EFTA01197540.pdf

From: Gregory Brown To: undisclosed-recipients:; Bee: [email protected] Subject: Greg Brown's Weekend Reading and Other Things.... 07/20/2014 Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 08:09:36 +0000 Attachments: What_Will_America_Look_Like_in_2024_David_Graham_The_Atlantic_July_1,_2014.doc x; Not_All_Passports_Are_Created_Equal_Suzy_Strutner_Huff_Postiune_30,2014.docx; Forget_Red_State,filue_Statejs_Your_State_Tight_or_Loose_Chris_Mooney_Motherio nes_July_7,_2014.docx; 15_Charts_That_Prove_We're_Far_From_Post- Racial_Braden_Goyette_Huff_Post_July_2,_2014.docx; West_Wing_- _Why_are_we_changing_maps_Upworthy.docx; 60aiisI:ou_Probably_Didn't_Know_About_New_Yor_k_City_Matt_Stopera_BuzzFee TI _2014.docx; 5_of_the_biggest_corporatelines_ever_WSLOctober_19,_2014.docx; Bill Withers bio.docx Inline-Images: image.png; image(1).png; image(2).png; image(3).png; image(4).png; image(5).png; image(6).png; image(7).png; image(8).png; image(9).png; image(10).png; image(11).png; image(12).png DEAR FRIEND Four years ago civil rights litigator and legal scholar, Michelle Alexander wrote a thought provoking book on the current epidemic in America today, mass incarceration which she called The New Jim Crow. The United States (with 5% of the world's population, incarcerates 25% of the world's EFTA01197540 prisoners) and what she perceives as societal repression of African-American men and, to a lesser degree, Latino men. She discusses the social consequences of various policies for people of color, as well as for the US population as a whole. According to Alexander, the majority of young black men in large American cities are "warehoused in prisons," their labor no longer needed in the globalized economy. Alexander maintains that many young black men, once they are labeled as "felons," become trapped in a second-class status that they find difficult to escape. The conventional point of view holds that discrimination has mostly ended with the Civil rights movement reforms of the 196os. However, Alexander claims the U.S. criminal justice system uses the "War on Drugs" as a primary tool for enforcing traditional, as well as new, modes of discrimination and repression. Alexander argues that the "War on Drugs" has had a devastating impact on inner city African American communities, on a scale entirely out of proportion to the actual dimensions of criminal activity taking place within these communities. During the past three decades, the US prison population has exploded from 300,000 to more than two million, with the majority of the increase due to drug convictions. This has led to the US having the world's highest incarceration rate, exceeding the rates of a number of regimes strongly criticized by the US government as highly repressive. The US incarceration rate is eight times that of Germany, a comparatively developed large democracy. Alexander claims that the US is unparalleled in the world in focusistenforcement of federal drug laws on racial and ethnic minorities. In the capital city of Washington, M. three out of four young African American males are expected to serve time in prison. While studies show that quantitatively Americans of different races consume illegal drugs at similar rates, in some states black men have been sent to prison on drug charges at rates twenty to fifty times those of white men. The proportion of African American men with some sort of criminal record approaches 8o% in some major US cities, and they become marginalized, part of what Alexander calls "a growing and permanent undercaste." Alexander maintains that this undercaste is hidden from view, invisible within a maze of rationalizations, with mass incarceration its most serious manifestation. Alexander borrows from the term "racial caste," as it is commonly used in scientific literature, to create "undercast," denoting a "stigmatized racial group locked into inferior position by law and custom." By mass incarceration she refers to the entire web of laws, rules, policies and customs that make up the criminal justice system and which serve as a gateway to permanent marginalization in the undercast. Once released from prison, new members of this undercast face a "hidden underworld of legalized discrimination and permanent social exclusion." Incarceration Trends in America • From 1980 to 2010, the number of people incarcerated in America quadrupled-from roughly 500,000 to 2.3 million people • Today, the US is 5% of the World population and has 25% of world prisoners. • Combining the number of people in prison and jail with those under parole or probation supervision, in ever y 31 adults, or 3.2 percent of the population is under some form of correctional control Racial Disparities in Incarceration • African Americans now constitute nearly i million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population • African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites • Together, African American and Hispanics comprised 58% of all prisoners in 2008, even though African Americans and Hispanics make up approximately one quarter of the US population EFTA01197541 • According to Unlocking America, if African American and Hispanics were incarcerated at the same rates of whites, today's prison and jail populations would decline by approximately 50% • One in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001. If current trends continue, one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime • 1 in too African American women are in prison • Nationwide, African-Americans represent 26% of juvenile arrests, 44% of youth who are detained, 46% of the youth who are judicially waived to criminal court, and 58% of the youth admitted to state prisons (Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice). Drug Sentencing Disparities • About 14 million Whites and 2.6 million African Americans report using an illicit drug • 5 times as many Whites are using drugs as African Americans, yet African Americans are sent to prison for drug offenses at to times the rate of Whites • African Americans represent 12% of the total population of drug users, but 38% of those arrested for drug offenses, and 59% of those in state prison for a drug offense. • African Americans serve virtually as much time in prison for a drug offense (58.7 months) as whites do for a violent offense (61.7 months). (Sentencing Project) Contributing Factors • Inner city crime prompted by social and economic isolation • Crime/drug arrest rates: African Americans represent 12% of monthly drug users, but comprise 32% of persons arrested for drug possession • "Get tough on crime" and "war on drugs" policies • Mandatory minimum sentencing, especially disparities in sentencing for crack and powder cocaine possession • In 2002, blacks constituted more than 80% of the people sentenced under the federal crack cocaine laws and served substantially more time in prison for drug offenses than did whites, despite that fact that more than 2/3 of crack cocaine users in the U.S. are white or Hispanic • "Three Strikes"/habitual offender policies • Zero Tolerance policies as a result of perceived problems of school violence; adverse affect on black children. • 35% of black children grades 7-12 have been suspended or expelled at some point in their school careers compared to 20% of Hispanics and 15% of whites Effects of Incarceration • Jail reduces work time of young people over the next decade by 25-30 percent when compared with arrested youths who were not incarcerated • Jails and prisons are recognized as settings where society's infectious diseases are highly concentrated • Prison has not been proven as a rehabilitation for behavior, as two-thirds of prisoners will reoffend EFTA01197542 Exorbitant Cost of Incarceration: Is it Worth It? • About $70 billion dollars are spent on corrections yearly • Prisons and jails consume a growing portion of the nearly $200 billion we spend annually on public safety According to Alexander, crime and punishment are poorly correlated, and the present US criminal justice system has effectively become a system of social control unparalleled in world history, with its targets largely defined by race. The rate of incarceration in the US has soared, while its crime rates have generally remained similar to those of other Western countries, where incarceration rates have remained stable. The current rate of incarceration in the US is six to ten times greater than in other industrialized nations, and Alexander maintains that this disparity is not related to the actual rates of crime or their increase, but can be traced mostly to the artificially invoked "War on Drugs" and its associated discriminatory policies. In 1973 the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals of the Justice Department found overwhelming evidence that juvenile detention centers, jails and prisons increase crime rather than reduce it; they recommended the elimination of existing juvenile detention centers and no further construction of adult facilities. During the next few decades, actual developments went in the opposite direction; the US embarked on an unprecedented expansion of its juvenile detention and prison systems. INCARCERATION RATES BY RACE_& ETHNICITY, 2010 (Number ample incamtratcd pa 100.000 people In that group) 2.000 PRISON WHITE • L LATINO &woe: Calculated by the Pt. Tbky Inidrhy Ave Boman ciJunkt t BLACK tont. & I < coo,i. `ulna, 1 Alexander notes that the civil rights community has been reluctant to get involved in this issue, concentrating primarily on protecting affirmative action gains, which mainly benefit an elite group of high-achieving African Americans. At the other end of the social spectrum are the young black men who are under active control of the criminal justice system (currently in prison, or on parole or probation) — approximately one-third of the young black men in the US. Criminal justice was not listed as a top priority of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights in 2007 and 2008, or of the Congressional Black Caucus in 2009. The NAACP and the ACLU have been involved in legal action, and grassroots campaigns have been organized, however Alexander feels that generally there is a lack of appreciation of the enormity of the crisis. According to her, mass incarceration is "the most damaging manifestation of the backlash against the Civil Rights Movement," and those who feel that EFTA01197543 the election of Barack Obama represents the ultimate "triumph over race," and that race no longer matters, are dangerously misguided. Alexander writes that Americans are ashamed of their racial history, and therefore avoid talking about race, or even class, so the terms used in her book will seem strangely unfamiliar to many. Americans want to believe that everybody is capable of upward mobility, given enough effort on his or her part; this assumption forms a part of the national collective self-image. Alexander points out that a large percentage of African Americans are blocked by the discriminatory practices of an ostensibly colorblind criminal justice system, which end up creating an undercaste where upward mobility is severely constrained. In an article addressing the status of contemporary African Americans, Alexander said, "The clock has been turned back on racial progress in America, though scarcely anyone seems to notice. All eyes arefixed on people like Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey who have defied the odds and achieved great power, wealth andfame". Alexander believes that the existence of the New Jim Crow system is not disproved by the election of Barack Obama and other examples of exceptional achievement among African Americans, but on the contrary the New Jim Crow system depends on such exceptionalism. She contends that the system does not require overt racial hostility or bigotry on the part of other racial groups; indifference serves its purpose. Alexander argues that the system reflects an underlying racial ideology and will not be significantly disturbed by half-measures such as laws mandating shorter sentences; like its predecessors the new system of racial control has been largely immunized from legal challenge. She writes that a human tragedy is unfolding under our watch, and The New Jim Crow is intended to stimulate a much-needed national discussion "about the role of the criminal justice system in creating and perpetuating racial hierarchy in the United States." We should question why our politics allow us to continue spending so lavishly to lock up so much human capital when the results are so racially skewed and offer so little evidence of crime-fighting success. Alexander's answer is that mass incarceration is the new Jim Crow, a deliberate form of social control over racial minorities. It maybe. Certainly, the policies that gave rise to these funding priorities, exercises of discretion, and constitutional interpretations followed a clear "law and order" path that began after the 196os urban riots, but reached full steam under Presidents Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Bill Clinton. For politicians everywhere, presenting oneself as tough on crime has been a cherished virtue among voters for decades now, a sure way to prevent us from slipping into lawlessness. What is odd, however, is the concentration of crime. Here again, segregation plays a hand. Since crime is concentrated in areas of concentrated poverty, the broader public's willingness to fund tough and expensive policing seems irrational. That same public expresses no such desire to fund schools in areas of concentrated poverty at higher levels, for instance. Maybe Alexander asserts too much intention on the part of the myriad forces of social control, a coordination of efforts that seems too perfect for the government we know. Yet something is dearly wrong with a criminal justice system that produces so much injustice. And now that crack has at least subsided as an epidemic and prison costs are crushing state and local budgets, people are rethinking our incarceration policies. But are they doing so for the right reasons? And if not, why not? And this is the rage of the week.... **OS** 60 Things You Probably Didn't Know About New York City EFTA01197544 Although I was born in the city of Mount Vernon which is the first suburb north of the Bronx I have always thought of myself as a New Yorker especially since I have been riding the New York subways by myself from the age of six years old. And although I now live in Los Angeles and have been transplanted here for years, part of my soul is still a New Yorker as it is the greatest city in the world and my many years of living there were some of the greatest in my life. So for a bit of nostalgia I invite you to enjoy some facts about the great city 1. Pinball was banned in the city until 1978. The NYPD even held "Prohibition-style" busts. 2. It is a misdemeanor to fart in NYC churches. 3. It costs$1 million to get a license (medallion) to operate a taxicab. 4. The first pizzeria in the United States was opened in NYC in 1895. 5. In 1857, toilet paper was invented by Joseph C. Gayetty in NYC. 6. The Jewish population in NYC is the largest in the world outside of Israel. 7. Up until World War II, everyone in the entire city who was moving apartments had to move on May 1. 8. The city of New York will pay fora one-way plane ticket for any homeless person if they have a guaranteed place to stay. 9. There's a man who mines sidewalk cracks for gold. He can make over $600 a week. 10. According to New York City's Office of Emergency Management, the last hurricane to pass directly over the city was in 1821. The storm surge was so high that the city was flooded up to Canal Street. 11. Hog Island, a one-mile-long island south of Rockaway Beach, was never seen again after the hurricane of 1893. 12. New York City's leading hurricane historian, Nicholas Coch, a professor of coastal geology at Queens College, believes that this is the only reported incidence ever of the removal of an entire island by a hurricane. 13. Up until 1957, there was a pneumatic mail tube system that was used to connect 23 post offices across 27 miles. At one point, it moved 97,000 letters a day. 14. Albert Einstein's eyeballs are stored in a safe deposit box in the city. 15. There are tiny shrimp called copepods in NYC's drinking water. 16. On Nov. 28, 2012, not a single murder, shooting, stabbing, or other incident of violent crime in NYC was reported for an entire day. The first time in basically ever. 17. There's a wind tunnel near the Flat Iron building that can raise women's skirts. Men used to gather outside of the Flat Iron building to watch. EFTA01197545 i8. About t in every 38 people living in the United States resides in New York City. 19. New York City has more people than 39 of the 5o states in the U.S. 20. There is a birth in New York City every 4.4 minutes. 21. There is a death in New York City every 9.1 minutes. 22. The borough of Brooklyn on its own would be the fourth largest city in the United States. Queens would also rank fourth nationally. 23. New York City has the largest Chinese population of any city outside of Asia. 24. New York has the largest Puerto Rican population of any city in the world. 25. PONY stands for Product of New York. For the entire list of sixty plus several photos and graphics please feel free to download the attached article - 6o Things You Probably Didn't Know About New York City - by Matt Stopera at BuzzFeed. *fir** Top 4 Dieting Myths of All Time T7 P re • OW mn 11- tia N7.1 C l et`e° lir I nariex 2. v Ca Tk A 'et EMI Lew Cal ttann" nu 0 Minerals -nic In OW r z' via-v.1 ca\oc c rgl Crash I N _ ____ Bonywst— : — Over the years, we're exposed to countless tips, tricks and supposed "rules" regarding dieting. Can you separate fact from fiction? We all know a few hard-and-fast rules when it comes to eating right and staying in shape: Eat lots of fruits and veggies. Cut back on red meat, fast food, and sodas. Exercise regularly. But you may be EFTA01197546 surprised to learn that many of the so-called "facts" you swear by aren't true at all! Here, Dr. Oz busts the top 4 dieting myths. Dieting Myth 1: Eating Fat Makes You Fat The name says it all: Fat makes you fat, right? Wrong! Eating a small amount of fat actually helps you feel fuller faster as it triggers satiety (or fullness) signals, causing you to eat less overall. Not only that, eating the right fats aids in the absorption of healthy vitamins. Seek out the polyunsaturated fats you'll find in liquid oils, like canola and safflower oil. Unlike saturated fats, they won't raise bad blood cholesterol levels and may even reduce the risk of a heart attack. To get your healthy fat fix, also look for omega-3 oils from fish, krill, seafood, algae, flaxseeds and/or walnuts, and olive oil, which is a source of both monounsaturated fats and omega-3s. Dieting Myth 2: You Burn Fat Faster by Exercising on an Empty Stomach Starving yourself before you exercise isn't only ineffective, it may be harmful. A report published this year concluded that your body bums roughly the same amount of fat regardless of whether you eat before a workout, but you're likely to lose strength-building muscles by exercising on an empty stomach. Not only that, without food to fuel your workout, exercise intensity and overall calorie burn are reduced. On the other hand, when you exercise with some food in your stomach, you're burning fat instead of muscle, leaving you with more energy and a higher calorie burn. Be sure to eat 3o minutes before exercise, preferably a liquid-like yogurt or a protein shake so your body can make nutrients readily available for your workout. Dieting Myth 3: It's Harder for Women to Lose Weight Men may appear to lose weight faster than women at first, over the long run things balance out. Men tend to have more muscle mass and undergo fewer hormonal changes, which allows for an easier burn- off of those first few pounds. Research shows, however, that, over time, weight loss evens out between the sexes so long as you stick to a healthy diet and exercise routine. Remember, healthy results don't matter over a week or even a month — they really add up and matter over the years. Dieting Myth 4: All Calories Are Created Equally A calorie does not automatically equal a calorie! Some calories are more filling, leaving you feeling full faster so your appetite is gone in a flash. Other calories are less filling, keeping your appetite going and going and going. You want to seek out the first type of calories, so be sure to replace the less-filling saturated fats that you'll find in butter and fatty meats with the more-filling, polyunsaturated fats found in sources like avocados and nuts. You'll get the rich, delicious flavors you crave without packing on unwanted pounds. 414**41-11 History of Corporate Fines EFTA01197547 Homeowners have just received another $3.1 billion in cash under a federal settlement with 13 big banks over alleged misconduct in processing mortgages that may have resulted in wrongful foreclosures, the Federal Reserve said in a report released Monday. The report said 83 percent of the 4.2 million borrowers covered by the January 2013 settlement, or about 3.4 million, had cashed checks as of April 25. The amounts paid range from several hundred dollars to $125,000. The 13 banks include Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs. The $9.3 billion settlement called for $3.6 billion in cash payments and $5.7 billion in aid such as reduced mortgage loans. The settlement ended a review of mortgage files required under a 2011 action by federal regulators. While last October M. Morgan reached a record $13 billion settlement with the Department of Justice and other federal regulators over mortgage-backed securities. The settlement includes some homeowner assistance payments and fines, it would likely be the biggest fine ever levied by the DOJ. Here are some other memorable settlements and fines by DOJ and regulators, including the previous high-water mark for a bank. Current Biggest DOJ Fine: $4.5 billion - BP - November 2012: BP's fines for Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico included what was the biggest fine ever levied by the Department of Justice: $4 billion. That came along with $525 million more to the SEC for civil penalties. The DOJ penalty also had an accompanying guilty plea to 11 felony counts of "seaman's manslaughter" relating to the deaths aboard the drilling rig, admitting that its workers were negligent when they misinterpreted a key well safety test. Meanwhile, the oil giant earlier in 2012 agreed to pay victims an estimated $7.8 billion and have in total booked charges of about $42 billion for cleanup and settlement payments. It is in a court trial over environmental penalties that could total billions more. Pharmaceutical Industry $3 billion -GlaxoSmithKline - July 2012: In what was billed as the largest healthcare settlement with the DOJ ever, the drug maker paid $3 billion and pleaded guilty to criminal charges of illegally marketing drugs and withholding safety data from U.S. regulators. Included in the allegations were that Dr. Drew Pinsky, famed for co-hosting sex-advice show "Loveline" was given payments and then pitched a Glaxo anti-depressant on air. $2.3 billion — Pfizer Inc. - 2009: The pharmaceutical giant pleaded guilty to a federal criminal charge of illegally marketing the painkiller Bextra and paid $2.3 billion for illegally promoting the sale of that and other medicines for unapproved uses. $1.6 billion — Abbott Laboratories — 2012: The drug maker agreed to pay $1.6 billion and to plead guilty to a criminal misdemeanor violation of a federal drug law following allegations that the company improperly promoted antiseizure drug Depakote for unauthorized uses. EFTA01197548 $1.42 billion — Eli Lilly & Co. — 2009 : Eli Lilly agreed to pay $1.42 billion to settle a probe into alleged improper marketing of the antipsychotic drug Zyprexa. $95o million — Merck & Co. — 2011: Merck agreed to pay $950 million and plead guilty to a criminal misdemeanor charge to resolve government allegations that the company illegally promoted its former painkiller Vioxx and deceived the government about the drug's safety. Banking Industry $8.5 billion — Bank of America — June 2011: The bank has paid billions in settlements since the financial crisis, most of them tied to the mortgages that where churned out by Countrywide before it's collapse and rescue by Bank of America. The biggest settlement it reached, for $8.5 billion, was not with the government but with a group of mortgage bond holders including BlackRock, Pimco and the New York Federal Reserve. The settlement is still awaiting a judge's approval. $25 billion — Wells Fargo & Co., M. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp., Ally Financial Inc. — 21012: The Five banks agreed to pay $25 billion in penalties and borrower relief over alleged foreclosure processing abuses. The deal represented the largest government-industry settlement since the tobacco deal. $9.3 billion — Bank of America, Wells Fargo, M. Morgan and 10 others — 2013: Thirteen banks reached an agreement with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and Federal Reserve to pay $9.3 billion in cash and noncash relief, including loan assistance, to homeowners over alleged foreclosure abuses. $1.9 billion — HSBC Holdings - HSBC agreed to pay $1.9 billion to U.S. authorities over deficiencies in its antimoney-laundering controls. U.S. officials hailed the settlement as the largest penalty ever under the Bank Secrecy Act. The agreement between the U.S. and HSBC also represented the third time since 2003 the bank agreed to U.S. orders to cease lax conduct and correct failed policies. $1.5 billion — UBS AG - 2012: UBS agreed to pay $1.5 billion and acknowledged charges that it had manipulated interbank lending rates including the London interbank offered rate, or Libor. It was the biggest fine so far in that scandal. $1.4 billion — 10 Wall Street firms including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and M. Morgan — 2003: The 10 firms agreed to pay penalties of roughly $1.4 billion to settle charges of conflicts of interest between their research and investment banking sectors. EFTA01197549 Other Corporate Settlements: $246 billion — Tobacco industry combined — 1998: The nation's 5o state attorneys general reached a comprehensive settlement with the five largest tobacco makers in the country, Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson, Lorillard and Liggett & Meyers. The pact called for the tobacco companies to pay out $246 billion over the course of 25 years ended 2025. The companies had reached earlier agreements with some states and then reached a wide settlement with the remaining 46, the agreements combined for $246 billion. $900 million - Enon - 1991 - The oil company agreed to settle all federal and state civil claims resulting from the Exxon Valdez oil spill of March 24, 1989 with a payment of $900 million and the possibility for $100 million more. Three decades later, the sides continued to argue about the $100 million more. $1.6 billion — Siemens — 2008: Siemens agreed to pay a total of $1.6 billion in fines and penalties to U.S. and German authorities to resolve allegations of a bribery scheme across several countries to win business. Antitrust: $1.5 billion - Intel - 2009 - The chip maker was walloped with the biggest antitrust fine ever by the European Union. The company, at the time, controlled about 80% of the world's computer chips. Intel is still appealing the fine and has said the EU is mistaken. The largest U.S. antitrust fine ever has been $500 million, levied twice, including last year in a case against LCD television maker AU Optronics Corporation of Taiwan. As you can see from the above list, a number of our biggest banks and international conglomerates have been caught doing all types of skullduggery and although they have paid hundreds of billions in fines and restitution little has changed because that is just the cost of doing business. And until the people running these companies are incarcerated like the common criminals that they are, this criminality is destine to continue and this is my rant of the week.... WEEK's READINGS EFTA01197550  Not All Passports Are Created Equal, As This Map Will Tell You A passport from the United States allows its citizens free access to 172 other countries. But not all travelers have such an overwhelming spread of choices: Residents of Iraq, for example, can access only 31 countries with their passport. Venturing away from Afghanistan? Your options dwindle to 28 countries. You might say we've been taking our travel freedom for granted here in the U.S. In this infographic map from the folks at GOOD, countries are color-coded based on the "power" of their passports. The darker in color, the more freedom that country's residents have to travel. Lighter orange colors mean residents can visit less countries with their passports. How powerful is yours? Being a U.S. citizen traveling on a U.S. passport this was welcomed news. HOW POWERFUL IS YOUR PASSPORT? lir MI Sy a yo• •• Sy •• SS =gm •••• ••• y ••••• Is • S ••••••• OP ••••• . •• . WES II OS IS NO als • • OS ••••••• •G. ••••• WS ii• ...am •• WS as a• • = S in. Sees •• S •• ••• I - %Ea gm= •••••• a OS Se Oft Sy • WY •••• • S Pe •• ••• •••• ••• So• MIME\ MP is • OP •••••• n tan ••••• • S In OS •• •••• IN MOS a Ps S Ilow Sy S •••• Sa• ••••• . Sy OD SAS Mo. OP •••• • •••• Sdn m . 7.0 iiMM 0. 0. iii•••• IS Sow •••• N O ••• • SY yis SSS Sam •• So . IS • ••••• II •••• •••• ••••• l• VS e SY Ss • ••• ••• ••••• • r" es OM S • S OOP i• SS ID mini in Sy• IS . ••••• ID Ps •••••• • SS a SP ME S ..i . ••••• • •••• Mem •• ••• ' top• The Buffington Post I By Suzy Stratner ****** Last week The Atlantic Magazine published an article by David Graham - What Will America Look Like in 2024? - with 25 charts that show what the nation expects over the next to years. And although by many measures, the United States has bounced back from the Great Recession, yet the country doesn't seem to have totally regained its confidence. Against this uncertain background, the EFTA01197551 charts show what Americans anticipate about the next 10 years. And on the Atlantic/Aspen Institute Survey loth anniversary of the Aspen Ideas Festival, this year's survey asks about impressions of the nation in 2024. The poll finds Americans in a pessimistic mood, worried that U.S. is on the wrong track and unsure about the future. Respondents expect a nation more divided by class and race. They also expect America's standing in the world to diminish, as China and Russia gain in stature. But the results aren't uniform: The poll finds that white Americans have a bleaker view of the future than their black and Latino counterparts, who are more likely to see opportunity today and ahead. Nor is the pessimism absolute. Even as many Americans seem to despair for the nation's future, they're optimistic about their own health, wealth, and well-being over the next decade. Below, a brief summary in charts: Americans are evenly split about whether the country will be on the right track in 1.0 years. AMERICA'S PATH Do you think the United Stan Mtge on the right track or heeded In the wrong direction In 10 years? 35% • Right Track • Don't Know • Wrong Direction 28% ALL Americans expect that we will be more divided than we are now and look hack on fractious 2OO4 with rose-colored glasses. UNITY 10 YEARS AGO UNITY IN 10 YEARS DO I/WOW' WM WO at las tweed on Cayman Annan win be Ni...or hes unified es • ypYaillil•- WO OM today? billanthen we an *Sr • More unified • More unified • Less unified • Less unified • Dont know • Dont know Americans expect the country will still be wrestling with many of the same essential issues it does today. EFTA01197552  TOP 5 ISSUES IN 2024 What do you think will be the top three most Important issues facing the United States in ten years? Please select up to three. 35% 34% 29% 24% 22% The federal Healthcare Economic Homeland Defense and budget and growth and security and national national debt Job creation terrorism security Please download the attached article by David Graham — What Will America Look Like in 2024? - containing the entire 25 charts that show what the nation expects over the next 10 years. This Is Not A Mosquito!! Note size; it is on the man's finger! • ‘, -. . 0 • What have your to accomplished •• for YOU??? legs appear to work via repelling and attracting electromagnets This Is Not A Mosquito!! Look closely Incredible Is this a mosquito? No. It's an insect spy drone for urban areas, already in production, funded by the US Government. It can be remotely controlled and is equipped with a camera and a microphone. EFTA01197553  It can land on you, and it may have the potential to take a DNA sample or leave RFID tracking nanotechnology on your skin. It can fly through an open window, or it can attach to your clothing until you take it in your home. Given their propensity to request macro-sized drones for surveillance, one is left with little doubt that police and military may look into these gadgets next. (And to think we were worried about West Nile virus!) Now think that our government has requested the law be changed to allow drone surveillance in the United States... Are you uncomfortable? Forget Red State, Blue State: Is Your State "Tight" or "Loose"? A new theory about the cultures of different regions could go a long way toward explaining why the United States is so polarized. HOW "TIGHT" tin Sir s sje IS YOUR STATE? Researches ranted states on how they enforced social norms and euMshed deviants. Higher numbers signify -beget mote ftStriCOW StittS. ■ Under 40 ■ 40-49.9 5049.9 60-69.9 • 70 Above Soar. Unneenty of inaryiand.Caor Pak Nit Mother-Jones It is obvious to anyone who has traveled around the United States that cultural assumptions, behaviors, and norms vary widely. We all know, for instance, that the South is more politically conservative than the Northeast. And we at least vaguely assume that this is rooted in different outlooks on life. But why do these different outlooks exist, and correspond so closely to different regions? In a paper recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (and discussed more here), psychologists Jesse R. Harrington and Michele J. Gelfand of the University of Maryland propose a sweeping theory to explain this phenomenon. Call it the theory of "tightness-looseness": The researchers show, through analysis of anything from numbers of police per capita to the availability of EFTA01197554 booze, that some US states are far more "tight" — meaning that they "have many strongly enforced rules and little tolerancefor deviance." Others, meanwhile, are more "loose," meaning that they "have few strongly enforced rules and greater tolerance for deviance." The to tightest states? Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Louisiana, Kentucky, South Carolina, and North Carolina. The to loosest, meanwhile, are California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Hawaii, New Hampshire, and Vermont. (Notice a pattern here?) The to tightest states? Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Louisiana, Kentucky, South Carolina, and North Carolina. (Notice a pattern here?) Harrington and Gelfand measure a state's tightness or looseness based on indicators such as the legality of corporal punishment in schools, the general severity of legal sentences, access to alcohol and availability of civil unions, level of religiosity, and the percent of the population that is foreign. But really, that's just the beginning of their analysis. After identifying which states are "tighter" and which are more "loose," the researchers then trace these different outlooks to a range of ecological or historical factors in the states' pasts (and in many cases, lingering into their presents). For as the authors write, tighter societies generally have had to deal with "a greater number of ecological and historical threats, including fewer natural resources, more natural disasters, a greater incidence of territorial threat, higher population density, and greater pathogen prevalence." That applies nicely to the United States. The "tight" states, it turns out, have higher death rates from heat, storms, floods, and lightning. (Not to mention tornadoes.) They also have higher rates of death from influenza and pneumonia, and higher rates of HIV and a number of other diseases. They have higher child and infant mortality. And then there's external threat: The South, in the Civil War, was defending its own terrain and its own way of life. Indeed, the researchers show a very strong correlation between the percentage of slave-owning families that a state had in the year 186o, and its "tightness" measurement today. It makes psychological sense, of course, that regions facing more threats would be much more inward- looking and tougher on deviants, because basically, they had to buckle down. They didn't have the luxury of flowery art, creativity, and substance abuse. Tight states have higher incarceration and execution rates and "lower circulation of pornographic magazines." Still not done, Harrington and Gelfand also show that their index of states "tightness" and "looseness" maps nicely on to prior analyses of the differing personalities of people living in different US states. Citizens of "tight" states tend to be more "conscientious," prizing order and structure in their lives. Citizens of "loose" states tend to be more "open," wanting to try new things and have new experiences. EFTA01197555 Other major distinguishing factors between "tight" and "loose" states: • Tight states have higher incarceration rates and higher execution rates. • Tight states have "lower circulation ofpornographic magazines." • Tight states have "more charges of employment discrimination per capita." • Tight states produce fewer patents per capita, and have far fewer "fine artists" (including "painters, illustrators, writers"). Most striking of all, the authors found "a negative and linear relationship between tightness and happiness" among citizens. Put more simply: People in loose states are happier. In sum: It's a very interesting theory, and one with quite a scope. Or as the authors put it: "tightness- looseness can accountfor the divergence of substance abuse and discrimination rates between states such as Hawaii and Ohio, reliably predicts the psycholo