CALIFORNIA LOOKING FORWARD: LINKING INCLUSION & PROSPERITY IN - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
california looking forward
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

CALIFORNIA LOOKING FORWARD: LINKING INCLUSION & PROSPERITY IN - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 27, 2023 346 likes •761 views

CALIFORNIA LOOKING FORWARD: LINKING INCLUSION & PROSPERITY IN THE NEW ECONOMY @PERE_USC 07-19-2015 MANUEL PASTOR @Prof_MPastor Decadal Population Growth Rates by Race/Ethnicity United States, 1980-2010 1980-1990

slide-1
SLIDE 1

07-19-2015

MANUEL PASTOR @Prof_MPastor

CALIFORNIA LOOKING FORWARD:

LINKING INCLUSION & PROSPERITY IN THE NEW ECONOMY

@PERE_USC

slide-2
SLIDE 2

4% 12% 53% 109% 3% 16% 58% 50% 1% 11% 43% 43%

  • 50%
  • 30%
  • 10%

10% 30% 50% 70% 90% 110% 130% 150% White Black Latino Asian/Pacific Islander Decadal Population Growth Rates by Race/Ethnicity United States, 1980-2010 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010

slide-3
SLIDE 3

8% 17% 69% 129%

  • 7%

4% 43% 38%

  • 5%
  • 1%

28% 31%

  • 50%
  • 30%
  • 10%

10% 30% 50% 70% 90% 110% 130% 150% White Black Latino Asian/Pacific Islander Decadal Population Growth Rates by Race/Ethnicity California, 1980-2010 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010

slide-4
SLIDE 4

80% 76% 69% 64% 59% 54% 50% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 6% 9% 13% 16% 20% 23% 27% 3% 4% 5% 6% 6% 7%

2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Changing Demographics United States, 1980-2040 Other Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Latino Black White

slide-5
SLIDE 5
  • 4,310,525
  • 248,081

4,788,632 781,946 875,683 White Black Latino API Other

U.S. Change in Youth (<18) Population by Race/Ethnicity, 2000-2010

slide-6
SLIDE 6
  • 10%
  • 21%
  • 2%
  • 20%

39% 17% 31% 12% 31% 8%

  • 30%
  • 20%
  • 10%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% U.S. California Change in Youth Population by Race/Ethnicity U.S. and California, 2000-2010 White Black Latino Asian/Pacific Islander Other

slide-7
SLIDE 7
slide-8
SLIDE 8
slide-9
SLIDE 9
slide-10
SLIDE 10

IMMIGRATION AS A (NON-) FACTOR

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

A Leveling Off: Immigrant Share of Total Population California, Los Angeles, and the U.S.

Los Angeles United States California

slide-11
SLIDE 11

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% North Dakota South Dakota Wyoming Kentucky Alabama Nebraska Indiana Mississippi Tennessee Iowa Missouri Louisiana Oklahoma Minnesota District of Columbia Delaware Arkansas South Carolina Kansas North Carolina Ohio West Virginia Georgia Virginia Maryland Wisconsin Colorado Utah Pennsylvania Massachusetts Montana Washington Alaska Idaho Oregon Texas Michigan Connecticut New Jersey New Hampshire Florida New Mexico Illinois New York Nevada Hawaii Rhode Island Arizona Maine Vermont California

Percent of Immigrant Population in U.S. Since 1999

A MUCH MORE SETTLED IMMIGRANT POPULATION

slide-12
SLIDE 12

AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE DC FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75%

Percent Share of State That is Foreign-Born Percent Immigrants Arrived Before 2000

Percent Foreign-born by Length of Time in U.S. by State

Prepared by USC PERE | 8

slide-13
SLIDE 13
slide-14
SLIDE 14
slide-15
SLIDE 15
slide-16
SLIDE 16
slide-17
SLIDE 17

THE GAP MATTERS

slide-18
SLIDE 18

THE GAP MATTERS

slide-19
SLIDE 19
slide-20
SLIDE 20

AGAINST A CONTEXT OF GROWING INEQUALITY

Educational Attainment by Race/Ethnicity/Nativity, 2006-2010

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 1917 1920 1923 1926 1929 1932 1935 1938 1941 1944 1947 1950 1953 1956 1959 1962 1965 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 percent of income

Income Distribution in the U.S., 1917-2012

Top 1% (incomes above $394,000 in 2012) Top 5-1% (incomes between $161,000 and $394,000) Top 10-5% (incomes between $114,000 and $161,000)

Source: Emmanuel Saez, Striking It Richer: The Evolution of Top Incomes in the United States (Update : September 15, 2013.

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

BUT WE MOVE UP OVER TIME?

Class “Stickiness” Income Inequality

slide-22
SLIDE 22

WE USED TO BE OPPORTUNITY-RICH . . .

0.40 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50 0.52 New York Connecticut Louisiana Mississippi Texas Florida California Tennessee Alabama Georgia Illinois Massachusetts Kentucky New Jersey North Carolina South Carolina Arkansas New Mexico Oklahoma Pennsylvania Rhode Island Virginia West Virginia Colorado Arizona Michigan Missouri Ohio North Dakota Oregon Kansas Maryland Montana Washington Minnesota Delaware South Dakota Maine Indiana Nevada Nebraska Idaho Vermont Wyoming Wisconsin Iowa Hawaii New Hampshire Utah Alaska

Gini Index by State

(2007-2009)

Note: The Gini coefficient is a measure of income inequality. A zero coefficient implies that all households in a state have exactly the same amount of wealth, while a coefficient of 1.0 means a single household has all the state's income.

Once considered a land of

  • pportunity, California is now one of

the most unequal states in the U.S.

slide-23
SLIDE 23
  • 21%
  • 22%
  • 10%

8% 17%

  • 8%
  • 6%
  • 6%

7% 19%

10th Percentile 20th Percentile 50th Percentile 80th Percentile 90th Percentile

Income Percentiles, Earned Income for Full-Time Workers 25-64 ($2010) U.S. and Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metro, 1980-2010*

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA United States

slide-24
SLIDE 24

$0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 < high school high school only some college, no degree AA or equivalent BA or better

Changing Returns to Education in California, 1979-2009

1979 2009

Real wage earned at various education points – note that the return has increased for college grads such that the wage premium was about 100 percent in 1979 and is now nearly 200 percent in 2009

Prepared by USC PERE | April 23, 2013 | 24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

BUT AT LEAST RACIAL PROGRESS?

40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 1947 1949 1951 1953 1955 1957 1959 1961 1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013

Minority Median Family Income as percent of White Median Family Income

Ratio of U.S. Resident Median Family Income 1947-2013 (Blacks and Latinos Relative to Whites)

Ratio Black to White Income Ratio Black to Non-Hispanic White Income Ratio Latino to Non-Hispanic White Income

slide-26
SLIDE 26

16% 32% 40% 25% 22% 18% 33% 37% 22% 25%

White Black Latino Asian/Pacific Islander All Percent of Families Living Below 150 Percent of the Federal Poverty Line by Race/Ethnicity California 1990 2006-2010

slide-27
SLIDE 27

A TIDE IS TURNING: EQUITY AND GROWTH

Conventional wisdom in economics says there is a trade-off between equity and efficiency. But, new evidence shows that regions that work toward equity have stronger and more resilient economic growth—for everyone.

Image source: http://storage.cloversites.com/northriverside baptistchurch/site_images/sub_page70_picture0.jpg

slide-28
SLIDE 28

WHAT’S NEW: EQUITY IS OF CONCERN

slide-29
SLIDE 29

WHAT’S NEW: EQUITY IS OF CONCERN

Hot topic at 2014 World Economic Forum: Inequality as the #1 global risk

slide-30
SLIDE 30

THE GOOD NEWS: EQUITY AND GROWTH

Image Sources: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/2/24/1235500211963/Ben-Bernanke-chairman-of--003.jpg; http://blog.usni.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Fed-logo_trans.png; http://www.benjamindrickey.com/gallery/gallery_federal_reserve.jpg

Even the Federal Reserve Bank

  • f Cleveland found that that

racial inclusion and income equality matter for growth.

slide-31
SLIDE 31

THE GOOD NEWS: EQUITY AND GROWTH

We found this in

  • ur research, too.
slide-32
SLIDE 32

 Underinvestment in

each other makes us less competitive as a nation

  • Social tensions over who will

gain and who will lose make us less likely to cohere on what we need to do to thrive

IT’S A BROADER STORY

slide-33
SLIDE 33

AND WHY SO IMPORTANT NOW?

http://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/large/847889448.gif?1397145494&maxX=740&maxY=704

slide-34
SLIDE 34

In November 2012, Proposition 30 passes— directing funding toward schools—a product of multi-year community

  • rganizing which also

showed that movement mattered more than money.

A TIDE IS TURNING . . .

slide-35
SLIDE 35

In October 2013, after years of strategic organizing by

  • rganizing groups, California

passed the Trust Act— protecting those arrested for misdemeanors against deportation—and approved drivers’ licenses for undocumented Californians.

Source: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-brown-immigration-20131006,0,5441798.story#axzz2rrkVSPxM

A TIDE IS TURNING . . .

slide-36
SLIDE 36

In November 2014, a statewide, cross-sector coalition pushed nearly 60% of voters to pass Proposition 47—reducing nonviolent crimes from felonies to a misdemeanors and so helping shutdown the school-to-prison pipeline.

A TIDE IS TURNING . . .

Source: Californians for Safety and Justice Source: http://www.cacalls.org/california-calls-11th-civic-engagement-campaign-wraps-up-with-101811-voters-contacted-statewide/

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Ensuring that California’s moment

  • f change becomes a sustained

movement for equity requires attention and investment in our state’s “organizing infrastructure” — that is, the ecosystem of social movements working to improve conditions for communities by changing systems of power.

BUT WILL MOMENT BECOME MOVEMENT?

Source: http://www.industrialareasfoundation.org/topics/faith-action

slide-38
SLIDE 38
  • And this comes not simply

through good ideas but by mobilizing constituencies

  • To invest for the future, we need

to understand revenues as much as we understand spending

  • So it’s a challenge: we must be making

not just the moral case but the business case for equity in education & beyond LEADING FORWARD

slide-39
SLIDE 39
  • Stress that equity and inclusion

are fundamental not add-on’s

  • Push folks to understand the key

role of education as one part of a larger opportunity system

  • Link up with other efforts to

promote a more inclusive and prosperous California IMPLICATIONS FOR LEADERSHIP

slide-40
SLIDE 40

FOR MORE . . .

@Prof_MPastor , @PERE_USC , @CSII_USC