In a plug for this week's Color of Wealth Policy Summit, the Washington Post features an op-ed by Meizhu Lui of the Insight Center for Community Economic Development in Oakland, CA on the shockingly-expansive racial wealth gap in the U.S. This subject is Asset Building 101: A broad income gap means many families cannot get by, while others are plenty comfortable. The even-broader wealth gap means that many families cannot get ahead, while others are reaping the benefits of tax breaks and other policies that can only be accessed by those who do not want.

Consider data from the most recent Survey of Consumer Finances on average family income (before taxes):

White non-Hispanic families: $51,800.
Non-white or Hispanic families: $36,800.

Pretty Troubling.

Now consider the following: "According to the Fed, for every dollar of wealth held by the typical white family, the African American family has only one dime."

Pretty Terrifying.

A little Monday morning humor, courtesy of Tom Toles at the Washington Post :

We understand if you're confused too. While both of these pear-shaped cartoon Economists have a point, we tend to side with the lady to the left.

A curious piece ran today on the Washington Post's opinion page.  

President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference Charles Steele Jr. wrote an article called the "The Color of Credit" which noted the racial disaprity of wealth in America. Good, that's a fact that needs some more attention. It highlights the history of housing discrimination, policy efforts to address it, and the rise in minority homeownership rates since the mid-90s. Fine, that's a story worth knowing. It then discusses how recent declines in the housing and mortgages market will erode these gains. Great, that's an essential perspective to have right now, especially as we think about crafting future policy interventions. It takes issue with proposed restrictions on credit providers that would cap their fees. Wait a minute, what's going on here?

This may sound like a detour from direct democracy, but I promise I'll get there in a couple paragraphs (after I indulge a little provincialism). 

Here's a thought: The world of hip hop had an East vs. West war that raged for years. After reading reviews of James Frey's latest book, supposedly about Los Angeles, I think it may be time for a similar war in journalistic and literary circles.

The New York Times and Washington Post have given rave reviews to Frey's new novel, Bright Shiny Morning, which purports to be about Los Angeles. The Post called it "very acccurate" and said it "can be considered a reliable guide" to the city. The Times said, "He stepped up to the plate and hit one out of the park." I'm not sure I can find words to convey how insane these reviews are.

In Tinseltown, the book is a laughing stock. The editor of the LA Times book review, David Ulin, suggested it is one of the worst books he's ever read ("an execrable novel, a literary train wreck without even the good grace to be entertaining "). I picked it up this week (making sure not to pay for my copy), and think David might be too kind. It is absolutely the worst thing I've ever read. I couldn't find a single true thing in it about Los Angeles. Frey doesn't even get the weather right.