Either way, the drawdown is a worry in the huge US retirement industry, which managed total assets of $24.8 trillion as of June 30. Massive withdrawals will crimp the lucrative fee income for administrators. And another concern is market performance, with fewer US buyers and sellers available to potentially prop up assets.
Americans who vote are different from those who don’t. Voters are older, richer, and whiter than nonvoters, in part because Americans lack a constitutional right to vote and the various restrictions on voting tend to disproportionately impact the less privileged. In 2014, turnout among those ages 18 to 24 with family incomes below $30,000 was 13 percent. Turnout among those older than 65 and making more than $150,000 was 73 percent.
The key to changing public policy in key areas is increasing the number of people who vote, according to a recent report by Demos, a public policy group that supports economic and social equality.
When compared to White voters, non-White voters were more likely to support policies that increased government spending on the poor, guaranteed jobs and a standard of living and reduced inequality.
“Because of the growth of the prison industry, you’re having these artificial shifts that empower the rural communities but take power away from the urban communities,” Marc Mauer, executive director of the Sentencing Project, told me.
That is wrong.
In 2012, Demos — a public policy organization that battles inequality in the U.S. — submitted testimony to the U.S. Census Bureau’s National Advisory Committee on Racial, Ethnic and Other Populations urging it to find a solution to “prison-based gerrymandering.”
As the 2016 campaign heats up, one story that's being largely ignored is how voter turnout will affect policy. Although many people, particularly young Americans, believe that their vote doesn't matter, new research suggests nothing could be further from the truth.
“There’s an assumption out there that because community and technical colleges and workforce retraining programs are lower cost than elite Ivy League institutions that borrowing isn’t an issue for those students, but it’s precisely the opposite,” said Mark Huelsman, a senior policy analyst at think tank Demos, who studies student debt. “These are students who have fewer financial means to begin with, they’re more likely to borrow, and if they borrow it’s just a fundamentally different prospect.”
Almost everyone agrees that education, innovation and human capital are critical to economic growth and security. And anyone who can’t find a job or is stuck with a low-paying job is told to acquire the skills necessary to succeed in today’s economy.
Unfortunately, the results of believing in that myth have been catastrophic. Earnings have stagnated or declined for everyone except the very top earners, even for those who have educational qualifications, and jobs that didn’t previously require credentials now do.
Those orders represent a victory for unions, particularly the labor federation Change to Win, which has been organizing workers at federally contracted businesses through the campaign Good Jobs Nation. Low-wage workers affiliated with Good Jobs Nation — including food service and janitorial workers in federal buildings — have spent the past two years engaging in protests and other labor actions to pressure the federal government to improve contractor standards.
Consumer advocacy groups have long complained that there is no link between bad credit and job performance. They argue that such checks lead to discriminatory hiring.
The system is profitable but imperfect, and for decades critics have attacked it for all sorts of offenses. In 1969, Columbia University legal scholar Alan Westin testified to Congress that the companies violated Americans’ right to privacy and that their inaccuracies damaged lives.
eddy Roosevelt famously argued that, when it comes to foreign policy, one should “Speak softly, and carry a big stick.” Similarly, an apt summation of the political inclinations of billionaires might be, “Speak softly, and carry a big check.”
The ink had barely dried on the recommendation issued last month by New York Gov. Cuomo’s Wage Board — calling for a $15 minimum wage in the state’s fast-food industry — when corporate special interests in New York began sounding the alarm.
In the 2016 presidential election, we are approaching a singular and momentous crossroads in our nation’s history. Will we, or will we not, make a serious effort to achieve a low-carbon future for our children and our planet? The fossil fuel magnates and the GOP say no, because we can’t or shouldn’t, but more than 75 percent of Americans want our leaders to take significant steps to fight climate change, according to a poll released in January 2015 by the New York Times, Stanford University, and Resources for the Future.
Given how tough it can be for many people to save for retirement, it’s unfortunate that some companies make it even more difficult. But a large number of 401(k) plans do just that by imposing high costs and offering subpar investment choices.
In 1965, CEOs made about 20 times as much as the average worker. By 2013, they made about 273 times as much. And CEOs of fast food companies made about 1,200 times as much as the typical fast food workers, according to a 2014 report by Demos, a public policy organization in New York.
The St. Louis Fed findings add to the growing body of evidence that higher education benefits some groups more than others, which may help to exacerbate the yawning racial wealth gap instead of shrink it. Black and Hispanic students are more likely to approach college with lower levels of wealth on average and are, therefore, more likely to have to borrow to attend school, according to a report earlier this year from Demos, a left-leaning think tank.
While every single Democratic member of the Legislature has signed on as a sponsor of this bill, not a single Republican has been willing to break from party orthodoxy and let common sense trump caustic partisanship.
Imagine the benefits to our state economy and Wisconsin families if millions of dollars in interest on student loans paid by borrowers every year to the federal government and Wall Street banks would instead stay right here.
Declining state appropriations for higher ed is responsible for more than three-quarters of tuition hikes between 2001 and 2011, the analysis found. Increased spending on administration and building projects accounts for only about 12 percent of the tuition increases over that time. During the recession, when many states scrambled to cope with shrinking coffers, lawmakers slashed spending on public universities. But appropriations haven't returned to prerecession figures despite an improving economy.