U.S. Government Economic Statistics Show Endurance of Structural Racism

Rick Baum

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

U.S. government economic statistics that can be used to compare the conditions of the Black population with the white population provide a picture of the continuing deep seated structural racism in the United States. The statistics covering wealth and income distribution, poverty, and unemployment show how the functioning of capitalism and the operation of its institutions have continued to keep much of the Black population in an inferior economic position relative to the white population despite reforms that supposedly have increased opportunities and that have led to many Blacks occupying positions of power.

Wealth Inequality

One’s wealth is the value of what one currently possess minus one’s debts.  Wealth inequality between whites and Blacks, especially if growing, is of great importance in bringing out the presence of structural racism.

Under capitalism, over time, wealth inequality usually grows. That has been especially true in the current neoliberal era. Federal Reserve Board figures show the increasing wealth inequality in the United States over the last three decades.[1] From the start of their survey in the third quarter of 1989 until the second quarter of 2023, the share of the nation’s wealth held by the wealthiest 1% of households increased from 22.5% to 31.4%. During the same period, the share of the poorest 90% declined from 40.1% to 31.1% while the poorest 50% saw their share of the nation’s wealth decline from 3.8% to 2.5%. The 2.5% represents a recovery from the great recession in 2008 when it fell below 1%.[2]

Recent Federal Reserve Board figures on mean, or average wealth, and median wealth, (the point at which half of the particular group has more and half has less), generally show the ongoing and increasing wealth inequality between white and Black families.[3]

Most striking are the changes in mean wealth. From 1989 until 2022, based on 2022-dollar values, the mean wealth of white families went up 261% from $524,410 to $1,367,170. For Blacks, mean wealth went from $95,530 to $211,450 for a 221% increase, widening the difference between Black and white family average wealth from $428,880 in 1989 to $1,155,720 in 2022.

From 1992 until 2022, the median wealth of white families, also based on      2022-dollar values, increased from $144,420 to $285,010 while that for Blacks went from $20,510 to $44,890. The rate of increase for Blacks was greater. However, the gap between white and Black median wealth widened from $123,910 to $240,120.

Below are tables using Federal Reserve Board figures on mean and median wealth that have been put together every three years starting in 1989. What is especially noteworthy with regard to mean wealth is both the general trend in the increasing size of wealth held by whites compared to the smaller amount held by Blacks, and the growth in how many times greater is white wealth compared to Black wealth even when the average wealth of Black and white households have both increased.

The Fed figures show that the Black population endured a greater percentage loss in average wealth during the great recession and took longer to recover. Not until 2022 did they exceed their 2007 average wealth while whites reached that level in 2016.

In terms of median wealth, following the great recession, both Blacks and whites took until 2022 to surpass their 2007 amounts, an indication of how the recession and growing inequality was presumably harshest on the working class and those with fewer resources. With the recovery, the difference in median wealth between whites and Blacks increased from $215,000 in 2007 to $240,000 in 2022.

The increases in average wealth give the appearance of many people being better off.  That may be an illusion given the recent gains that have benefited the wealthiest the most. The gains in average wealth may not represent improvements for the less well-off but, instead, reflect the furthering of the class divide within both the Black and white populations.

What the tables don’t show is the quantitative and qualitative difference between the share of the country’s total wealth held by Blacks compared to what is held by whites.

As of the second quarter of 2023, the white share of the nation’s wealth (from drop down tables) came to  82% ($119.76 trillion) while the total Black share came to 4.5% ($6.53 trillion) which is significantly lower than their 13.6% of the nation’s population.[4]  Since 1989, the share of the nation’s wealth held by Blacks has never reached half of their percent of the U.S. population, ranging from its highest point of 4.7% in 1992 to a low of 3.3% in 1999.[5]

The wealth holdings of Blacks and whites are different. As of the middle of 2023, the white share of the country’s corporate equities and mutual funds stood at 88.9% ($33.8 trillion) while the Black share was 1.1% ($.42 trillion). These assets are generally liquid meaning, unlike many other assets such as real estate, they can more easily and quickly be converted into cash.

The difference between Black and white holdings of real estate are not as great as the differences in the holdings of corporate equites and mutual funds. The white share of the nation’s real estate is 74.3% ($33.06 trillion) to the Black share of 6.2% ($2.75 trillion). However, Black real estate holdings are more encumbered by greater home mortgage debt ($.9 trillion which is 32.7% of the value of their real estate) compared to real estate held by whites ($9.18 trillion home mortgage debt, 27.8% of the value of their real estate). Factoring in mortgage debt, real estate represents a larger share of Black wealth, 28.3%, compared to that for whites, 19.9%.

There are other forms of real estate inequality. As of 2022, the rate of homeownership by whites is 73.15% compared to the Black rate of 46.34%. The net home value at figure 6 for a typical family owned home in 2022 for whites stood at $205,370 compared to $123,000 for Blacks.[6]

Wealth Inequality Among Black and White Billionaires!

Between Black and white billionaires, there is great billionaire inequality!!  In 2023, of the 735 billionaires in the United States, only nine are Black.[7]  Their wealth together came to $25.4 billion. Compare that to the wealth of a single white individual, Elon Musk, whose wealth is currently over $200 billion, about eight times the total wealth of the nine Black billionaires. Their combined wealth  is dwarfed by the wealth of each of the nine wealthiest U.S. billionaires, each of whom is worth more than $100 billion.[8] Additionally, the total wealth of the nine wealthiest is close to one-fifth of all Black wealth of $6.53 trillion (as of the end of the second quarter of 2023). 

Income[9]

Income refers to the amount of money brought in during a given period of time (usually a year). For most people, the primary source of their income comes from payment for work or from a pension earned from working.  For rich people, the bulk of their income is more likely to come from investments in the forms of interest, dividends, capital gains, and rent.

Over the years, the dollar difference in white income compared to Black income has generally been growing. According to Federal Reserve report at figure 7, from 2019-2022, the wages and salaries of white families increased 6.16% while for Blacks, they were stagnant, declining by .03%.[10]  Growth of all income during this period was 6.9% for Blacks and 16.05% for whites furthering inequality between whites and Blacks.

Census Bureau tables on household income cover the mean and median amounts. The figures show how income inequality between Blacks and whites has tended to be increasing before dipping in 2022. Here are the table A-2 amounts from a few selected years in 2022 dollars.[11]

Is the difference in income between whites and Blacks a result of whites tending to be better educated which results in higher incomes? In recent years, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has been providing figures that show the variation in median weekly income by race when people have a similar education level. Over many years, the median income level for whites at all education levels is higher than that of Blacks. In the years randomly selected, in most categories, the difference in median weekly pay for whites compared to Blacks, over time, has gone up. The exceptions are small amounts.

Below is a table based on BLS table 17 or 16 over the cited years showing the differences for whites and Blacks.[12]

 As with all statistics, there are limitations to what they show. The above table is not completely definitive. For those who went to college, the table does not show the college people attended nor the fields they studied which can impact one’s level of pay. For example, not shown is if whites attended more prestigious colleges and/or went into fields that pay better. However, the unequal results are persistent and are consistent with many other unequal results.

Poverty

Presumably, ever since such statistics were being gathered, more whites than Blacks living in the United States are deemed to be poor. That is because whites constitute a much larger share of the country’s population. However, and of critical importance, the rate of poverty for Blacks has always been much greater than the rate for whites.

2022 is no different.  The government official figures at Table A-3 placed the number of impoverished Blacks at 7.6 million compared to 26 million whites and 16.7 million whites who are not Hispanic.[13] The Black rate of poverty was 17.1% compared to the white, not Hispanic rate of 8.6% and rate of 10.5% for all whites.

Below is from the table at A-3 that covers selective years. It shows a decline in the Black poverty rate, but it has remained significantly higher than the rate for whites.

Additionally, in 2022, this same census bureau report at table B-6 shows another form of inequality. That year, the poverty income threshold was $15,225 for a single person under 65 years old and $29,678 for two adults with two children.  8.4% of the Black population had incomes below one-half that income threshold compared to 4.9% of whites, and 4.2% for whites who are not Hispanic.

Another measure provided in table B-6 shows how many have an income level that is four times or higher than the poverty income threshold. Here, Blacks compared to whites are worse off. In 2022, 29.1% of Blacks exceeded the threshold while the white figure is 44.6%, and the white not Hispanic figure is 49.9%.

 Unemployment

The Black unemployment rate has usually been close to or more than twice the rate for whites.  For example, before Covid, in 2019, the rate of Black unemployment was 6.1% to 3.3% for whites. Job prospects have improved for Blacks. Nevertheless, compared to whites, a higher percent of Blacks remain unemployed.

Below are unemployment figures by race derived from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics table 12 figures that show the ongoing higher rate of unemployment for the Black population compared to whites.[14]

Conclusion

Much attention is rightfully devoted to the racism behind voter suppression, unequal health coverage and its negative consequences, the workings of the criminal justice and prison system, and police murders such as that of George Floyd.  Behind these issues is the continuation of a system of significant racial economic inequality as brought out in official government figures.

Those with power, by their actions or lack of actions, have repeatedly accepted the conditions that give rise to significant economic inequality, showing their support for the continuation of structural racism.

Suharto-era general poised to take Indonesian presidency

Peter Symonds

A quarter century after the fall of the bloody US-backed Indonesian dictatorship, ex-general Prabowo Subianto, son-in-in-law to the former dictator Suharto, is poised to take the country’s powerful presidency. That Prabowo, who is responsible for numerous atrocities, could stand in Wednesday’s election and is not behind bars, is an indictment of the entire political establishment and the “democracy” established after Suharto’s fall in 1998.

Presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto, left, delivers a speech as his running mate Gibran Rakabuming Raka, the eldest son of Indonesian President Joko Widodo, listens in Jakarta, Indonesia, Feb. 14, 2024. [AP Photo/Vincent Thian]

While the official election results will not be announced until March 20, the “quick count” by various polling agencies puts Prabowo at 57-59 percent of the vote, with more than 80 percent of the vote counted in the polling booths sampled. The “quick count,” based on a sample of polling stations across Indonesia, has proven to be relatively accurate in the past four presidential polls. To avoid a second round run-off, Prabowo has to win more than 50 percent of the vote and achieve 20 percent across each of the country’s provinces.

The two other candidates were former Jakarta governor Anies Baswedan and former Central Java governor Ganjar Pranowo. The same unofficial results indicated that Anies received about 25 percent of the vote and Ganjar less than 20 percent. While Prabowo has already claimed victory, neither of the other two candidates has conceded defeat amid accusations of electoral fraud.

The anti-democratic framework of the presidential election ensures that at most four candidates can stand and that all are connected to the political establishment in Jakarta. Each presidential/vice-presidential pair must demonstrate that they have the support of political parties holding at least 20 percent of the seats in the national parliament, or 25 percent of the total votes in the previous election.

Only parties that win at least 4 percent of the national vote are eligible for parliamentary seats. Any socialist, communist or even left-leaning political parties or candidates face prosecution under Suharto’s 1966 law banning communism, which has been kept on the books by all subsequent administrations.

Ex-general Prabowo, now a wealthy businessman, ran a slick and well-funded campaign to absurdly repackage himself as cuddly grandfather who loves his dog and promises to help the poor and rule for the whole nation. In reality, he is a right-wing political nationalist with connections to the Islamist extremists. He will quickly junk his election promises, protect the interests of the wealthy business elite and not hesitate to repress any opposition.

Prabowo was born into the Jakarta establishment. His father, Sumitro Djojohadikusimo, served as economy minister and minister for research and technology to the dictator Suharto, who had come to power in the 1965–66 CIA-backed military coup, in which up to a million members of the Indonesian Communist Party, workers and peasants were slaughtered.

Prabowo graduated from the Indonesian Military Academy in 1970 and served mainly in the notorious Kopassus special forces that were responsible for the bloody repression of political opposition to the dictatorship. One of his first deployments was to East Timor shortly after the Indonesian invasion in 1975. He was assigned to capture the first East Timorese prime minister, Nicolau dos Reis Lobato, whom he tracked down and fatally shot in December 1978.

Prabowo is known to have carried out further atrocities in East Timor in the 1980s and 1990s as the regime sought to crush an armed pro-independence movement. He carried out similar brutal actions in West Papua against the Free Papua movement.

In March 1998, as the Asian financial crisis destabilised the Suharto dictatorship, Prabowo was appointed to head the army’s 27,000 strong Army Strategic Reserve Command (Kostrad). Amid emerging anti-Suharto protests, he was responsible for kidnapping and torturing at least 22 activists, of whom 13 remain missing, presumed dead. Prabowo was dishonorably discharged after he had risen to the rank of lieutenant-general, but was never charged for his crimes.

Prabowo’s ability to avoid trial and make several bids for the presidency depended on the duplicity and treachery of the various bourgeois parties and politicians that loudly proclaimed their commitment to democratic reforms but left the state apparatus, including the military, largely intact.

The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) headed by Megawati Sukarnoputri, daughter of the first Indonesian President Sukarno, played the central role in Prabowo’s political resuscitation. He stood as her vice-presidential running mate in the 2009 national elections, but the pair lost to another former Suharto-era general, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Prabowo stood against the current president, Joko Widodo, the official PDIP candidate, in the 2014 and 2019 elections but lost in the run-offs on both occasions. In 2019, Prabowo claimed that he had won, accused Widodo of electoral fraud and whipped up violent right-wing demonstrations that threatened to destabilise the country. He finally accepted the result, and was rewarded by Widodo with his appointment to the powerful post of defence minister.

Moreover, Widodo’s backing for Prabowo in the current election was instrumental in boosting his popularity. Early in the campaign, Prabowo was trailing in the polls behind the official candidate of the PDIP, Ganjar Pranowo, until the announcement that Widodo’s eldest son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, would be Prabowo’s vice-presidential running mate.

Gibran, just 36, was not eligible to be vice-president, as the constitution sets a minimum age of 40. Yet the Constitutional Court made an exception in Gibran’s case, with Widodo’s brother-in-law casting the deciding vote. Widodo brushed off accusations of nepotism and all but openly campaigned for Prabowo, ignoring constitutional restrictions on presidential involvement in elections.

Widodo’s backing for Prabowo, along with his tacit acceptance by much of the country’s ruling elite, stems from the growing concerns in ruling circles of potential instability and the need for a strongman to crush opposition. In response to growing global economic uncertainty, Widodo unerringly took action to defend the interests of big business and the financial elite at the expense of the democratic rights and social position of working people.

Like its counterparts internationally, the Widodo administration bailed out corporations and banks during the COVID-19 pandemic, then let the virus rip through the country by lifting basic health measures at the cost of at least 160,000 deaths. The government also provoked widespread opposition among workers by enacting its Omnibus Law, supposedly to create jobs but in reality to slash wages and conditions including job protections. Prabowo has pledged to continue Widodo’s policies.

Amid the aggressive US confrontation with China, Prabowo is likely to strengthen relations with Washington. He has pledged to boost Indonesia’s military spending and has been critical of China’s claims over waters close to Indonesia’s Natuna islands. For years Prabowo was banned from entering the US as a result of his record of atrocities. The Trump administration, however, ignored the ban, invited him to Washington and gave him a visa—a policy that the Biden administration will almost certainly follow as it seeks to consolidate anti-China alliances in the Indo-Pacific.

While the “quick count” appears to give Prabowo a first round win, the election outcome is by no means certain. Indonesian elections are notorious for ballot rigging, vote buying and other corrupt practices that call into question not only the “quick count” but the final official result. Under conditions of mounting social tensions, the ex-general’s “victory” may well be challenged not only by the other contenders, but also by popular protests.

Indian Government (ICCR) African Scholarships 2024/2025

Application Deadline: Varying but generally ends 30th April 2024

Offered annually? Yes

About Indian Government (ICCR) African Scholarships: At the inaugural plenary of the India – Africa Forum Summit held in New Delhi in April 2008, the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India announced the Government of India’s initiative to enhance the academic opportunities for students of African countries in India by increasing the number of scholarships for them to pursue undergraduate, postgraduate and higher courses.

The ICCR – Indian Council for Cultural Relations – implements this scheme on behalf of the Ministry of External Affairs.

Type: undergraduate, post-graduate

Who can apply for Indian Government (ICCR) African Scholarships:

• Students applying for doctoral/ post doctoral courses should include a synopsis of the proposed area of research.
• Students wishing to study performing arts should, if possible, enclose video/ audio cassettes of their recorded performances.
• Candidates must have adequate knowledge of English.
• ICCR will not entertain applications which are sent to ICCR directly by the students or which are sent by local Embassies/High Commissions in New Delhi.
• Priority will be given to students who have never studied in India before.
• No application will be accepted for admission to courses in MBBS/MD or Dentistry/Nursing.
• Candidates may note that Indian universities/educational institution are autonomous and independent and hence have their own eligibility criteria which have to be fulfilled. Please also note that acceptance of application by the University is also not a guarantee of admission. A scholarship is awarded only when admission is confirmed by ICCR.
• Student must carry a proper visa. Students should ensure that they get the correct visa from the Indian Embassy/High Commission. Government of India guideline stipulate that if a scholar arrives without proper visa and his/her actual admission at the University/Institute does not materialize, he/she will be deported to his/her country.
• Before departing for India the scholars should seek a full briefing from the Indian Diplomatic Mission in their country about living conditions in India/the details of scholarship/the type and duration of the course to which he/she is admitted. Scholars should inform the Indian Embassy/High Commission of their travel schedule well in advance so that ICCR can make reception and other arrangements for them.
• Scholars are advised to bring some money with them to meet incidental expenditures on arrival in India.
• The scholars who are awarded scholarships should bring with them all documents relating to their qualification in original for verification by the respective college/university at the time of admission

Number of Scholarships: 900

Value of Indian Government (ICCR) African Scholarships: (figure is in Indian currency)

• Living allowance (Stipend) (Per Month)
• Undergraduate -5,500 , Postgraduate-6,000 M.Phil / Ph.D 7,000, Post-doctoral Fellow-7,500
• -House Rent Allowance (Per Month)
• In Grade 1 cities-5,000 and In other cities-4,500
• -Contingent Grant (per annum)
• Undergraduate-5,000, Postgraduate-7,000, M/Phil / Ph.D and M.Tech./ME-12,500, Postdoctoral studies-15,500, Tuition Fee/Other Compulsory Fee-As per actual (excluding refundable amount) –Thesis and dissertation Expenses (Once in entire duration of course)
• D Scholar-10,000 and for BBA/BCA/MBA/MCA/M.Tech and other course required submission of Project-7.000
• -Medical Benefits
• Under the scheme scholars are expected to seek treatment only at medical centre or dispensary attached to universities / Institutes where they enrolled or in the nearest Government hospital (Bill are settled as admissible according to AMA/CGHS norms)

Duration of Scholarship: For the period of study

Eligible Countries: Under this Scheme, the Council offers 900 scholarships to the following African countries:
Algeria, Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, Comoros, Congo (Republic of), Djibouti, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea (concurrent from Nairobi), Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Kenya, Libya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Mali, Malawi, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, South Sudan (Republic of), Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sao Tame & Principe, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

To be taken at (country): India

How to Apply for Indian Government (ICCR) African Scholarships

• Please read the instructions before filling out the application form.
• Please also read the financial terms and conditions.
• Detailed guidelines on the process of applying for ICCR Scholarships online on the A2A Portal and procedure and norms governing the same is given on the www.a2ascholarships.iccr.gov.in .
• Students must read instructions and apply through the same website and no hard copy of the application form is required at the Mission.

Visit Scholarship webpage for details