Environmental Problems Part 6-Effects of Climate Change

Environmental Problems (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Effects of Global Warming and Climate Change

Climate Change kills an estimated 30,000 people per year, mostly in the developing world (Global Humanitarian Forum 2009). The majority of these deaths are attributed to crop failure leading to malnutrition and water problems such as flooding and drought. The effects of global warming and climate change also include the following:

Melting Ice and Sea-Level Rise. Between 1901 and 2010, average global sea level rose by about 7.5 inches (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013). Some forecasts predict that sea-level rise could reach 3 to 6.5 feet over the 21^st century (Muldrow & Ochs 2011). The two major factors that are causing a rise in the sea level are (1) thermal expansion caused by the warming of the oceans (water expands as it warms), and (2) the melting of glaciers and the Greenland and polar ice sheets. In 2012, sea ice extent (ocean area covered by ice) was at a record low, and in mid-summer, 97 percent of the Greenland ice sheet was melting (UNEP 2013). Scientists say the Arctic Ocean in summer could be ice-free by the end of the century (Leitzell 2011). Rising sea levels pose a threat to 10 percent of the world’s population that live in coastal areas, and 13 of the world’s 20 largest cities that are located in coastal areas (Muldrow & Ochs 2011). As sea levels rise, some island countries, as well as some barrier islands off the U.S. coast, are likely to disappear, and low-lying coastal areas will become increasingly vulnerable to storm surges and flooding.

Flooding and Spread of Disease. Increased heavy rains and flooding caused by global warming contribute to increases in drownings and increases in the number of people exposed to insect-and-water-related diseases, such as malaria and cholera. Flooding, for example, provides fertile breeding grounds for mosquitoes that carry a variety of diseases including encephalitis, dengue fever, yellow fever, West Nile virus, and malaria (Knoell 2007). With the warming of the planet, mosquitoes are now living in areas in which they previously were not found, placing more people at risk of acquiring one of the diseases carried by the insect.

Threat of Species Extinction. At least 19 species extinctions have been attributed to climate change (Staudinger et al. 2012). Scientists have predicted that, in certain areas of the world, global warming will lead to the extinction of up to 43 percent of plant and animal species, representing the potential loss of 56,000 plant species and 3,700 vertebrate species (Malcolm et al. 2006). The U.S. Geological Survey (2007) predicts that, due to the effects of climate change, the entire polar bear population of Alaska may be extinct in the next 43 years.

Extreme Weather: Hurricanes, Droughts, and Heat Waves. Rising temperatures are causing drought in some parts of the world and too much rain in other parts. Warmer tropical ocean temperatures can cause more intense hurricanes (Chafe 2006). With rising temperatures, an increase in the number, intensity, and duration of heat waves is expected, with the accompanying adverse health effects (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007). Droughts, as well as floods, can be devastating to crops and food supplies.

Forest Fires. Another effect of global warming is an increase in the number and size of forest fires (Westerling et al. 2006). For every degree Celsius warming in the Western states, scientists project a two-to-sixfold increase in area burned by wildfire (Staudinger et al. 2012). Warmer temperatures dry out trash brush and trees, creating ideal conditions for fires to spread. Warmer temperatures dry out brush and trees, creating ideal conditions for fires to spread. Warmer weather also allows bark beetles to breed more frequently, which leads to more trees dying from beetle infestation (Staudinger et al. 2012). Dead trees become dry and increase risk of fire. Global warming also means that spring comes earlier, making the fire season longer.

Effects on Recreation. Winter sports and recreation, such as skiing and snowboarding, are threatened by decreased and unreliable snowfall, causing high economic losses for winter recreation businesses, not to speak of frustration for winter sports enthusiasts. In coastal areas, beach recreation is also projected to suffer due to coastal erosion caused by sea level rise and increased storms association with climate change (Staudinger et al. 2012).

Sources

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Global Humanitarian Forum. 2009. Human Impact Report: Climate Change-The Anatomy of a Silent Crisis. Genova: Global Humanitarian Forum.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. United Nations Environmental Programme and the World Meteorological Organization. Available at www.climatechange2013.org

Muldrow, John, and Alexander Ochs (with Shakuntala Makhijani). 2011. “Glacial Melt and Ocean Warming Drive Sea Level Upward.” In Vital Signs, Linda Starke, ed. (pp. 43-46). Washington DC: Worldwatch Institute.

UNEP. 2013. UNEP Yearbook 2013: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment. Available at www.unep.org

Leitzell, Katherine. 2011 (May 3). “When Will the Artic Lose its Sea Ice?” National Snow and Ice Data Center. Available at www.nsidc.org

Knoell, Carly. 2007 (August 9). “Malaria: Climbing in Elevation as Temperature Rises.” Population Connection. Available at www.populationconnection.org

Staudinger, Michelle D., Nancy B. Grimm, Amanda Staudt, Shawn L. Carter, F Stuart Chapin III, Peter Kareiva, Mary Ruckelshaus, Bruce A. Stein. 2012. Impacts of Climate Change on Biodiversity, Ecosystems, and Ecosystem Services: Technical Input to the 2013 National Climate Assessment. Available at assessment.globalchange.gov

Malcolm, Jay R., Canran Liu, Ronald P. Neilson, Lara Hansen, and Lee Hannah. 2006. “Global Warming and Extinctions of Epidemic Species from Biodiversity Hotspots.” Conservation Biology 20(2):538-548

U.S. Geological Survey. 2007 (September 7). “Future Retreat of Arctic Ice Will Lower Polar Bear Populations and Limit Their Distribution.” USGS Newsroom. Available at www.usgs.gov

Chafe, Zoe. 2006. “Weather-Related Disasters Affect Millions.” In Vital Signs. L. Starke ed. (pp. 44-45). New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: United Nations Environmental Programme and the World Meteorological Organization. Available at www.ipcc.ch

Westerling, A.L., H.G. Hidalgo, D.R. Cayan, and T.W. Swetnam. 2006. “Warming and Earlier Spring Increase Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity.” Science 313 (5789):940-943

Environmental Problems Part 5-Global Warming and Climate Change

Environmental Problems (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Global Warming and Climate Change

Global warming refers to the increasing average global temperature of earth’s atmosphere, water and land, caused mainly by the accumulation of various gases (greenhouse gases) that collect in the atmosphere. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international team of scientists from countries around the world, “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal…The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased” (2013, p. SPM-3). In the United States, 2012 was the warmest year since records began in 1895 (Blunden & Arndt 2013).

Causes of Global Warming

The prevailing scientific view is that greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, and nitrous oxide, accumulate in the atmosphere and act like the glass in a greenhouse, holding heat from the sun close to the earth. Most scientists believe that global warming has resulted from the marked increase in global atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases since industrialization began. Global increases in carbon dioxide concentration are due primarily to the actions of humankind, particularly the use of fossil fuels.

Deforestation also contributes to increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Trees and other plant life use carbon dioxide and release oxygen into the air. As forests are cut down or are burned, fewer trees are available to absorb the carbon dioxide.

The growth of greenhouse gas emissions is strongest in developing countries, particularly China, which emits more carbon dioxide than any other nation. In 2010, China consumed nearly half of all coal worldwide and surpassed the United States as the world’s largest consumer of energy (BP 2011). However, the United States has the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide (Energy Information Administration,2013).

Even if greenhouse gases are stabilized, global air temperature and sea level are expected to continue to rise for hundreds of years. That is because global warming that has already occurred contributes to further warming of the planet, a process known as a positive feedback loop. For example, the melting of Siberia’s frozen peat bog could release billions of tons of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere (Pearce 2005). And the melting of ice and snow, another result of global warming, exposes more land and ocean area, which absorbs more heat than ice and snow, further warming the planet.

For more than 20 years, the fossil fuel industry and its allies have launched an aggressive misinformation campaign attacking and discrediting climate science, scientists, and scientific institutions (Greenpeace USA 2013). This well-funded “climate denial machine” has been effective in swaying public view of climate change: Despite the overwhelming scientific consensus that human activity causes global warming (Cook et al. 2013), more than half (57 percent) of U.S. adults believe that global warming is due to natural changes in the environment (Saad 2013).

 Sources

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. United Nations Environmental Programme and the World Meteorological Organization. Available at www.climatechange2013.org

Blunden, Jessica, and Derek S. Arndt. 2013. “State of the Climate in 2012.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94(8):S1-S258

BP. 2011. BP Statistical Review of World Energy. Available at www.bp.com

Energy Information Administration. 2013 (September). Monthly Energy Review. Available at www.eia.gov

Pearce, Fred. 2005. “Climate Warming as Siberia Melts.” New Scientist, August 11. Available at www.NewScientist.com

Greenpeace USA. 2013. Dealing in Doubt: The Climate Denial Machine Vs. Climate Science. Available at www.greenpeace.org

Cook, John, Dana Nuccitelli, Sarah A. Green, Mark Richardson, Barbel Winkler, Rob Painting, Robert Way, Peter Jacobs, and Andrew Skuce, 2013. “Quantifying the Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming in the Scientific Literature.” Environmental Research Letters 8(2)1-7.

Saad, Lydia. 2013 (April 8). “Americans’ Concerns about Global Warming on the Rise.” Gallup, Inc. Available at www.gallup.com

Environmental Problems Part 4-Water Pollution

Environmental Problems  (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Over the past 50 years, humans have altered ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any other comparable period of time in history (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). As a result, humans have created environmental problems, including depletion of natural resources; air, land and water pollution; global warming and climate change; environmental illness; threats to biodiversity; and light pollution. Because many of these environmental problems are related to the ways that humans produce and consume energy, we will begin with global energy use.

Water Pollution

Our water is being polluted by a number of harmful substances, including plastics, pesticides, vehicle exhaust, acid rain, oil spills, sewage, and industrial, military, and agricultural waste. Water pollution is most severe in developing countries, where more than 1 billion people lack access to clean water. In developing nations, more than 80 percent of untreated sewage is dumped directly into rivers, lakes, and seas that are also used for drinking and bathing (World Water Assessment Program 2009).

In the United States, one indicator of water pollution is the thousands of fish advisories issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that warn against the consumption of certain fish caught in local waters because of contamination with pollutants such as mercury and dioxin. The EPA advises women who may become pregnant, pregnant women and nursing mothers, and young children to avoid eating certain fish altogether (swordfish, shark, king mackerel, and tilefish) because of the high levels of mercury (EPA 2004).

Pollutants in drinking water can cause serious health problems and even death. At Camp Lejeune, a Marine Corps base in Onslow County, North Carolina, as many as 1 million people were exposed to water contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE), an industrial degreasing solvent, and perchloroethylene (PCE), a dry-cleaning agent from 1957 until 1987 (Sinks 2007). Exposure to these chemicals has been linked to a number of health problem, including kidney, liver, and lung damage, as well as cancer, childhood leukemia, and birth defects.

Water pollution also affects the health and survival of fish and other marine life. In the Gulf of Mexico, as well as in the Chesapeake Bay and Lake Erie, there are areas known as “dead zones” that due to pollution runoff from agricultural uses of fertilizer have oxygen levels so low they cannot support life (Scavia 2011)

In recent years, there has been increasing public concern about the effects of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking-a process used in natural gas production that involves injecting at high pressure a mixture of water, sand, and chemicals into deep underground wells to break apart shale rock and release gas. Opponents of fracking cite a number of concerns about the damaging impacts to the environment and to human health, including the production of toxic wastewater and contamination of drinking water, air pollution, land damage, and global warming emissions (Ridlington & Rumpler 2013).

Another growing concern surrounds the increasing amount of plastic pollution found in the world’s oceans: There is not a single cubic meter of ocean water that does not contain some plastic. Much of this plastic is difficult to see because of its small size. Microplastics, which fragments of plastic that measure less than 5 mm, come from the degradation of plastic products and from small pellets that are used to make plastic products such as bottles, bags, and packaging. Some of these pellets are accidentally spilled into the environment and have been found on beaches and in ocean water around the world (Takada 2013) These plastic pellets and other plastic debris contain high concentration of hazardous chemicals that can have adverse effects on marine life and humans that consume seafood.

Sources

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Washington. DC: Island Press.

World Water Assessment Program, 2009. World Water Development Report 3: Water In a Changing World. Available at www.unesco.org

EPA. 2004. What You Need to Know about Mercury in Fish and Shellfish. Available at www.epa.gov

Sinks, Thomas. 2007 (June 12). Statement by Thomas Sinks, PhD, Deputy Director, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry on ATSDR’s Activities at U.S. Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune before Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations United States House of Representatives. Available at www.hhs.gov

Scavia, Donald. 2011 (September 2). “Dead Zones in Gulf of Mexico and Other Waters Require a Tougher Approach: Donald Scavia.” Nola.com Available at www.nola.com

Ridlington, Elizabeth, and John Rumpler. 2013. Fracking by the Numbers: Key Impacts of Dirty Drilling at the State and National Level. Environment America Research & Policy Center. Available at www.environmentamerica.org

Takada, Dr. Hideshige. 2013 (May 10). Microplastics and the Threat to Our Seafood. Ocean Health Index. Available at www.oceanhealthindex.org

Environmental Problems Part 3-Land Pollution

Environmental Problems (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Over the past 50 years, humans have altered ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any other comparable period of time in history (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). As a result, humans have created environmental problems, including depletion of natural resources; air, land and water pollution; global warming and climate change; environmental illness; threats to biodiversity; and light pollution. Because many of these environmental problems are related to the ways that humans produce and consume energy, we will begin with global energy use.

Land Pollution

About 30 percent of the world’s surface is land, which provides soil to grow the food we eat. Increasingly, humans are polluting the land with nuclear waste, solid waste and pesticides. In 2013, 1,320 hazardous waste sites in the United States (also called Superfund sites) were on the National Priorities List (EPA 2013a).

Solid Waste

In 1960, each U.S. citizen generated 2.7 pounds of garbage on average every day. This figure increased to 4.4 pounds in 2011 (EPA 2013b). This figure does not include mining, agricultural, and industrial waste; demolition and construction wastes; junked autos; or obsolete equipment wastes. Just over half of this waste is dumped in landfills; the rest is recycled or composted. The availability of landfill space is limited, however. Some states have passed laws that limit the amount of solid waste that can be disposed of; instead, they require that bottles and cans be returned for a deposit or that lawn clippings be used in community composting programs.

Solid waste includes discarded electrical appliances and electronic equipment, knows as e-waste. Ever think about where your discarded computer, cell phone, CD player, television, or other electronic product ends up when you replace it with a newer model? Most discarded electronics end up in landfills, incinerators, or hazardous substances, such as lead, cadmium, barium, mercury, PCBs, and polyvinyl chloride, can leach out of e-waste and contaminate the soil and groundwater.

Pesticides

Pesticides are used worldwide for crops and gardens; outdoor mosquito control; the care of lawns, parks, and golf courses; and indoor pest control. Pesticides contaminate food, water, and air and can be absorbed through the skin, swallowed, or inhaled. Many common pesticides are considered potential carcinogens and neurotoxins (Blatt 2005). Even when a pesticide is found to be hazardous and is banned in the United States, other countries from which we import food may continue to use it. In an analysis of more than 5,000 food samples, pesticide residues were detected in 43 percent of the domestic samples and 31 percent of the imported samples (Food and Drug Administration 2013). Pesticides also contaminate our groundwater supplies.

Sources

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Washington. DC: Island Press.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2013a National Priorities List (NPL), Available at www.epa.gov/superfund/sites

EPA, 2013b. Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 2011 Facts and Figures. Available at www.epa.gov

Blatt, Harvey. 2005. America’s Environmental Report Card: Are We Making the Grade? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Food and Drug Administration. 2013. Pesticide Residue Monitoring Program Results and Discussion FY 2009. Available at www.fda.gov

Environmental Problems Part 2-Air Pollution

Environmental Problems (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Over the past 50 years, humans have altered ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any other comparable period of time in history (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). As a result, humans have created environmental problems, including depletion of natural resources; air, land and water pollution; global warming and climate change; environmental illness; threats to biodiversity; and light pollution. Because many of these environmental problems are related to the ways that humans produce and consume energy, we will begin with global energy use.

Air Pollution

Transportation vehicles, fuel combustion, industrial processes (such as burning coal and processing minerals from mining), and solid waste disposal have contributed to the growing levels of air pollutants, including carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, arsenic, nitrogen dioxide, mercury, dioxins and lead. Leaded aviation gasoline is one of the few fuels in the United States to still contain lead, and it’s the single largest source of lead emissions in the country (Kessler 2013). Air pollution, which is linked to heart disease, lung cancer, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and asthma, kills about 3 million people a year (Pimentel et al. 2007). In the United States, 42 percent of the population lives in areas where they are exposed to unhealthy levels of air pollution (ozone or particulate pollution) (American Lung Association 2013).

Destruction of the Ozone Layer

The ozone layer of the earth’s atmosphere protects life on earth from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. Yet the ozone layer has been weakened by the use of certain chemicals, particularly chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs, used in refrigerators, air conditioners, and spray cans. The ozone hole over the Antartic in 2012 was, at its peak, slightly smaller than the area of North America (Blunden & Arndt 2013). The depletion of the ozone layer allows hazardous levels of ultraviolet rays to reach the earth’s surface and is linked to increases in skin cancer and cataracts, weakened immune systems, reduced crop yields, damage to ocean ecosystems and reduced fishing yields, and adverse effects on animals. Despite measures that have ended production of CFCs, the ozone is not expected to recover significantly for about another decade because CFCs already in the atmosphere remain for 40 to 100 years.

Acid Rain

Air pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, mix with precipitation to form acid rain. Polluted rain, snow and fog contaminate crops, forests, lakes and rivers. As a result of the effects of acid rain, all the fish have died in a third of the lakes in New York’s Adirondack Mountains (Blatt 2005). Because winds carry pollutants in the air, industrial pollution in the Midwest falls back to earth as acid rain on southeast Canada and the northeast New England states. In China, most of the electricity comes from burning coal, which creates sulfur dioxide pollution and acid rain that falls on one-third of China, damaging lakes, forests, and crops (Woodward 2007). Acid rain also deteriorates the surfaces of buildings and statues. “The Parthenon, Taj Mahal, and Michelangelo’s statues are dissolving under the onslaught of the acid pouring out of the skies” (Blatt 2005, p. 161).

Sources

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Washington. DC: Island Press.

Kessler, Rebecca. 2013. “Sunset for Labeled Aviation Gasoline?” Environmental Health Perspectives 121(2): A54-A57

Pimental, D., S. Cooperstein, H. Randell, D. Filiberto, S. Sorrentino, B. Kaye, C. Nicklin, J. Yagi, J. Brian, J. O’Hern, A. Habas, and C. Wenstein. 2007. “Ecology of Increasing Diseases: Population Growth and Environmental Degradation.” Human Ecology 35(6): 653-668.

American Lung Association. 2013. State of the Air: 2013. Available at www.lungaction.org

 Blunden, Jessica, and Derek S. Arndt. 2013. “State of the Climate in 2012.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94(8): S1-S258

Blatt, Harvey. 2005. America’s Environmental Report Card: Are We Making the Grade? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Woodward, Collin. 2007. “Curbing Climate Change.” CQ Global Researcher 1(2):27-50. Available at www.globalresearcher.com

Empathy and the Election

Election years are always difficult times as it seems everyone is on edge and filled with anxiety over the high stakes. However, this year has proven to be one of the most difficult in my memory. As I reflected and observed the last couple of days, everyone seems beaten down by this process (on both sides of the fence). There appeared to be more talk and less listening, combined with more hate and less empathy. Supporters of each candidate had an incredible fear of what would happen if their candidate did not win. That is a very polarizing effect and does not leave much room for open and educated dialogue.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary (2016), the simple definition of empathy is the feeling that you understand and share another person’s experiences and emotions: the ability to share someone else’s feelings. From my observations, there is a major lack of empathy in our society at this time. We would rather judge, insult, belittle and demean others than listen to their stance or their knowledge. We blame victims rather than hear their story. We categorize people and dismiss their experience if it is not our own. We don’t believe them when they tell us what it is like to walk in their shoes.

Now, I am not calling anyone out with this discussion except maybe myself. This is not a self-righteous stance to condemn anyone other than me. I consider myself an open and educated person, however I have a long way to go as well. I studied Sociology and Community Services throughout my undergrad and graduate career and have been educated and aware of many issues for years (police brutality, discrimination, white privilege, environmental problems, income/wealth inequality, incarceration, etc.). Unfortunately, I cannot say I have done much to act upon eradicating these issues. I have worked in non-profits and mental health settings as my career and felt that was my way to contribute. However, I do not feel that is enough. I started my blog and have become more active on social media, but that is very unsubstantial. I have participated in some rallies and marches for various causes, but have not broadcasted it well. By staying quiet, I am part of the problem. Today, I am vowing to not be a bystander any longer. I am vowing to not leave anyone out. I care, I can help, I can make a change. I will stand up for what is right.

At this moment, half the country is elated, while the other half is in mourning. Yet, there are no winners if we do not learn how to collaborate. No one wins if we do not listen and develop empathy for others. No one wins if we refuse to educate ourselves and chose to make uninformed decisions. Let’s take action and change that. Educate. Empathize. Act.

"Nothing is more important than empathy for another human being's suffering Not a career. Not wealth. Not intelligence. Certainly not status. We have to feel for one another if we're going to survive with dignity."   -Audrey Hepburn

Environmental Problems (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Over the past 50 years, humans have altered ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any other comparable period of time in history (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). As a result, humans have created environmental problems, including depletion of natural resources; air, land and water pollution; global warming and climate change; environmental illness; threats to biodiversity; and light pollution. Because many of these environmental problems are related to the ways that humans produce and consume energy, we will begin with global energy use.

When Hurricane Sandy hit the Northeast United States in 2012, 8.5 million people from Indiana to Maine experienced power outage. Until we experience a prolonged power outage, most of us take the availability of electricity for granted, and don’t think about how dependent we are on energy. Being mindful of environmental problems means seeing the connections between energy use and our daily lives:

Everything we consume or use-our homes, their contents, our cars and the roads we travel, the clothes we wear, and the food we eat- requires energy to produce and package, to distribute to shops or front doors, to operate, and then to get rid of. We rarely consider where this energy comes from or how much of it we use-or how much we truly need. (Sawin 2004, p. 25).

Humans have used more of the earth’s natural resources since 1950 than in the million years preceding 1950 (Lamm, 2006). In 1961, humanity used only about two-thirds of earth’s natural resources; in the early 1970s, human demand for resources began exceeding what the planet could renewably produce (Global Footprint Network 2013). Currently, the environmental footprint exceeds the earth’s biocapacity-the area of land and oceans available to produce renewable resources and absorb CO2 emissions-by more than 50 percent, meaning we currently use 1.5 planet earths to support our consumption. Rich countries that consume more goods and produce more carbon dioxide have much larger environmental footprint than poor countries. If every person in the world lived like an average resident of the United States, a total of four earths would be required to support humanity’s annual demand on nature. If the current global patterns of consumption continue, we would need the equivalent of 2.9 planet earths to support us by 2050 (WWF 2012).

Every year the Global Footprint Network identifies Earth Overshoot Day- the approximate date on which humanity’s annual demand on the planet’s resources exceeds what our planet can renew in a year. In 2013, Earth Overshoot Day was August 20, meaning that in less than eight months, we used as much natural resources as our planet can renew in a year (Global Footprint Network 2013).

Population growth and consumption patterns are depleting natural resources such as forests, water, minerals, and fossil fuels. About 1.2 billion people- nearly one-fifth of the world’s population-live in areas of physical water scarcity, which occurs when there is not enough water to meet demand (Kumar 2013). Water supplies around the world are dwindling, while the demand for water continues to increase because of population growth, industrialization, rising living standards, and changing diets that include more food products that require larger amounts of water to produce: milk, eggs, chicken, and beef. With 70 percent of freshwater use going to agriculture, water shortages threaten food production and supply.

The world’s forests are also being depleted due to the expansion of agricultural land, human settlements, wood harvesting, and road building. The result is deforestation-the conversion of forestland to non-forestland. Global forest cover has been reduced by half of what it was 8,000 years ago (Gardner 2005). Between 2000 and 2010, the world’s forests shrank by an area roughly the size of France (Normander 2011). Deforestation displaces people and wild species from their habitats; soil erosion caused by deforestation can cause severe flooding as well as contribute to global warming (fewer trees=less oxygen in the atmosphere/more CO2). Deforestation also contributes to desertification or the degradation of semiarid land, which results in the expansion of desert land that is unusable for agriculture. As more land turns to desert, populations can no longer sustain a livelihood on the land, and so they migrate to urban areas or other countries, contributing to social and political instability.

Sources

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Sawin, Janet. 2004. “Making Better Energy Choices.” In State of the World 2004. Linda Starke, ed. (pp. 24-43). New York: W.W. Norton.

Lamm, Richard. 2006. “The Culture of Growth and the Culture of Limits.” Conservation Biology 20(2): 269-271.

WWF (World Wildlife Federation). 2012. Living Planet Report, 9^th ed. World Wildlife Fund, Zoological Society of London. Global Footprint Network, and the European Space Agency. Available at www.panda.org

Global Footprint Network, 2013. “August 20^th is Earth Overshoot Day.” Press release Available at www.footprintnetwork.org

Kumar, Supriya. 2013 (March 13). “The Looming Threat of Water Scarcity.” Vital Signs World Watch Institute. Available at vitalsigns.worldwatch.org

Normander, Bo. 2011 (February 23). “World’s Forests Continue to Shrink.” Vital Signs. World Watch Institute. Available at vitalsigns.worldwatch.org

Discrimination Against Racial and Ethnic Minorties-Housing

Housing Discrimination and Segregation (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Before the 1968 Fair Housing Act and the 1974 Equal Credit Opportunity Act, discrimination against minorities in housing and mortgage lending was common. Banks and mortgage companies commonly engaged in "redlining"---the practice of denying mortgage loans in minority neighborhoods on the premise that the financial risk was too great, and the ethical standards of the National Association of Real Estate Boards prohibited its members from introducing minorities into white neighborhoods.

Although housing discrimination is illegal today, it is not uncommon. To assess discrimination in housing, researchers use a method called "paired testing." In a paired test, two individuals---one minority and the other nonminority---are trained to pose as home seekers, and they interact with real estate agents, landlords, rental agents, and mortgage seekers to see how they are treated. The testers are assigned comparable or identical income, assets, and debt as well as comparable or identical housing preferences, family circumstances, education, and job characteristics. A paired testing study of housing discrimination in 23 metropolitan areas found that whites in the rental market were more likely to receive information about available housing units and had more opportunities to inspect available units that did blacks and Hispanics (Turner et al. 2002). The incidence of discrimination was greater for Hispanic renters than for black renters. The same study found that, in the home sales market, white home buyers were more likely to be able to inspect available homes and to be shown homes in more predominately non-Hispanic white neighborhoods than were comparable black and Hispanic buyers. Whites were also more likely to receive information and assistance with financing.

In a study of housing discrimination in the Philadelphia area, Massey and Lundy (2001) found that, compared with whites, African Americans were less likely to have a rental agent return their calls, less likely to be told that a unit was available, more likely to pay application fees, and more likely to have credit mentioned as a potential problem in qualifying for a lease. Sex and class exacerbated these racial effects. Lower-class blacks experienced less across to rental housing than middle-class blacks, and black females experienced less access than black males. Lower-class black females were the most disadvantaged group. The experienced the lowest probability of contacting and speaking to a rental agent and, even if they did make contact, they faced the lowest probability of being told of a housing unit's availability. Lower-class black females also faced the highest chance of paying an application fee. On average, lower-class black females were assessed $32 more per application than white middle-class males.

Residential segregation of racial and ethnic groups also persists. Almost a quarter of all census tracts within the largest U.S. metropolitan areas are more than 90 percent white and 12 percent are more than 90 percent minority (Turner & Fortuny 2009).

Sources

Turner, Margery Austin, Stephen L., Ross, George Galster, and John Yinger. 2002. Discrimination in Metropolitan Housing Markets. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Massey, Douglas S., and Garvey Lundy. 2001. “Use of Black English and Racial Discrimination in Urban Housing Markets: New Methods and Findings.” Urban Affairs Review 36(4): 452-469.

Turner, Margery Austin, and Karina Fortuny. 2009 Residential Segregation and Low-Income Working Families. Washington DC: Urban Institute.

Discrimination Against Racial and Ethnic Minorities-Employment

In 2016, while many us do not feel personally racist, prejudiced or bigoted we are still encountering a great amount of discrimination in our nation. Whereas prejudice refers to attitudes, discrimination refers to actions or practices that result in differential treatment of categories of individuals.

Individual versus Institutional Discrimination (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Individual discrimination occurs when individuals treat other individuals unfairly or unequally because of their group membership. Individual discrimination can be overt or adaptive. In overt discrimination, individuals discriminate because of their own prejudicial attitudes. For example, a white landlord may refuse to rent to a Mexican American family because of prejudice against Mexican Americans.

In adaptive discrimination, the injustice occurs due to the discrimination of others. The landlord may refuse the Mexican American family due to the discrimination of other tenants and for fear that they would move.

Institutional discrimination refers to institutional policies and procedures that result in unequal treatment of and opportunities for minorities. Institution discrimination is covert and insidious and maintains the subordinate position of minorities in society. For example, when schools use standard intelligence tests to decide which children will be placed in college preparatory tracks, they are limiting the educational advancement of minorities whose intelligence is not fairly measured by culturally biased tests developed from white middle-class experiences. And the funding of public schools through local tax dollars results in less funding for schools in poor and largely minority school districts.

Employment Discrimination

Despite laws against it, discrimination against minorities occurs today in all phases of the employment process, from recruitment to interview, job offer, salary, promotion, and firing decisions. A sociologist at Northwestern University studied employers' treatment of job applicants in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, by dividing up job applicant "testers" into four groups: blacks with a criminal record, blacks without a criminal record, whites with a criminal record, and whites without a criminal record (Pager 2003). Applicant testers, none of whom actually had a criminal record, were trained to behave similarly in the application process and were sent with comparable resumes to the same set of employers. The study found that white applicants with no criminal record were the most likely to be called back for an interview (34 percent) and that black applicants with a criminal record were the least likely to be called back (5 percent). But surprisingly, white applicants with a criminal record (17 percent) were more likely to be called back for a job interview than were black applicants without a criminal record (14 percent). The researcher concluded that "the powerful effects of race thus continue to direct employment decisions in ways that contribute to persisting racial inequality" (Pager 2003, p. 960).

Workplace discrimination also includes unfair treatment and harassment. African American employees working for A.C. Widenhouse---a North Carolina---based freight trucking company---were repeatedly subjected to derogatory racial comments and slurs by employees and managers. These insulting comments and slurs included "n----r," "monkey," and "boy" (EEOC 2011). One employee was approached by a coworker with a noose who said, "This is for you. Do you want to hang from the family tree?" A company manager allegedly told an employee, "We are going coon hunting, are you going to be the coon?"

Sources

EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission). 2011 (June 22). “A.C. Widenhouse Sued by EEOC for Racial Harassment.” Press Release. Available at www.eeoc.gov

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Pager, Devah. 2003. “The Mark of a Criminal Record.” American Journal of Sociology 108(5):937-975

Discrimination Against Racial and Ethnic Minorities-Education

Discrimination against Racial and Ethnic Minorities

In 2016, while many us do not feel personally racist, prejudiced or bigoted we are still encountering a great amount of discrimination in our nation. Whereas prejudice refers to attitudes, discrimination refers to actions or practices that result in differential treatment of categories of individuals.

Individual versus Institutional Discrimination (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Individual discrimination occurs when individuals treat other individuals unfairly or unequally because of their group membership. Individual discrimination can be overt or adaptive. In overt discrimination, individuals discriminate because of their own prejudicial attitudes. For example, a white landlord may refuse to rent to a Mexican American family because of prejudice against Mexican Americans.

In adaptive discrimination, the injustice occurs due to the discrimination of others. The landlord may refuse the Mexican American family due to the discrimination of other tenants and for fear that they would move.

Institutional discrimination refers to institutional policies and procedures that result in unequal treatment of and opportunities for minorities. Institutional discrimination is covert and insidious and maintains the subordinate position of minorities in society. For example, when schools use standard intelligence tests to decide which children will be placed in college preparatory tracks, they are limiting the educational advancement of minorities whose intelligence is not fairly measured by culturally biased tests developed from white middle-class experiences. And the funding of public schools through local tax dollars results in less funding for schools in poor and largely minority school districts.

Educational Discrimination and Segregation

Both institutional discrimination and individual discrimination in education negatively affect racial and ethnic minorities and help to explain why minorities (with the exception of Asian Americans) tend to achieve lower levels of academic attainment and success. Institutional discrimination is evidenced by inequalities in school funding---a practice that disproportionately hurts minority students (Kozol 1991). Because minorities are more likely than whites to live in economically disadvantaged schools, which serve primarily minority students, receive less funding per student than do schools in more affluent, primarily white areas.

Another institutional education policy that is advantageous to whites is the policy that gives preference to college applicants whose parents or grandparents are alumni. The overwhelming majority of alumni at the highest-ranked universities and colleges are white. Thus, white college applicants are the primary beneficiaries of these so-called legacy admissions policies. About 10 to 15 percent of students in most Ivy League colleges and universities are children of alumni. Harvard University accepts about 11 percent of its overall applicant pool, but the admission rate is 40 percent for legacy applicants (Schmidt 2004).

Minorities also experience individual discrimination in the schools as a result of continuing prejudice among teachers. In a survey conducted by the Southern Poverty Law Center, 1,100 educators were asked whether they had heard racist comments from their colleagues in the past year. More than a quarter of the survey respondents answered "yes" (Hear and Now 2000). It is likely that teachers who are prejudiced against minorities discriminate against them, giving them less teaching attention and encouragement.

Racial and ethnic minorities are also treated unfairly in educational materials, such as textbooks, which often distort the history and heritages of people of color (King 2000). For example, Zinn (1993) observed, "To emphasize the heroism of Columbus and his successors as navigators and discoverers, and to de-emphasize their genocide, is not a technical necessity but an ideological choice. It serves, unwittingly----to justify what was done" (P. 355).

Finally, racial and ethnic minorities are largely isolated from whites in a largely segregated school system. U.S. school in the 2000-2001 school year were more segregated than they were in 1970 (Orfield 2001). School segregation is largely due to the persistence of housing segregation and the termination of court-ordered desegregation plans. Court-mandated busing became a means to achieve equality of education and school integration in the early 1970s, after the Supreme Court (in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg) endorsed busing to desegregate schools. But in the 1990s, lower courts lifted desegregation orders in dozens of school districts (Winter 2003). And in 2007, the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling, in a bitterly divided 5-to-4 votes, that race cannot be a factor in the assignment of children to public schools. The decision jeopardizes similar plans in hundreds of districts nationwide, and it further restricts how public school systems may achieve racial diversity.

References

Kozol, Joathan. 1991. Savage Inequalities: Children in America’s Schools. New York: Crown.

Schmidt, Peter. 2004 (January 30). “New Pressure Put on Colleges to End Legacies in Admissions.” Chronicle of Higher Education 50(21): A1.

“Hear and Now.” 2000 (Fall). Teaching Tolerance, p. 5.

King, Joyce E. 2000 (Fall). “A Moral Choice.” Teaching Tolerance 18:14-15.

Zinn, Howard. 1993. “Columbus and the Doctrine of Discovery. “In Systemic Crisis: Problems in Society, Politics, and World Order, William D. Perdue, ed (pp. 351-357). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Orfield, Gary. 2001 (July). Schools More Separate: Consequences of a Decade of Resegregation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Civil Rights Project.

Winter, Greg. 2003. “Schools Resegregate, Study Finds.” New York Times, January 21. Available at www.nytimes.com

Discrimination Against Racial and Ethnic Minoroties 1-Race and Crime

Discrimination against Racial and Ethnic Minorities

In 2016, while many us do not feel personally racist, prejudiced or bigoted we are still encountering a great amount of discrimination in our nation. Whereas prejudice refers to attitudes, discrimination refers to actions or practices that result in differential treatment of categories of individuals.

Individual versus Institutional Discrimination (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Individual discrimination occurs when individuals treat other individuals unfairly or unequally because of their group membership. Individual discrimination can be overt or adaptive. In overt discrimination, individuals discriminate because of their own prejudicial attitudes. For example, a white landlord may refuse to rent to a Mexican American family because of prejudice against Mexican Americans.

In adaptive discrimination, the injustice occurs due to the discrimination of others. The landlord may refuse the Mexican American family due to the discrimination of other tenants and for fear that they would move.

Institutional discrimination refers to institutional policies and procedures that result in unequal treatment of and opportunities for minorities. Institutional discrimination is covert and insidious and maintains the subordinate position of minorities in society. For example, when schools use standard intelligence tests to decide which children will be placed in college preparatory tracks, they are limiting the educational advancement of minorities whose intelligence is not fairly measured by culturally biased tests developed from white middle-class experiences. And the funding of public schools through local tax dollars results in less funding for schools in poor and largely minority school districts.

Race and Crime

Institutional discrimination is also found in the criminal justice system, which disproportionately incarcerates people of color. Because the "War on Drugs" has been waged predominately in poor communities of color, most people arrested for drug offenses are black or Latino, even though people of color are no more likely to use or sell drugs than whites (Alexander 2010). Millions of people of color are labeled as felons for relatively minor, nonviolent drug offenses.

Race is a factor in who gets arrested. Minorities are disproportionately represented in the official statistics. For example, African Americans represent about 13 percent of the population but account for 38.5 percent of all arrests for violent index offenses, and 29.3 percent of all arrests for property index offenses (FBI 2013). They have 3.7 times the arrest rate for possession of marijuana, are six times more likely to be admitted to prison and, if admitted to prison for a violent crime, receive longer sentences than their white counterparts (ACLU 2013; Hartney & Vuong 2009).

Nevertheless, it is inaccurate to conclude that race and crime are casually related. Thus, the high rate of arrests, conviction, and incarceration of minorities may be a consequence of individual and institutional bias against minorities. For example, racial profiling---the practice of targeting suspects on the basis of race---may be responsible for their higher arrest rates. A survey of Seattle residents lends support to such contention (Drakulich 2013). The results indicate that "...crime stereotypes about racial and ethnic minorities are associated with reduced perceptions of neighborhood safety and increased anxieties about victimization..." among white respondents (p. 322)

References

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Alexandaer, Michelle. 2010. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York: The New Press

FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation). 2013. “Crime in the United States, 2012.” Annual Uniform Crime Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union). 2013 (June). The War on Marijuana in Black and White. Available at www.aclu.org

Hartney, Christopher, and Linh Vuong. 2009. Created Equal: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the U.S. Criminal Justice System. Oakland, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.

Drakulich, Kevin M. 2013. “Strangers, Neighbors, and Race: A Content Model of Stereotypes and Racial Anxieties about Crime.” Race and Justice 2(4):322-355.

"Wealthfare"

"Wealthfare" (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

Laws and policies that favor the rich, such as tax breaks that benefit the wealthy, are sometimes referred to as wealthfare. For example, the richest fifth of the U.S. population receives housing subsidies through the mortgage interest tax deduction that amounts to nearly four times the housing assistance provided to the poorest fifth (Garfinkel 2013). Corporate welfare refers to government subsidies to corporations, including direct payments and tax breaks. The profitable oil and gas industries receive large federal subsidies, and many states give corporations tax breaks as part of their economic development efforts to entice businesses to locate operations in their state.

Although the official federal corporate tax rate is 35 percent, legal tax loopholes enable corporations to pay significantly less than the 35 percent rate. Many corporations pay a tax rate of less than 20 percent and some have paid no taxes in a given year (Americans for Tax Justice 2014). One example of a corporate tax loophole is the practice known as corporate tax inversion, in which company lowers its taxes by merging with a foreign company and changing to an offshore address. Inversions largely occur on paper and typically do not involve moving operations overseas.

Free-market trade and investment economic policies, which some claim to be a solution to poverty, primarily benefit wealthy corporations. Trade and investment agreements enable corporations to (1) expand production and increase economic development in poor countries, and (2) sell their products and services to consumers around the world, thus increasing poor populations’ access to goods and services. Yet, such policies also enable corporations to relocate production to countries with abundant supplies of cheap labor, which leads to a lowering of wages and a resultant decrease in consumer spending, which leads to move industries closing plants, going bankrupt, and/or laying off workers.

Transnational corporations contribute to the trade deficit in that more goods are produced and exporter from outside the United States than from within. These corporations also contribute to the budget deficit, because the United States does not tax income from U.S. corporations abroad, yet transnational corporations pressure the government to protect their foreign interests; as a result, military spending increases. Transnational corporations contribute to U.S. unemployment by letting workers in other countries perform labor that U.S. employees could perform. These corporations are also implicated in an array of other social problems, such as poverty resulting from fewer jobs, urban decline resulting from factories moving away, and racial and ethnic tensions resulting from competition for jobs.

Furthermore, most trade and investment agreements include a key provision that allows corporations to take legal action against governments with policies that protect the public, but at a cost to corporate profits. In 2012, in 70 percent of cases where corporations took legal action against governments for violating trade agreements, the World Bank’s trade court ruled in favor of the corporation, and governments had to pay tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars---money that could otherwise go toward education, health care, and other public investments to improve the lives of the public, and especially the poor (McDonagh 2013).

When corporations claim that their products or services are essential in the fight against poverty, there is actually a different story. For example, powerful food and biotech corporations such as Monsanto, Cargill, and Archer Daniels Midland have used their economic and political power to impose a system of agriculture based on intensive chemical use and patented and genetically modified seeds (McDonagh 2013). These corporations assert that their model of agriculture, which requires farmers to purchase their chemicals and seeds, yields more and better food, and thus is important in global fight against hunger and poverty. Yet, this corporate control of agriculture has resulted in farmers’ dependence and debt (and an epidemic of suicides among poor farmers), environmental degradation (through the increased use of chemicals), and health risks associated with chemicals and genetically modified foods.

Individuals who are poor are often viewed as undeserving of help or sympathy; their poverty is viewed as due to laziness, immorality, irresponsibility, lack of motivation, or personal deficiency (Katz 2013). Wealthy individuals, on the other hand, tend to be viewed as capable, motivated, hard working, and deserving of their wealth. While both sides are receiving assistance and provisions, it is typically only those who are poverty stricken that receive the negative stigma. However, wealthy and large corporations are receiving larger welfare provisions and at a greater cost to society.

Sources

Garfinkel, Irwin. 2013. “The Welfare State: Myths & Measurement.” Spectrum (Winter):6-7.

Katz, Michael B. 2013. The Undeserving Poor: America’s Enduring Confrontation with Poverty: Fully Updated and Revised. New York: Oxford University Press.

McDonagh, Thomas. 2013. Unfair, Unsustainable, and Under the Radar: How Corporations Use Global Investment Rules to Undermine a Sustainable Future. The Democracy Center. Available at www.democracyctr.org

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.

Income and Wealth Inequality in the United States

For this week, I have also included a video presentation to help provide visuals of the statistical information. If you are like me, visuals greatly aid in making sense of the information. This video is 3 years old now, but it is still really helpful and I use it in both Intro to Sociology and Social Problems. The information is taken from a study conducted by Harvard and the link is provided below.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM

U.S. Income Inequality (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

In 2012, the top 1 percent of U.S. taxpayers earned 22.5 percent of all U.S. income (Sommeiller and Price 2015). Wages used to be tied to worker productivity, meaning the amount of goods and services produced per hour worked. From 1948 to 1973, worker productivity increased 97 percent and wages increased nearly as much (91 percent). But from 1973 to 2013, although worker productivity increased by 74 percent, wages rose by only 9 percent (Mishel 2015). The wage stagnation of middle and low-income earners is in stark contrast to the huge increase in wages of the top earners. From 1973 to 2013, wages of the top 1 percent grew 138 percent, while wages for the bottom 99 percent rose by only 15 percent (Mishel et al. 2015).

One reason why workers’ wages have not increased in sync with their productivity is that CEOs are taking a larger piece of the pie. In 2014, CEOs at the top 350 U.S. corporations received, in salaries and other compensation (such as bonuses and stocks), 303 times the average compensation of U.S. workers (Mishel and Davis 2015). That means that a typical worker would have to work 303 years to earn what a CEO makes in 1  year.

 U.S. Wealth Inequality (Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht)

 Wealth in the United States, like in the rest of the world, is unevenly distributed and concentrated at the top. More than 40 percent of U.S. wealth in 2012 was owned by the top 1 percent, but more than half of that wealth was owned by the top 0.1 percent (Saez and Zucman 2014).

There is a saying: The best way to make a million dollars is to start out with $900,000! Wealth tends to snowball, and the bigger the snowball you start off with, the bigger it grows. Consider that between 1963 and 2013 (Urban Institute 2015):

·         Families at the 99^th percentile saw their wealth increase six-fold.

·         Families at the 90^th percentile qualdrupled their wealth.

·         Families in the middle of the wealth distribution roughly doubled their wealth.

·         Families in the bottom 10 percent of the wealth distribution went from having no wealth, on average, to being about $2,000 in debt.

In the 2011 Forbes 400 annual list of the wealthiest Americans, more than 70 percent of the 282 billionaires on the list were described as “self-made,” suggesting that these individuals achieved financial success on their own, without assistance from family or society. But the notion that wealthy individuals have created their own financial success ignores the importance of gender, race, and family background as well as the role that tax policies play in creating wealthy individuals. United for a Fair Economy (2012) examined the 2011 Forbes list and found that:

·         17 percent of the Forbes 400 have family members who are also on the list

·         About 40 percent inherited a “sizeable asset” from a spouse or family member

·         More than one in five of the Forbes 400 inherited enough wealth to make the list

·         Just one African-American is on the list, and of the women on the list (who comprise just 10 percent of the list), 88 percent inherited their fortune

·         60 percent of the income owned by those on the list comes from capital gains (investments) that are taxed at a lower rate than other income.

There are, indeed, true “rags to riches” success stories in the United States that exemplify the idea that anyone can achieve the American dream. Approximately one-third of the individuals on the 2011 Forbes 400 list came from a lower- or middle-class background. Oprah Winfrey, for example-the only black person and one of 40 women on the list, was born to a low income mother, yet she developed a successful career in television, film, and publication. However, such stories are the exception and not the rule.

Sources (In order of appearance)

Sommeiller, Estelle, and Mark Price. 2015 (Janaury 26). “The Increasingly Unequal States of America.” Economic Policy Institute. Available at www.epi.org

Mishel, Lawrence. 2015 (February 4). “Congressional Testimony: Policies That Do and Do Not Address the Challenges of Raising Wages and Creating Jobs.” Economic Policy Institute. Available at www.epi.org

Mishel, Lawrence, and Alyssa Davis. 2015 (June 21). “Top CEOs Make 300 Times More Than Typical Workers.” Economic Policy Institute. Available at www.epi.org

Saez, Emmanuel, and Gabriel Zucman. 2014 (October). “Wealth Inequality in the United States since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Data.” NBER Working Paper No. 20625. National Bureau of Economic Research. www.nber.org

Urban Institute. 2015 (February). “Nine Charts about Wealth Inequality in America.” Available at www.datatools.urban.org

United for a Fair Economy. 2012. Born on Third Base: What the Forbes 400 Really Says About Economic Equality & Opportunity in America. Available at www.faireconomy.org

Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Schacht, Caroline 2015. Understanding Social Problems. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA.