company that owns the 26-year-old Sikorsky S-76B helicopter, emblazoned with a red 'TRUMP' on the side of its fuselage. Across Mr. Trump's business, he uses a similar web of privately held LLCs and other entities to house his assets—everything from real estate to a vintage carousel in Manhattan's Central Park. … Roughly half—at least $304 million—of the revenue Mr. Trump reported in a federal financial disclosure form earlier this year came from assets held in 96 different LLCs … None of the 96 LLCs examined by the Journal appear to regularly release audited financial statements. That opacity … makes it impossible to gauge the full extent of potential conflicts between his business interests and presidential role."

    Ivanka Trump waves from the elevator as Al Gore leaves Trump Tower. (Dominick Reuter/AFP/Getty Images)</p>

    Ivanka Trump waves from the elevator as Al Gore leaves Trump Tower. (Dominick Reuter/AFP/Getty Images)

    -- "Is Ivanka Trump a passionate political advocate — or a businesswoman building her brand?" by Juliet Eilperin and Karen Tumulty: "The quest to unearth the Manhattan moderate that may lie deep within [Trump's] psyche runs directly through his daughter, Ivanka. This, at least, is the impression that she has given over the past few weeks, brokering meetings between the president-elect and environmentalists such as former vice president Al Gore and actor Leonardo DiCaprio, and chatting about child care with prominent feminists. But as Ivanka Trump expands her circle of allies and sorts out what kind of influence she might have over the policies of the next administration, the question arises: Are her efforts a reflection of her passions and convictions — or of a desire to extend the brand of a fashion entrepreneur whose market is primarily young women? The two may not be mutually exclusive. [And] the public and private outreach Ivanka Trump has made to influential liberals underscores the extent to which the Trumps' political and financial interests are interwoven."

    Trump's victory rally in Des Moines, in two minutes

    -- A more subdued Trump was on display in Des Moines last night at the latest stop on his "thank you" tour. "Gone were the loud chants of 'Lock her up!' and 'CNN sucks!'" Sean Sullivan reports. "But there were also some familiar -- and controversial -- themes. A vow to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. A promise to bring back American jobs shipped abroad and fight sweeping trade deals. A challenge to the validity of unemployment statistics. Speaking inside a sprawling events center … Trump delivered an address that was part thank you, part victory lap and part to-do list. He said that Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, whom he has tapped to head the EPA, would help 'end the EPA intrusion into your lives.' Trump also brought onstage the man he has tapped to be the next ambassador to China: Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad. 'We're going to have mutual respect. China's going to benefit and Terry's going to benefit,' Trump vowed. At the start, he was briefly interrupted by protesters. But instead of criticizing them aggressively as he often did as a candidate, he responded with a more subtle jab. 'I think they're actually on my side, they just don't know it yet,' he said."

    -- Before Iowa, Trump stopped in Ohio yesterday afternoon for his second visit in just one week, a reminder of how central the Buckeye State is to his 2020 reelection hopes. He met with survivors of the terrorist/knife attack at The Ohio State University.

    Stephen Bannon and Jared Kushner disembark Trump&#39;s plane in Indianapolis.&nbsp;(Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)</p>

    Stephen Bannon and Jared Kushner disembark Trump's plane in Indianapolis. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

    TROUBLE BREWING IN TRUMP TOWER -- MORE STAFFING NEWS:

    -- "As the least experienced, least ideological, and therefore perhaps most malleable president-elect in history prepares to take office, all eyes are on who is influencing his decisions," New York Magazine's Gabriel Sherman reports. "And so far, [Trump's] administration is shaping up to be like his campaign: full of clashing egos and agendas. According to [transition officials and senior Republicans] … the question of whether senior counselor and chief strategist Steve Bannon or chief of staff Reince Priebus — represented by Trump as "equal partners" in the White House — has more power is one that is being widely discussed in Trumpworld. "In this administration, titles will not matter," one transition staffer said. "It's like Game of Thrones." And the outcome is not simply about which personality gets pride of place but which worldview determines the Trump White House's approach to policy: the nationalist-populist agenda of Bannon and other former campaign staffers, or the more traditional Republican governance advocated by Priebus and [Pence]."

    "One Trump adviser speculated that Bannon may be content to let Priebus take control now because Bannon is hoping to play a longer game. Given Trump's history of turning on those closest to him (Corey Lewandowski, Paul Manafort), it may be good strategy to lay low and avoid blame for any problems with the transition. There is sure to be dysfunction — not least because of this very power struggle."

    -- Trump's team is zeroing in on a pick to replace Reince Priebus as RNC chair. The field of contenders has narrowed to two leading candidates, Michigan GOP chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel and Nick Ayers, Politico's Eliana Johnson, Kenneth Vogel, and Alex Isenstadt report. "The situation is fluid, transition sources cautioned: Others in the mix include RNC official Matt Pinnell and veteran Bush operative Mercedes Schlapp, whose names are being floated as potential co-chairs as the two sides work toward a solution. McDaniel is the preferred candidate of [Priebus], who wants to hand over the reins to a fellow committee member. He is at odds with Pence, Trump senior strategist Steve Bannon and GOP megadonor Rebekah Mercer, who are pushing to put the RNC, which will become the political vehicle of the Trump White House, under the control of an institutional outsider like Ayers or Schlapp." A decision is expected within two days.

    Notice who is not on that list? Chris Christie, who reportedly told people he was interested. It's just the latest way that Jared Kushner has figured out to humiliate the New Jersey governor who put his dad in jail.

    -- Spotted near Trump Tower: a sharp-suited, briefcase-touting Mitt Romney, who is still in the running to lead the State Department. The former Massachusetts governor was walking briskly, "like he didn't want to be seen," said a bystander. (New York Post)

    -- Joseph Hagin, a deputy chief of staff for operations under George W. Bush, is a strong contender in the eyes of some of Mr. Trump's advisers to take the same role in the Trump administration, the New York Times reports. "One person briefed on the discussions said that Mr. Hagin could play a role in informally advising the incoming staff, but that others in Mr. Trump's circle of advisers did not want to see him take on that job. Mr. Hagin would come to the job with deep experience in crucial aspects of managing a White House. But he also rose to prominence working for the man whose tenure Mr. Trump spent his campaign criticizing."

    -- A new narrative: "Trump chooses 'Band of Brothers' over 'Team of Rivals,'" by Fox News's Jennifer Griffin: "Trump has now chosen two Marines - both close friends - to lead the Pentagon (Jim Mattis) and Department of Homeland Security (John Kelly). A third Marine, General Joe Dunford, is Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. … Dunford delivered the news that Kelly's son … also a Marine, had been killed in Afghanistan six years ago. He appeared at Kelly's front door wearing his full dress uniform. Kelly said when he saw his old friend at the door, he knew immediately his son was dead. Kelly is the highest ranking military officer to have a child killed in combat."

    -- Trump national security adviser nominee Michael Flynn claimed in an August radio interview that Arabic signs were present along the U.S. border with Mexico to guide "radicalized Muslims" into the US. (CNN)

    -- Donald spent the week attacking Boeing, but the aircraft builder has thrown big bucks behind his transition effort: The company committed $1 million to help underwrite inaugural events when Trump took aim at the manufacturer online this week, USA Today reports. The donation matches the amount Boeing gave to Obama's inauguration in 2013.

    Two conservative Post columnists weigh in on Trump's unpredictability:

    -- "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are on their way to the White House," says former Bush adviser Michael Gerson: "[Trump] seems caught in a cycle: a few days on message, then a conspiratorial or bullying statement or tweet, then a scramble by Republicans to solicit intervention from 'the family,' who give the president-elect the political equivalent of lithium and get him back on message before the next manic stage.  Meanwhile, this theory of the Trump presidency leaves a policy environment more fluid and open than any in my political lifetime. Apart from a few vivid campaign promises on immigration and infrastructure — which have also been renegotiated since the election — Trump has radical freedom of action. He owes no one, holds no definite ideology and will be forgiven even the worst heresies by his supporters (at least for the moment). Republicans are now finding strategic brilliance in this attempt to keep the whole world off balance. But what happens when President Trump can truly throw the whole world off balance?"

    -- "Tweets and theater entertain, but Congress is the main event," Charles Krauthammer writes: "Trump has mesmerized the national media not just with his elaborate Cabinet-selection production, by now Broadway-ready. But with a cluster of equally theatrical personal interventions … Preventing the shutdown of a Carrier factory in Indiana. Announcing, in a contextless 45-second surprise statement, a major Japanese investment in the U.S. Calling for cancellation of the new Air Force One to be built by Boeing. It's a technique borrowed from Third World strongmen who specialize in demonstrating their personal connection to the ordinary citizen. In a genuine democracy, however, the endurance of any political support depends on the larger success of the country. And that doesn't come from Carrier-size fixes. … It comes from policy — policy that fundamentally changes the structures and alters the trajectory of the nation. That requires Congress. … Trump will continue to tweet and the media will continue to take the bait. Highly entertaining, but it is a sideshow. Congress is where the fate of the Trump presidency will be decided."

    Dwight D. Eisenhower (AP)</p>

    --
    John Case
    Harpers Ferry, WV

    The Winners and Losers Radio Show
    Sign UP HERE to get the Weekly Program Notes.

    Re: [CCDS Members] The Dangerous Myth That Hillary Clinton Ignored The Working Class

    the author makes some interesting points. But the conclusion (lose lose lose) indicts the central theme, which is defeatist, and wracked with fear. Fear of what?

    Many of the Clinton campaign defeat apologies (excusing the inexcusable, defending the indefensible, making fascism appear unbeatable), and the scab Left denials (that there were VITAL, life and death IMPORTANT,  differences between Clinton and the Creep leading to spoiler votes for pointless third party candidates, or sit-out-the-elections Narcissism), have, I believe a common thematic unity. To  keep it in simple, understandable terms: I call it: Fear of Bernie Sanders example. Sanders illustrated exactly how a consistent, uncompromised class line in American politics can garner millions of votes and exercise real power. On the one hand he proved that effective, powerful, winning politics can be engaged without a sellout to ANY billionaire interest. On the other, he proved that such politics can actually govern, effectively,  in ANY environment. The first proof negates the prolific sectarianism on the Left that has over decades led to its electoral, and therefore democratic, irrelevance unless hiding under the protection of an acceptable bourgeois liberal. Not having that protection takes considerable courage. Not surprising that those without a genuine BASE fear to follow Bernie down that path. The second proof is the rush of the deniers away from electoral politics and broad democratic coalitions. 

    Now. Candidates that follow Bernie's example will not and cannot be carbon copies of his. They will reflect the particular class democratic consciousness and experiences of their own regions, communities, including unique stamps of their racial, national, ethnic and gender constituencies from which they arise. They may have a different emphasis on a range of issues -- But they will ALL follow the fearlessness, the sincerity, the class solidarity.

    John



    On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 1:17 AM, <jnack@igc.org> wrote:
    Secretary Clinton lost because she was a weak candidate.  She was correctly perceived by many as the candidate preferred by the political establishment, by Wall Street, and by the corporate elite and their mass media.  She lacks charisma and is not an inspiring speaker.  Certainly racism and a pronounced white backlash played a critical role, but a stronger candidate could have overcome that by inspiring more working class support from all racial demographics.  President Obama proved that.  The contention that Clinton made efforts to speak to the working class is less relevant than Clinton's record, her support by elites, and lack of communication skills. Clinton's effort could not make up for the other factors.

    In solidarity,
    Jonathan Nack
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Portside Labor
    Sent: Dec 7, 2016 6:50 PM
    To: PORTSIDELABOR@LISTS.PORTSIDE.ORG
    Subject: The Dangerous Myth That Hillary Clinton Ignored The Working Class

     
     

    Portside Labor

       
     

     

    Derek Thompson
    December 7, 2016
    The Atlantic
     
    The author says Hillary Clinton talked about the working class constantly. She had plans to help coal miners and steelworkers. She had plans to help those getting out of prison get jobs. She promoted clean energy jobs and spoke of the dignity of manufacturing jobs. The author argues that white Trump voters might just have been more interested in his attacks against Muslims and Hispanics.
     
     

    Perhaps the clearest takeaway for many liberals is that Hillary Clinton lost because she ignored the working class.

    In the days after her shocking loss, Democrats complained that Clinton had no jobs agenda. A widely shared essay in The Nation blamed Clinton's "neoliberalism" for abandoning the voters who swung the election. "I come from the white working class," Bernie Sanders said on CBS This Morning, "and I am deeply humiliated that the Democratic Party cannot talk to where I came from."

    But here is the troubling reality for civically minded liberals looking to justify their preferred strategies: Hillary Clinton talked about the working class, middle class jobs, and the dignity of work constantly. And she still lost.

    She detailed plans to help coal miners and steel workers. She had decades of ideas to help parents, particularly working moms, and their children. She had plans to help young men who were getting out of prison and old men who were getting into new careers. She talked about the dignity of manufacturing jobs, the promise of clean-energy jobs, and the Obama administration's record of creating private-sector jobs for a record-breaking number of consecutive months. She said the word "job" more in the Democratic National Convention speech than Trump did in the RNC acceptance speech; she mentioned the word  "jobs" more during the first presidential debate than Trump did. She offered the most comprehensively progressive economic platform of any presidential candidate in history—one specifically tailored to an economy powered by an educated workforce.

    What's more, the evidence that Clinton lost because of the nation's economic disenchantment is extremely mixed. Some economists found that Trump won in counties affected by trade with China. But among the 52 percent of voters who said economics was the most important issue in the election, Clinton beat Trump by double digits. In the vast majority of swing states, voters said they preferred Clinton on the economy. If the 2016 election had come down to economics exclusively, the working class—which, by any reasonable definition, includes the black, Hispanic, and Asian working classes, too—would have elected Hillary Clinton president.

    The more frightening possibility for liberals is that Clinton didn't lose because the white working class failed to hear her message, but precisely because they did hear it.

    Trump's white voters do support the mommy state, but only so long as it's mothering them. Most of them don't seem eager to change Medicare or Social Security, but they're fine with repealing Obamacare and its more diverse pool of 20 million insured people. They're happy for the government to pick winners and losers, so long as beleaguered coal and manufacturing companies are in the winner's circle. Massive deficit-financed spending on infrastructure? Under Obama, that was dangerous government overreach, but under Trump, it's a jobs plan by a guy they know won't let Muslims and Mexicans cut in line to get work renovating highways and airports.

    Many liberals—including those who supported Clinton enthusiastically,  those who supported her only grudgingly, and even those who didn't vote—share a vision for America's future. Call it "pluralist social democracy." In other words, most left-of-center people would like the U.S. to move toward a more European-style system of universal health care, subsidized education and childcare, and greater support for those born in poverty or displaced by globalization; that's social democracy. But unlike in many European countries, they also want to see these values combined with a distinctly American flavor of pluralism: support for immigration reform, criminal justice reform, and a celebration of America's multiethnic culture.

    After the election, some people called for an end to "identity politics" that promotes niche cultural issues over economic policy. But any reasonable working-class platform requires the advancement of policies that may disproportionately help non-whites. For example, hundreds of thousands of black men stay out of the labor force after being released from prison sentences for non-violent crimes. For them and their families, criminal justice reform is essential economic reform, even if poor whites see it as a distraction from that "real" issues that bedevil the working class, like trade policy.

    The long-term future of the U.S. involves rising diversity, rising inequality, and rising redistribution. The combination of these forces makes for an unstable and unpredictable system. Income stagnation and inequality encourage policies to redistribute wealth from a rich few to the anxious multitudes. But when that multitude includes minorities who are seen as benefiting disproportionately from those redistribution policies, the white majority can turn resentful. (This may be one reason why the most successful social democracies, as in Scandinavia, were initially almost all white.) Nobody has really figured out how to be an effective messenger for pluralist social democracy, except, perhaps, for one of the few American adults who is legally barred from running for the U.S. presidency in the future.

    So, the country is wobbling between two extremely different futures: pluralist social democracy on the one hand, and white nativist protectionism on the other. The election's bizarre schism, with Clinton winning the popular vote and Trump winning the electoral college, is a sign of how razor-thin the margin between those dramatically opposed futures is.

    Rising diversity isn't going away. Income inequality isn't going away. Support for redistribution isn't going away. For liberals, pluralist social democracy is the project of the future, and any alternative falls somewhere between xenophobic and amoral. But what if the vast majority of white voters who voted for Trump aren't interested in any version of that future, no matter who the messenger is?

     
     
    VIEW ONLINE
    PRINT
    SUBSCRIBE
    VISIT PORTSIDE.ORG
    TWITTER
    FACEBOOK
     
     

    Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.

           
     

    To unsubscribe, click here.


    _______________________________________________
    CCDS Members mailing list

    CCDS website: http://www.cc-ds.org

    CCDS welcomes and encourages the full participation of our members in
    this list serve. It is intended for discussion of issues of concern to
    our organization and its members, for building our community, for
    respectfully expressing our different points of view, all in keeping
    with our commitment to building a democratic and socialist society. To
    those ends, free and honest discussion of issues and ideas is
    encouraged. However, personal attacks on named individuals, carrying on
    old vendettas, excessive posts and, especially, statements that are
    racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-semitic and/or anti-working class are not
    appropriate.

    Repeated failure to respect those principles of discussion
    may result in exclusion from the list.
    Please respect each other and our organization.

    Any member of the list who objects to a posting on the list or the
    behavior of a particular member should send email describing his or her
    concerns to members-owner@lists.cc-ds.org

    Post: Members@lists.cc-ds.org
    List info and archives: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/members
    To Unsubscribe, send email to:
    Members-unsubscribe@lists.cc-ds.org
    To Unsubscribe, change your email address, your password or your preferences:
       visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/members/jcase4218%40gmail.com

    You are subscribed as: jcase4218@gmail.com




    --
    John Case
    Harpers Ferry, WV

    The Winners and Losers Radio Show
    Sign UP HERE to get the Weekly Program Notes.

    Eastern Panhandle Independent Community (EPIC) Radio:Paris on the Potomac -- Gary Zuckett on Regional Resistance

    John Case has sent you a link to a blog:



    Blog: Eastern Panhandle Independent Community (EPIC) Radio
    Post: Paris on the Potomac -- Gary Zuckett on Regional Resistance
    Link: http://www.enlightenradio.org/2016/12/paris-on-potomac-gary-zuckett-on.html

    --
    Powered by Blogger
    https://www.blogger.com/

    NYTimes.com: The American Dream, Quantified at Last

    From The New York Times:

    The American Dream, Quantified at Last

    Research shows that only half of Americans in their 30s earn more than their parents did at the same age. A few decades ago, nearly all adults did.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/08/opinion/the-american-dream-quantified-at-last.html?mwrsm=Email

    Thursday, December 8, 2016

    Re: [CCDS Members] Piketty, Saez, Gabriel Zucman

    Hello everyone.  Here's my comment on the work of Piketty from two years ago, under the title "Piketty, Marx, and Lenin:" http://www.greanvillepost.com/2014/10/29/piketty-marx-and-lenin/.
     
    With best wishes to all, (Dr.) Steve Jonas
     
    In a message dated 12/8/2016 7:11:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jcase4218@gmail.com writes:

    Economic growth in the United States: A tale of two countries

    Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, Gabriel Zucman



    Overview

    The rise of economic inequality is one of the most hotly debated issues today in the United States and indeed in the world. Yet economists and policymakers alike face important limitations when trying to measure and understand the rise of inequality.

    One major problem is the disconnect between macroeconomics and the study of economic inequality. Macroeconomics relies on national accounts data to study the growth of national income while the study of inequality relies on individual or household income, survey and tax data. Ideally all three sets of data should be consistent, but they are not. The total flow of income reported by households in survey or tax data adds up to barely 60 percent of the national income recorded in the national accounts, with this gap increasing over the past several decades.1

    This disconnect between the different data sets makes it hard to address important economic and policy questions, such as:

    • What fraction of economic growth accrues to those in the bottom 50 percent, the middle 40 percent, and the top 10 percent of the income distribution?
    • What part of the rise in inequality is due to to changes in the share of national income that goes to workers (labor income) and owners (capital income) versus changes in how these labor and capital incomes are distributed among individuals?

    A second major issue is that economists and policymakers do not have a comprehensive view of how government programs designed to ameliorate the worst effects of economic inequality actually affect inequality. Americans share almost one-third of the fruits of economic output (via taxes that help pay for an array of social services) through their federal, state, and local governments. These taxes collectively add up to about 30 percent of national income, and are used to fund transfers and public goods that ultimately benefit all U.S. families. Yet we do not have a clear measure of how the distribution of pre-tax income differs from the distribution of income after taxes are levied and after government spending is taken into account. This makes it hard to assess the extent to which governments make income growth more equal.2

    In a recent paper, the three authors of this issue brief attempt to create inequality statistics for the United States that overcome the limitations of existing data by creating distributional national accounts.3 We combine tax, survey, and national accounts data to build a new series on the distribution of national income. National income is the broadest measure of income published in the national accounts and is conceptually close to gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic growth.4 Our distributional national accounts enable us to provide decompositions of growth by income groups consistent with macroeconomic growth.

    In our paper, we calculate the distribution of both pre-tax and post-tax income. The post-tax series deducts all taxes and then adds back all transfers and public spending so that both pre-tax and post-tax incomes add up to national income. This allows us to provide the first comprehensive view of how government redistribution in the United States affects inequality. Our benchmark series use the adult individual as the unit of observation and split income equally among spouses in married couples. But we also produce series where each spouse is assigned their own labor income, allowing us to study gender inequality and its impact on overall income inequality. In this short summary, we would like to highlight three striking findings.

    Our first finding—a surge in income inequality

    First, our data show that the bottom half of the income distribution in the United States has been completely shut off from economic growth since the 1970s. From 1980 to 2014, average national income per adult grew by 61 percent in the United States, yet the average pre-tax income of the bottom 50 percent of individual income earners stagnated at about $16,000 per adult after adjusting for inflation.5 In contrast, income skyrocketed at the top of the income distribution, rising 121 percent for the top 10 percent, 205 percent for the top 1 percent, and 636 percent for the top 0.001 percent. (See Figures 1 and 2.)

    Figure 1

    Figure 2

    It's a tale of two countries. For the 117 million U.S. adults in the bottom half of the income distribution, growth has been non-existent for a generation while at the top of the ladder it has been extraordinarily strong. And this stagnation of national income accruing at the bottom is not due to population aging. Quite the contrary: For the bottom half of the working-age population (adults below 65), income has actually fallen. In the bottom half of the distribution, only the income of the elderly is rising.6From 1980 to 2014, for example, none of the growth in per-adult national income went to the bottom 50 percent, while 32 percent went to the middle class (defined as adults between the median and the 90th percentile), 68 percent to the top 10 percent, and 36 percent to the top 1 percent. An economy that fails to deliver growth for half of its people for an entire generation is bound to generate discontent with the status quo and a rejection of establishment politics.

    Because the pre-tax incomes of the bottom 50 percent stagnated while average national income per adult grew, the share of national income earned by the bottom 50 percent collapsed from 20 percent in 1980 to 12.5 percent in 2014. Over the same period, the share of incomes going to the top 1 percent surged from 10.7 percent in 1980 to 20.2 percent in 2014.7 As shown in Figure 2, these two income groups basically switched their income shares, with about 8 points of national income transferred from the bottom 50 percent to the top 1 percent. The gains made by the 1 percent would be large enough to fully compensate for the loss of the bottom 50 percent, a group 50 times larger.

    To understand how unequal the United States is today, consider the following fact. In 1980, adults in the top 1 percent earned on average 27 times more than bottom 50 percent of adults. Today they earn 81 times more. This ratio of 1 to 81 is similar to the gap between the average income in the United States and the average income in the world's poorest countries, among them the war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, and Burundi. Another alarming trend evident in this data is that the increase in income concentration at the top in the United States over the past 15 years is due to a boom in capital income. It looks like the working rich who drove the upsurge in income concentration in the 1980s and 1990s are either retiring to live off their capital income or passing their fortunes onto heirs.

    Our second finding—policies to ameliorate income inequality fall woefully short

    Our second main finding is that government redistribution has offset only a small fraction of the increase in pre-tax inequality. As shown in Figure 1, the average post-tax income of the bottom 50 percent of adults increased by only 21 percent between 1980 and 2014, much less than average national income. This meager increase comes with two important limits.

    First, there was almost no growth in real (inflation-adjusted) incomes after taxes and transfers for the bottom 50 percent of working-age adults over this period because even as government transfers increased overall, they went largely to the elderly and the middle class. Second, the small rise of the average post-tax income of the bottom 50 percent of income earners comes entirely from in-kind health transfers and public goods spending. The disposable post-tax income—including only cash transfers—of the bottom 50 percent stagnated at about $16,000. For the bottom 50 percent, post-tax disposable income and pre-tax income are similar—this group pays roughly as much in taxes as it receives in cash transfers.

    Our third finding—comparing income inequality among countries is enlightening

    Third, an advantage of our new series is that it allows us to directly compare income across countries. Our long-term goal is to create distributional national accounts for as many countries as possible; all the results will be made available online on the World Wealth and Income Database. One example of the value of these efforts is to compare the average bottom 50 percent pre-tax incomes in the United States and France.8 In sharp contrast with the United States, in France the bottom 50 percent of real (inflation-adjusted) pre-tax incomes grew by 32 percent from 1980 to 2014, at approximately the same rate as national income per adult. While the bottom 50 percent of  incomes were 11 percent lower in France than in the United States in 1980, they are now 16 percent higher. (See Figure 3.)

    Figure 3

    The bottom 50 percent of income earners makes more in France than in the United States even though average income per adult is still 35 percent lower in France than in the United States (partly due to differences in standard working hours in the two countries).9 Since the welfare state is more generous in France, the gap between the bottom 50 percent of income earners in France and the United States would be even greater after taxes and transfers.

    The diverging trends in the distribution of pre-tax income across France and the United States—two advanced economies subject to the same forces of technological progress and globalization—show that working-class incomes are not bound to stagnate in Western countries. In the United States, the stagnation of bottom 50 percent of incomes and the upsurge in the top 1 percent coincided with drastically reduced progressive taxation, widespread deregulation of industries and services, particularly the financial services industry, weakened unions, and an eroding minimum wage.

    Conclusion

    Given the generation-long stagnation of the pre-tax incomes among the bottom 50 percent of wage earners in the United States, we feel that the policy discussion at the federal, state, and local levels should focus on how to equalize the distribution of human capital, financial capital, and bargaining power rather than merely the redistribution of national income after taxes. Policies that could raise the pre-tax incomes of the bottom 50 percent of income earners could include:

    • Improved education and access to skills, which may require major changes in the system of education finance and admission
    • Reforms of labor market institutions to boost workers' bargaining power and including a higher minimum wage
    • Corporate governance reforms and worker co-determination of the distribution of profits
    • Steeply progressive taxation that affects the determination of pay and salaries and the pre-tax distribution of income, particularly at the top end

    The different levels of government in the United States today obviously have the power to make income distribution more unequal, but they also have the power to make economic growth in America more equitable again. Potentially pro-growth economic policies should always be discussed alongside their consequences for the distribution of national income and concrete ways to mitigate their unequalizing effects. We hope that the distributional national accounts we present today can prove to be useful for such policy evaluations.

    We will post online our complete distributional national accounts micro-data. These micro-files make it possible for researchers, journalists, policymakers, and any interested user to compute a wide array of distributional statistics—income, wealth, taxes paid and transfers received by age, gender, marital status, and other measures—and to simulate the distributional consequences of tax and transfer reforms in the United States.

    Thomas Piketty is a professor of economics at the Paris School of Economics. Emmanuel Saezis a professor of economics and director of the Center for Equitable Growth at the University of California-Berkeley. Gabriel Zucman is an assistant professor of economics at the University of California-Berkeley. They are co-directors of the World Wealth and Income Database, together with economists Facundo Alvaredo at the Paris School of Economics and Anthony Atkinson at Oxford University.

    1. Many important forms of income, such as fringe benefits of employees, retained profits and taxes paid by corporations, or imputed rent of homeowners, are part of U.S. national income but are not included in individual survey or tax data. http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-1
    2. Official U.S. Census Bureau household income statistics are based on money income. Money income does not subtract individual taxes but adds back cash (but not in-kind) transfers. Hence, it is a mixed concept in between pre-tax and post-tax. It is conceptually sounder to focus separately on pre-tax and post-tax income. The U.S. Congressional Budget Office evaluates the federal tax burden by income groups but does not factor in state and local taxes (U.S. Congressional Budget Office, "The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2013", 2016, Washington DC: U.S. Congressional Budget Office) and does not try to assign the benefits of federal government spending back to individuals. http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-2
    3. Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman, "Distributional National Accounts: Methods and Estimates for the United States", Cambridge MA: NBER Working Paper, December 2016, http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/PSZ2016.pdfhttp://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-3
    4. National income is gross domestic product minus capital depreciation plus net income received from abroad. Capital depreciation is not income and income from abroad is important, particularly among top earners. http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-4
    5. All our data are expressed in constant 2014 dollars, using the national income deflator. http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-5
    6. Our pre-tax income series are based on income after the operation of private and public pensions so that pension and social security income is included in pre-tax income (and the corresponding contributions are deducted). We also estimate series for factor income (before the operation of pension systems). Factor income series also display stagnation of bottom 50 percent of incomes since 1980. We prefer using pre-tax income series which give the elderly reasonable incomes so that aging has little impact on our inequality series. http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-6
    7. This 9.5 points increase in the top 1 percent of the pre-tax U.S. national income share is similar in magnitude to the increase estimated in the Piketty-Saez series, where the top 1 percent income share (when including realized capital gains) increases by 11.4 points from 10 percent in 1980 to 21.4 percent in 2014. The Piketty-Saez series are based on a fiscal income concept, which captures only about two-thirds of total national income, and they use the family tax unit instead of the adult unit (see Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez "Income Inequality in the United States, 1913-1998," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 2003, 1-39.) http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-7
    8. The results for France are presented in Bertrand Garbinti, Jonathan Goupille, and Thomas Piketty, "Inequality Dynamics in France, 1900-2014: Evidence from Distributional National Accounts (DINA)," 2016, Paris: Paris School of Economics working paper. http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-8
    9. In these calculations, we apply the 2014 Purchasing Power Parity exchange rate of 0.819 Euros per US dollar estimated by the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development. http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/#fnref-31833-9
    --
    John Case
    Harpers Ferry, WV

    The Winners and Losers Radio Show
    Sign UP HERE to get the Weekly Program Notes.


    _______________________________________________
    CCDS Members mailing list

    CCDS website: http://www.cc-ds.org

    CCDS welcomes and encourages the full participation of our members in
    this list serve. It is intended for discussion of issues of concern to
    our organization and its members, for building our community, for
    respectfully expressing our different points of view, all in keeping
    with our commitment to building a democratic and socialist society. To
    those ends, free and honest discussion of issues and ideas is
    encouraged. However, personal attacks on named individuals, carrying on
    old vendettas, excessive posts and, especially, statements that are
    racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-semitic and/or anti-working class are not
    appropriate.

    Repeated failure to respect those principles of discussion
    may result in exclusion from the list.
    Please respect each other and our organization.

    Any member of the list who objects to a posting on the list or the
    behavior of a particular member should send email describing his or her
    concerns to members-owner@lists.cc-ds.org

    Post: Members@lists.cc-ds.org
    List info and archives: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/members
    To Unsubscribe, send email to:
    Members-unsubscribe@lists.cc-ds.org
    To Unsubscribe, change your email address, your password or your preferences:
       visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/members/sjonastriski%40aol.com

    You are subscribed as: sjonastriski@aol.com

    Trump’s Likely Labor Pick, Andrew Puzder, Is Critic of Minimum Wage Increases [feedly]



    ----
    Trump's Likely Labor Pick, Andrew Puzder, Is Critic of Minimum Wage Increases
    // NYT > Business

    Mr. Puzder, chief executive of the company behind Hardee's and Carl's Jr., also strongly supports repealing the Affordable Care Act.
    ----

    Shared via my feedly newsfeed