What do you think?
Rate this book
Race & Economics: How Much Can Be Blamed on Discrimination?
Walter E. Williams applies an economic analysis to the problems black Americans have faced in the past and still face in the present to show that that free-market resource allocation, as opposed to political allocation, is in the best interests of minorities. He debunks many common labor market myths and reveals how excessive government regulation and the minimum-wage law have imposed incalculable harm on the most disadvantaged members of our society.
184 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2011
211 people are currently reading
1644 people want to read
About the author
Walter E. Williams
30 books256 followersBorn in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Dr. Walter E. Williams holds a B.A. in economics from California State University, Los Angeles, and M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in economics from UCLA. He also holds a Doctor of Humane Letters from Virginia Union University and Grove City College, Doctor of Laws from Washington and Jefferson College and Doctor Honoris Causa en Ciencias Sociales from Universidad Francisco Marroquin, in Guatemala, where he is also Professor Honorario.
Dr. Williams has served on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, since 1980; from 1995 to 2001, he served as department chairman. He has also served on the faculties of Los Angeles City College, California State University Los Angeles, and Temple University in Philadelphia, and Grove City College, Grove City, Pa.
Dr. Williams is the author of over 150 publications which have appeared in scholarly journals such as Economic Inquiry, American Economic Review, Georgia Law Review, Journal of Labor Economics, Social Science Quarterly, and Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy and popular publications such as Newsweek, Ideas on Liberty, National Review, Reader's Digest, Cato Journal, and Policy Review. He has authored six books: America: A Minority Viewpoint, The State Against Blacks, which was later made into the PBS documentary "Good Intentions," All It Takes Is Guts, South Africa's War Against Capitalism, which was later revised for South African publication, Do the Right Thing: The People's Economist Speaks, and More Liberty Means Less Government.
He has made scores of radio and television appearances which include "Nightline," "Firing Line," "Face the Nation," Milton Friedman's "Free To Choose," "Crossfire," "MacNeil/Lehrer," "Wall Street Week" and was a regular commentator for "Nightly Business Report." He is also occasional substitute host for the "Rush Limbaugh" show. In addition Dr. Williams writes a nationally syndicated weekly column that is carried by approximately 140 newspapers and several web sites.
Dr. Williams serves on several boards of directors: Grove City College, Reason Foundation and Hoover Institution. He serves on numerous advisory boards including: Cato Institute, Landmark Legal Foundation, Institute of Economic Affairs, and Heritage Foundation.
Dr. Williams has received numerous fellowships and awards including: Foundation for Economic Education Adam Smith Award, Hoover Institution National Fellow, Ford Foundation Fellow, Valley Forge Freedoms Foundation George Washington Medal of Honor, Veterans of Foreign Wars U.S. News Media Award, Adam Smith Award, California State University Distinguished Alumnus Award, George Mason University Faculty Member of the Year, and Alpha Kappa Psi Award.
Dr. Williams has participated in numerous debates, conferences and lectures in the United States and abroad. He has frequently given expert testimony before Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor policy to taxation and spending. He is a member of the Mont Pelerin Society, and the American Economic Association.
Dr. Williams has served on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, since 1980; from 1995 to 2001, he served as department chairman. He has also served on the faculties of Los Angeles City College, California State University Los Angeles, and Temple University in Philadelphia, and Grove City College, Grove City, Pa.
Dr. Williams is the author of over 150 publications which have appeared in scholarly journals such as Economic Inquiry, American Economic Review, Georgia Law Review, Journal of Labor Economics, Social Science Quarterly, and Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy and popular publications such as Newsweek, Ideas on Liberty, National Review, Reader's Digest, Cato Journal, and Policy Review. He has authored six books: America: A Minority Viewpoint, The State Against Blacks, which was later made into the PBS documentary "Good Intentions," All It Takes Is Guts, South Africa's War Against Capitalism, which was later revised for South African publication, Do the Right Thing: The People's Economist Speaks, and More Liberty Means Less Government.
He has made scores of radio and television appearances which include "Nightline," "Firing Line," "Face the Nation," Milton Friedman's "Free To Choose," "Crossfire," "MacNeil/Lehrer," "Wall Street Week" and was a regular commentator for "Nightly Business Report." He is also occasional substitute host for the "Rush Limbaugh" show. In addition Dr. Williams writes a nationally syndicated weekly column that is carried by approximately 140 newspapers and several web sites.
Dr. Williams serves on several boards of directors: Grove City College, Reason Foundation and Hoover Institution. He serves on numerous advisory boards including: Cato Institute, Landmark Legal Foundation, Institute of Economic Affairs, and Heritage Foundation.
Dr. Williams has received numerous fellowships and awards including: Foundation for Economic Education Adam Smith Award, Hoover Institution National Fellow, Ford Foundation Fellow, Valley Forge Freedoms Foundation George Washington Medal of Honor, Veterans of Foreign Wars U.S. News Media Award, Adam Smith Award, California State University Distinguished Alumnus Award, George Mason University Faculty Member of the Year, and Alpha Kappa Psi Award.
Dr. Williams has participated in numerous debates, conferences and lectures in the United States and abroad. He has frequently given expert testimony before Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor policy to taxation and spending. He is a member of the Mont Pelerin Society, and the American Economic Association.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
October 28, 2017
A former student sent me this book because she thought I would find it interesting. It's interesting like the books by Richard Rodriguez, Shelby Steele, and Dinesh D'Souza. Like them, Williams is a nonwhite academic/writer who gives bigots cover by arguing that our problems are not caused by racism. He uses statistics that raise more questions than they answer, false analogies, and logical fallacies to argue against the minimum wage, unions, and government regulations while arguing for racial profiling, segregated schools and clubs, as well as discrimination in home mortgage markets. Not everything he says is false; the unions were undoubtedly racist during the early 20th Century, and I'm sure licensing and testing were used to keep blacks and other nonwhites out of such occupations as taxicab driver, plumber, and beautician. But this man actually argues that the minimum wage law hurt blacks because it prevented them from working at a lower wage than whites. And we wonder how an overt bigot managed to secure enough votes to move into the White House?
November 4, 2020
This short book focuses on economic barriers to wealth and success. While cultural and educational factors also matter, this book doesn’t get into those.
Williams spends a lot of time looking at early unions, which largely formed to discriminate against blacks, and minimum wage laws, which have the unintended side effect of putting minorities out of the workforce. Basically, government regulations hurt minorities and unskilled workers disproportionately compared to pure free-market capitalism. Without regulations, employers and customers can be racist but it will cost them economically, so few persist in such behavior. If people can get low-paying jobs, they gain experience and can move up the ladder. But if a minimum-wage policy keeps them from getting a job, they’re stuck.
He looks at licensing, such as taxi medallions and trade tests, which largely exist to limit competition, and comes across as quite infuriating. Then he goes over definitions and terminology.
It’s concise and well written and well argued.
While the legislative bodies have the power to order wage increases, they have not found a way to order commensurate increases in worker productivity that make the worker’s output worth the higher wage. Further, while Congress can legislate the wage at which labor transactions occur, it cannot require that the transaction actually be made. ... To the extent to which the minimum wage law raises a worker’s pay level that exceeds his productivity, employers, predictably, make adjustments in their use of labor. Such an adjustment will produce gains for some workers at the expense of other workers. Those workers who retain their jobs receive a higher wage gain. Most of the adverse effects are borne by the workers who are most disadvantaged in terms of marketable skills. They will lose their jobs or not be hired in the first place.
The effects of actions do not depend on intentions. Whatever the intentions, the effect is to price their competition out of the market. ... Income subsidy programs disguise the true effects of labor market restrictions created by unions and other economic agents by casting a few crumbs to those denied jobs in order to keep them quiet, thereby contributing to the creation of a permanent welfare class.
The minimum wage law has imposed incalculable harm on the most disadvantaged members of our society. The absence of work opportunities for many youngsters does not only mean an absence of pocket money. Early work opportunities provide much more than that: important insights on how to find a job and to adopt proper attitudes toward both punctuality and respect for supervision in the workplace. Lessons of that sort learned on any job help make a young person a more valuable and successful worker in the future. In addition, early work experience give youngsters the pride and self-respect that comes from being financially semi-independent. That is even more important for black youngsters, a disproportionate number of whom grow up in female-headed households and go to the nation’s worst schools. If they are to learn job-related lessons, many of them will be learned through a job.
What the do-gooders don’t see are the people—the illegal aliens, the old women, the teenagers—who no longer have a job. The illegal may be back in Mexico, living under worse conditions. The old woman may be no longer earning any wage, and the kid may be on a street corner committing a crime. These are the invisible victims of the advocates’ actions.
It became readily apparent to me … that what they were really after was to pulverize and eviscerate and get rid of competition … this bill, if we indeed pass it, will be anti-immigrant, it will be anti-minority, it will be anti-competitive, ... it undermines the very values that many of us stand for. (City council member on NYC van service monopoly)
It is therefore clear that the written examination acts to exclude applicants, mainly be race, who are just as productive as others according to so-called performance results. The Dorsey study concluded that the occupational licensing of cosmetologists (1) screens out people on the basis of characteristics unrelated to job performance; and (2) causes an overinvestment in education and formal training—because much of the required training does not improve productivity, as measured by performance, and therefore is individually and socially wasteful. In addition, licensing services to reinforce formal educational handicaps suffered by disadvantaged minorities who attend grossly inferior schools.
One study showed that there is a significant relationship between occupational licensing and the number of accidental deaths by electrocution: the more stringent the state’s electrician licensing examination, the fewer the electricians and higher prices for an electrician’s services; therefore, the greater the willingness of amateurs to undertake electrical wiring tasks and risk electrocution in the process.
Occupational licensing has typically bought higher status for the producer of services at the price of higher costs to the consumer; it has reduced competition; it has narrowed opportunity for aspiring youth by increasing the cost of entry into a desired occupational career; ... and it has caused a proliferation of official administrative bodies, most of them staffed by persons drawn from and devoted to furthering the interests of the licensed occupations themselves. (Professor Walter Gellhorn)
While there is a smaller overall percentage of blacks in private schools, they are somewhat more racially heterogeneous nowadays. Those who see racial heterogeneity in schools as desirable should support measures such as education vouchers or tuition tax credits to strengthen the private-education sector. A majority of black parents support educational vouchers that would allow them educational choice.
In today’s America, there is a broad consensus that race-based discrimination in many activities is morally offensive and in many cases rightfully illegal … Even though people should be free to deal with, or refuse to deal with, anyone in private matters, there is little evidence that race-based discrimination is widespread in today’s America.
Numerous laws, regulations, and ordinances have reduced or eliminated avenues of upward mobility for many blacks. The most common feature of these barriers is that they prevent people from making voluntary transactions that are deemed mutually advantageous by the transactors themselves. While there is a long history of licensing laws written with the express purpose to restricting opportunities for black, it is misleading to see those laws as necessarily anti-black. An ordinance that generates a $600,000 license price in order to own a taxi, such as in New York City, discriminate against and handicaps anyone—brown, black, white, or yellow—who cannot meet the price. Therefore, these laws are anti-people! They produce a racial effect only to the extent that blacks may be the least likely to meet the entry conditions. They were the last major ethnic group to become urbanized and gain basic civil rights. When they finally achieved that status, blacks found that new barriers had been erected.
Williams spends a lot of time looking at early unions, which largely formed to discriminate against blacks, and minimum wage laws, which have the unintended side effect of putting minorities out of the workforce. Basically, government regulations hurt minorities and unskilled workers disproportionately compared to pure free-market capitalism. Without regulations, employers and customers can be racist but it will cost them economically, so few persist in such behavior. If people can get low-paying jobs, they gain experience and can move up the ladder. But if a minimum-wage policy keeps them from getting a job, they’re stuck.
He looks at licensing, such as taxi medallions and trade tests, which largely exist to limit competition, and comes across as quite infuriating. Then he goes over definitions and terminology.
It’s concise and well written and well argued.
While the legislative bodies have the power to order wage increases, they have not found a way to order commensurate increases in worker productivity that make the worker’s output worth the higher wage. Further, while Congress can legislate the wage at which labor transactions occur, it cannot require that the transaction actually be made. ... To the extent to which the minimum wage law raises a worker’s pay level that exceeds his productivity, employers, predictably, make adjustments in their use of labor. Such an adjustment will produce gains for some workers at the expense of other workers. Those workers who retain their jobs receive a higher wage gain. Most of the adverse effects are borne by the workers who are most disadvantaged in terms of marketable skills. They will lose their jobs or not be hired in the first place.
The effects of actions do not depend on intentions. Whatever the intentions, the effect is to price their competition out of the market. ... Income subsidy programs disguise the true effects of labor market restrictions created by unions and other economic agents by casting a few crumbs to those denied jobs in order to keep them quiet, thereby contributing to the creation of a permanent welfare class.
The minimum wage law has imposed incalculable harm on the most disadvantaged members of our society. The absence of work opportunities for many youngsters does not only mean an absence of pocket money. Early work opportunities provide much more than that: important insights on how to find a job and to adopt proper attitudes toward both punctuality and respect for supervision in the workplace. Lessons of that sort learned on any job help make a young person a more valuable and successful worker in the future. In addition, early work experience give youngsters the pride and self-respect that comes from being financially semi-independent. That is even more important for black youngsters, a disproportionate number of whom grow up in female-headed households and go to the nation’s worst schools. If they are to learn job-related lessons, many of them will be learned through a job.
What the do-gooders don’t see are the people—the illegal aliens, the old women, the teenagers—who no longer have a job. The illegal may be back in Mexico, living under worse conditions. The old woman may be no longer earning any wage, and the kid may be on a street corner committing a crime. These are the invisible victims of the advocates’ actions.
It became readily apparent to me … that what they were really after was to pulverize and eviscerate and get rid of competition … this bill, if we indeed pass it, will be anti-immigrant, it will be anti-minority, it will be anti-competitive, ... it undermines the very values that many of us stand for. (City council member on NYC van service monopoly)
It is therefore clear that the written examination acts to exclude applicants, mainly be race, who are just as productive as others according to so-called performance results. The Dorsey study concluded that the occupational licensing of cosmetologists (1) screens out people on the basis of characteristics unrelated to job performance; and (2) causes an overinvestment in education and formal training—because much of the required training does not improve productivity, as measured by performance, and therefore is individually and socially wasteful. In addition, licensing services to reinforce formal educational handicaps suffered by disadvantaged minorities who attend grossly inferior schools.
One study showed that there is a significant relationship between occupational licensing and the number of accidental deaths by electrocution: the more stringent the state’s electrician licensing examination, the fewer the electricians and higher prices for an electrician’s services; therefore, the greater the willingness of amateurs to undertake electrical wiring tasks and risk electrocution in the process.
Occupational licensing has typically bought higher status for the producer of services at the price of higher costs to the consumer; it has reduced competition; it has narrowed opportunity for aspiring youth by increasing the cost of entry into a desired occupational career; ... and it has caused a proliferation of official administrative bodies, most of them staffed by persons drawn from and devoted to furthering the interests of the licensed occupations themselves. (Professor Walter Gellhorn)
While there is a smaller overall percentage of blacks in private schools, they are somewhat more racially heterogeneous nowadays. Those who see racial heterogeneity in schools as desirable should support measures such as education vouchers or tuition tax credits to strengthen the private-education sector. A majority of black parents support educational vouchers that would allow them educational choice.
In today’s America, there is a broad consensus that race-based discrimination in many activities is morally offensive and in many cases rightfully illegal … Even though people should be free to deal with, or refuse to deal with, anyone in private matters, there is little evidence that race-based discrimination is widespread in today’s America.
Numerous laws, regulations, and ordinances have reduced or eliminated avenues of upward mobility for many blacks. The most common feature of these barriers is that they prevent people from making voluntary transactions that are deemed mutually advantageous by the transactors themselves. While there is a long history of licensing laws written with the express purpose to restricting opportunities for black, it is misleading to see those laws as necessarily anti-black. An ordinance that generates a $600,000 license price in order to own a taxi, such as in New York City, discriminate against and handicaps anyone—brown, black, white, or yellow—who cannot meet the price. Therefore, these laws are anti-people! They produce a racial effect only to the extent that blacks may be the least likely to meet the entry conditions. They were the last major ethnic group to become urbanized and gain basic civil rights. When they finally achieved that status, blacks found that new barriers had been erected.
July 29, 2019
Here's powerful reasoning for how economic regulations, rather than racial discrimination, have often been the main cause for economic disadvantages faced by blacks and other minorities, and how such controls, often championed as helping the poor, have actually afforded racial discrimination more expression. (Also, it's a good book those wanting to understand basic economics better.) Williams covers subjects like wage regulations, licensing laws, and unions, and, through historical examples and lucid logic, he demonstrates their harms toward blacks. Among other contrarian ideas he presents, Williams makes an un-PC argument for how prejudice can have a rational component, in that race can sometimes be "used as a proxy for more costly-to-observe attributes." This book is a helpful companion toward overcoming the confusion and fallacies spread by media and ignorant pundits. As Williams says: “Compassionate policy requires dispassionate analysis.”
September 20, 2016
Following the footsteps of Dr. Thomas Sowell, Dr. Williams looked at the race and economics in a more economic terms rather than the historical analysis of Dr. Sowell. Does discrimination exist? Yes it does, but discrimination has a cost as Dr. Sowell has written in Basic Economics, it is those who enable the status quo of discrimination through the means of legislation that further propagate discrimination. From slavery, unions to politicians and academia, the more they try to fix the problem through regulations, the worse the outcome will be (as evident in the examples used by Dr. Williams).
I think the most important message is that to stop discrimination, we need to dismantle those systems which enable discrimination without additional costs.
I think the most important message is that to stop discrimination, we need to dismantle those systems which enable discrimination without additional costs.
September 24, 2020
Williams, an economist, catalogues and explains numerous examples of what could properly be called systemic racism that continue to plague our country:
-Minumum wage laws that make it more difficult for low-skilled workers to find entry-level jobs to develop their skills and become more employable
-Barriers to entry, such as irrelevant licensing examinations and exorbitant fees that prevent new workers from entering fields as diverse as cosmetology, taxi driving, and plumbing, because current workers in those fields lobby to prevent competition.
-Prevailing wage laws, which mandate inflated union wages for government contracts, thus preventing minority business and workers from obtaining contracts by offering to work for lower wages.
He shows how these and other supposed protections actually function to perpetuate economic inequality.
-Minumum wage laws that make it more difficult for low-skilled workers to find entry-level jobs to develop their skills and become more employable
-Barriers to entry, such as irrelevant licensing examinations and exorbitant fees that prevent new workers from entering fields as diverse as cosmetology, taxi driving, and plumbing, because current workers in those fields lobby to prevent competition.
-Prevailing wage laws, which mandate inflated union wages for government contracts, thus preventing minority business and workers from obtaining contracts by offering to work for lower wages.
He shows how these and other supposed protections actually function to perpetuate economic inequality.
December 13, 2011
(kindle version)...not listed and i'm not fluent in listing...
(this is incredible! there are situations documented here that are nothing less than....grrrrrr! aggravating and angering!.....update...the scenario williams describes has a happy ending, or sorts. freedom cabs now, or at the time of the writing, exists and works for a living. 39% kindle.)
saw this title in a column from thomas sowell...best of, or recommended. dunno about tom, but i figure to give it a look see:
1st sentence, preface:
racial issues often give rise to high emotions but little understanding.
a sentence later: my purpose in writing this book is to apply simple economic analysis to some of the problems that black americans have faced in the past and still face today.
sounds good...sounds like a winner...williams is nothing, if not easy to understand in his columns. this appears so as well. the man wants to be understood. we should all endeavor for that understanding.
my copy is the kindle edition...or one that can be read on the kindle...
i'm at the chapter 2 beginning, 6% on the kindle.
prior to that, the preface & chapter one.
a few points he has made:
one of the tings that economics brings to the analysis is explicit recognition that people will not engage in activities--including racial discrimination--no matter what the cost.
interesting point...we're all selfish at heart.
he shall analyze methods a discriminator uses to reduce them.
he shall argue that free-market resource allocation as opposed to allocation on political grounds, is in the interests of minorities and/or less-preferred individuals.
point: policy is often evaluated in terms of intentions rather than effects.
compassionate policy requires dispassionate analysis. policy intentions and policy effects often bear no relationship to one another.
he makes use of a great quote from frederick douglas' speech, "what the black man wants"
point: the thrust of the argument in the chapters that follow is that the most difficult problems black americans face, particularly those who are poor, cannot adequately be explained by current racial discrimination. problems are self-inflicted, or, as his focus will show, a result of government.
(this should be an interesting read for me, as i am self-employed, and here, along w/gov't regulation and interference in my trade, i experience a kind of...small town politics...that is not policitics unless it be the politics of personality...my wages might be the lowest around--when your neighbor tells you, you'll never work in this town again, you sit up and listen. course, you already know exactly what he's talking about...so...i read it w/that in mind)
chapter 2 is discrimination a complete barrier to economic mobility?
the united states does not own the monopoly on discrimination. in fact, with some of the examples from recent history, one should ask why the guilt trip? there are some examples he provides. across the globe, we are efficient at killing those we dislike.
he goes on to write about the chinese...and in the next paragraph writes about "numerous measures have been undertaken to reduce the economic predominance of the chinese in southeast asia." despite anti-chinese discriminatory laws, there is while evasion of the law.
he wants to establish the widespread existence.....he makes the point that minorities, despite discrimination, excel...economic progress can occur in the absence of what is traditionally considered political power.
at the 11% mark...
williams has several pages from the historical record of the united states...slaves finding ways and means to make their life better. there's quite a collection here, all of it interesting, like this doctor jack in nashville, whose patients petitioned the state legislature to exempt him from the act of 1831.
new orleans, it sounds like, had quite a number of slaves and free-men, all of them making their life better, despite whatever setbacks and obstacles were thrown in their way.
with their success, "their" being the generic expression, came the call by those w/liberty to hinder and obstruct those seeking to better themselves. like we have today.
prior, he listed some laws in the western states, upheld by our supreme court, that discriminated against the oriental man...saying he could not own this that or the other.
(you know...i had thought at one time that the people from way back in the day valued freedom and liberty more so than today. looking at the record that williams provides, i'd say, not so. not so.)
heh! there's some stuff from the papers of the day, new orleans...one from 1855 memphis...a citizen complaining "to permit a negro to hire his own time send a slave to ruin as property, debauches a slave, and makes him a strolling agent of discontent, disorder, and immorality among our slave population."
try to imagine reading that in your daily as you held it up before you...did you snap the paper at the charge and resolve to make changes?
williams discusses licensing as a strategy of exclusion, something that has affected me very much so. when one travels over 500 miles (in-state) to plead his case before a board of unelected, unaccountable, yet powerful bureaucrats (a regulatory troika wherein they have all three powers at their flippant disposal), and when one tries to inform others and receives the kind of reception that teachers must receive on the first day of school...and most days thereafter....education, after all, being the only thing an american is willing to pay for, and hopes he don't get....where was i?
he records a few "help wanted" ads....irish need not apply. lankton, in his book, hallowed ground about the copper country's mining legacy has recorded, too, the discrimination against the finns.
williams sub-titles a section: licensing as a strategy of exclusion
yes. very much so. occupation licensing also happened when those swarthy europeans came across the pond.
too, john taylor gatto, in his book, an underground history of american education mentions occupational licensing...here i think among other jobs, he had in mind unlicensed pedlars of hot dogs on the coney island boardwalk, yet the point he makes is that kings and queens of europe granted the "right to work" in occupations, and here in the land of the free, we have followed suite, granting the powers (the regulatory troika, remember) of gov't to unelected bureaucrats. isn't that fascism?
williams writes this brief historical overview has aimed simply to highlight several important principles that will be discussed in subsequent chapters. gross racial discrimination alone has never been sufficient to prevent blacks from earning a living and bettering themselves...
pt: the relative color blindness of the market accounts for much of the hostility towards it. markets have a notorious lack of respect for privilege, race, and class structure.
chapter 3 race and wage regulation
concerns the davis-bacon act...makes this point: that wave of unemployment, together with resulting complaints, ultimately strengthened the hand of unions pressing for the enactment of a prevailing wage law at the federal level.
effects of the davis-bacon act
d-b exemplifies collusion between a seller (labor) and contractors (buyers) on federal construction projects to insure payment to workers of a minimum ("prevailing") wage.
d-b wages are higher than market wages...
(at some point herein this chapter, i considered my situation, my experience bidding on jobs where the taxpayers money pays...wuppdr....msda...housing rehabs etc...either low income or low interest (low as 1%)...)
cases of davis-bacon exclusion
the u.s. dept of housing urban development finances housing rehabs...here in michigan...the wuppdr/msda...dunno if that is only state taxes or both or only....
think of it this way...we bid on a job....we know the job is going to be awarded. you do not KNOW that usually. it is, a gamble. w/gov't money involved, you KNOW the job is going to be awarded and regardless, the cost is more....that's what i was trying to think/rethink moments ago...
constitutional test of the davis-bacon act
1993....brazier construction....this is really interesting, the idea behind this...that a statute may have discriminatory purpose even it if it not expressed....so? licensing acts? surely ALL of them had at their heart discriminatory roots...a way to hinder competition, rather than allow the free market of competition. so let's all go occupy wall street and demand more freakin gov't intervetion! gaaaaaaa!
minimum wages
begins back around 1923, etc. supreme court decision...adkins v children's hospital...a wage law held unconstitutional...another one held constitutional.
minimum wage effects
studies....one study, card/krueger...came under instant professional scrutiny and has been thoroughly discredited. one realizes that just as laws had discriminatory roots, so too have the opposing swing of the pendulum.....there are several pages of statistics....
williams argues that minimum wage laws have negative effects on people, youth and untrained, unskilled.
minimum wage and racial disrimination
the idea that is is sometimes necessary forsome individuals to lower their price in order to sell their services offends the sensibilities of many people who support the minimum wage law as a matter of moral conviction motivated by conern for equity in the distribution of income. the ole pendulum....swinging the other way...or having enough masses of peoples w/sufficient idle time that they can occupy a thought and promote it.
fashionable ideology.
visits south africa for an example. heh! some of the things we have done! white racist unions recognized that equal-pay-for-equal-work laws (a variation of the minimum wage laws) would lower the cost of racial discrimination and thus improve their competitive position in the labor market.
dunno if it is right here in 3...well...it is...but IN the chapter he illustrates how the price for all concerned rises as discriminatory wage laws go into effect.
intentions versus effects
south africa....he develops a nonracial example to illustrate the effects of such 'price-setting'. filet mignon and chuck steak. if both cost $9/pound, what will you buy? what will the majority buy? if one is honest?
makes this point: this line of reasoning gains additional weight when we consider that blacks experienced less unemployment at times of far greater racial discrimination.
and he certainly showed that with the examples from history, both here and around the world.
american union support for minimum wage laws
here it is, i believe...where he shows how prices rise for all concerned...makes this point, again: "effects of a policy are by no means necessarily determined by its intentions
ptthe efffect of the minimum wage is to price that worker's competition out of the market
oh you bet. the union tried desparately here to get one company to go union...a larger company that won a lot of work--remember, when the taxpayer dollar pays for the job, cost goes up...plus....the job WILL BE DONE...anyway...the union lost. pound sand.
u.s. business support for minimum wage laws
to protect themselves from competition...and he uses an example of jfk...other examples...
historically, for example, the minimum wage law for very little political support from low-wage states, especially those in the south.
labor market myths
1. if teenagers are allowed to work at subminimum wages, they will be employed while their parents for unemployed.
2.the employment problem faced by youths and others is that there are simply no jobs available.
3. many people are unemployed because they have few skills and other qualifications.
(he goes again to the time of slavery, chattel slavery, instead of what we have now, slavery w/weekends off...wherein slaves were making it, though they had little to no formal education)
4. widespread automation causes high unemployment rates among a large sector of the labor force.
5. higher minimum wages give workers increased purchasing power that in turn sustains high employment.
(too many assumptions built into this myth.)
6. the minimum wage law is an antipoverty weapon.
(this is like the bible verse, love never fails. if this were true, the world would be a different place)
7.the poor benefit most from minimum wage increases.
point: the minimum wage law has imposed incalculable harm on the most disadvantaged members of our society.
the minimum wage vision
"we observe people who share identical goals advocating different public policies, and quite often the policies produce unintended consequences."
baffling, isn't it? all those people in suits and nice dresses, even teeth, every last one of them, the sun in their eyes and no need to raise a hand to shade themselves? baffling indeed.
"one question we might ask is, how can honest and intelligent people, w/o a self-serving purpose, arrive at polar-opposite policy conclusions?"
i'll offer an answer: demon-possession.
the view that ignores or perceives no response to changes in wages is what economists call zero elasticity of response.
invisible victims
self-interest (demons like to be in control and cackle like, well like demons when their plans work.)
"the real problem is that workers are not so much underpaid as they are under-skilled."
yes. spot on. this is my #1 problem as a "used to employ" people employer. one, no skills....two, no interest in learning skills. when you show a man how to do step a, b, and c, and gamble and show him steps d, e , and f on days one and two, and then...have to show him those same steps for each of the following two weeks, that man has no intention of learning. he is there taking up space until friday. find another. you do. you repeat the process. you find another. you repeat. eventually, you go it alone...or, you wish you lived closer to the border....i can see canada from my back door.
chapter 4 occupational and business licensing
"some 800 occupations are licensed in at least one state."
read a newspaper article, me, once, a tattoo-artist on record in the article, lamenting that the state had not put more effort forth....apparently they are not licensed here, as yet. start a guild!
"the state of georgia used to require those who seek to be a commercial photographer to pass a wassermann test for syphilis."
(heard the other day that to qualify for a loan one needed a sperm count.)
"they have state police powers at their disposal to enforce concurrence and compliance among practitioners." i'll go one step further and say they are a regulatory troika, having all three powers of gov't in their reins.
suggests "probably the primary intent of licensing is to raise the incomes of incumbent practitioners." probably.
taxicab licensure
this is an interesting section, new york city cabs...and "liveries" and "gypsy cabs"....to the tune of 30,000...haas act of 1937 (when that fdr guy was prez and uncle joe stalin was our buddy) 13,566 medallions (to cab) were issued. and they sell for ungawdly sums today. originals for $10...2010: $603,000.
he makes the point that at 6% interest in the bank, 500-grand would earn 30-grand a year...so...assumption being there is that much profit in the cab. the gypsy cabs go where the "regular" cabs do not....and then some.
the entrepreneurial response to the taxi monopoly
already mentioned some of it above....but it is dangerous....going where the regular cabs do not...."since 1990, 180 drivers--an average o over two a month--have been killed while on duty according to the n.y.c. taxi and limousine commission."
taxicab operations in other cities at the 37% mark on the kindle
the sketch about denver reads like orwell's 1984...in denver there is something called PUC...
"starting in 1946, and as late as 1995, every application to operate a new taxi company in the city of denver was denied."
so much for benevolent gov't, hey? who can defend this/these kind of practices? nobody! nobody can defend this! the trajedy is that the newspapers and jq-public allows it to happen....we're all to freakin busy trying to make a dollar to attend meetings!
he illustrates an action that went through the courts....shows an "interrogatory" sent/used by PUC to intimidate and hinder those seeking life, liberty, and happiness. bizarre. orwellian! colorado!
highlights washington d.c. that is, ironically (they had some of the most draconian gun laws on the books) has some of the better/freer/more open/more liberty-ish laws regarding taxis.
other regulatory reforms
minneapolis...taxis number 343...
oh, here it is...about washington d.c....the taxicab industry in washington, d.c.
(heh! this is an aside, but the pretty boy reservoir, in maryland...that likely provides drinking water for our most holy servants there in the area has stringent laws governing the use of the water...gas-powered boats are not allowed. in iowa, at the coralville reservoir once we witnessed thousands of dead fish on the shore...this after the rainfall washed the farmers' fields into the watershed...someone said had i had a chem-test prior to moving to iowa, another after, i'd test radioactive...but then....the coralville reservoir does not service our servants in d.c.)
i suspect the laws that govern taxis in d.c. are like those governing the water usage....do as i say, not as i do. bastards, every last man jack one of them, including nasty pelosi.
a foreign experience with taxi deregulation
ireland.
jitney services
some historical background that is interesting...a regional story from houston...
new york city van services
heh! the occupy wall streeters are, IN NO WAY, protesting things like this....city monoply/control of tax/bus service...union marriage w/politicians...no sir...occupy wall street does not have its sight on this at all...i'd hazard they are willing dupes of those they're yelling about.
basically, covers the orwellian, draconian schemes that politicians and the incumbent--those who work the field already--have used to keep out competition.
racial effects of occupational and business licensing
licensing of cosmetologists
cites a study from stuart dorsey....missouri/illinois...
the case of monique landers
high school girl in wichita who was a good student, did what was asked of her, won an award, started a business--braiding hair--and the city jumped on her ass and put her out of business.
orwellian.
orwellian.
yet...the occupy wall streeters won't mention this if they ever find the time to articulate their petition.
the cornwell case
other adverse effects of licensing
one study showed there is more electrocution...amateurs..."do-it-to-yourselfers" do it to themselves, get electrocuted...because they're too cheap to call a professional. (i've seen 22 years of it.)
he fails to mention another aspect that i have witnessed...and that is the hoity-toity hires the unlicensed man because they know they can get the work done cheaply. simply because an individual holds a piece of paper from gov't in his or her hands saying one is "licensed" does not a moral person make. nor knowledgeable...given the "take our class and pass the test!" guaranteed!
(this is incredible! there are situations documented here that are nothing less than....grrrrrr! aggravating and angering!.....update...the scenario williams describes has a happy ending, or sorts. freedom cabs now, or at the time of the writing, exists and works for a living. 39% kindle.)
saw this title in a column from thomas sowell...best of, or recommended. dunno about tom, but i figure to give it a look see:
1st sentence, preface:
racial issues often give rise to high emotions but little understanding.
a sentence later: my purpose in writing this book is to apply simple economic analysis to some of the problems that black americans have faced in the past and still face today.
sounds good...sounds like a winner...williams is nothing, if not easy to understand in his columns. this appears so as well. the man wants to be understood. we should all endeavor for that understanding.
my copy is the kindle edition...or one that can be read on the kindle...
i'm at the chapter 2 beginning, 6% on the kindle.
prior to that, the preface & chapter one.
a few points he has made:
one of the tings that economics brings to the analysis is explicit recognition that people will not engage in activities--including racial discrimination--no matter what the cost.
interesting point...we're all selfish at heart.
he shall analyze methods a discriminator uses to reduce them.
he shall argue that free-market resource allocation as opposed to allocation on political grounds, is in the interests of minorities and/or less-preferred individuals.
point: policy is often evaluated in terms of intentions rather than effects.
compassionate policy requires dispassionate analysis. policy intentions and policy effects often bear no relationship to one another.
he makes use of a great quote from frederick douglas' speech, "what the black man wants"
point: the thrust of the argument in the chapters that follow is that the most difficult problems black americans face, particularly those who are poor, cannot adequately be explained by current racial discrimination. problems are self-inflicted, or, as his focus will show, a result of government.
(this should be an interesting read for me, as i am self-employed, and here, along w/gov't regulation and interference in my trade, i experience a kind of...small town politics...that is not policitics unless it be the politics of personality...my wages might be the lowest around--when your neighbor tells you, you'll never work in this town again, you sit up and listen. course, you already know exactly what he's talking about...so...i read it w/that in mind)
chapter 2 is discrimination a complete barrier to economic mobility?
the united states does not own the monopoly on discrimination. in fact, with some of the examples from recent history, one should ask why the guilt trip? there are some examples he provides. across the globe, we are efficient at killing those we dislike.
he goes on to write about the chinese...and in the next paragraph writes about "numerous measures have been undertaken to reduce the economic predominance of the chinese in southeast asia." despite anti-chinese discriminatory laws, there is while evasion of the law.
he wants to establish the widespread existence.....he makes the point that minorities, despite discrimination, excel...economic progress can occur in the absence of what is traditionally considered political power.
at the 11% mark...
williams has several pages from the historical record of the united states...slaves finding ways and means to make their life better. there's quite a collection here, all of it interesting, like this doctor jack in nashville, whose patients petitioned the state legislature to exempt him from the act of 1831.
new orleans, it sounds like, had quite a number of slaves and free-men, all of them making their life better, despite whatever setbacks and obstacles were thrown in their way.
with their success, "their" being the generic expression, came the call by those w/liberty to hinder and obstruct those seeking to better themselves. like we have today.
prior, he listed some laws in the western states, upheld by our supreme court, that discriminated against the oriental man...saying he could not own this that or the other.
(you know...i had thought at one time that the people from way back in the day valued freedom and liberty more so than today. looking at the record that williams provides, i'd say, not so. not so.)
heh! there's some stuff from the papers of the day, new orleans...one from 1855 memphis...a citizen complaining "to permit a negro to hire his own time send a slave to ruin as property, debauches a slave, and makes him a strolling agent of discontent, disorder, and immorality among our slave population."
try to imagine reading that in your daily as you held it up before you...did you snap the paper at the charge and resolve to make changes?
williams discusses licensing as a strategy of exclusion, something that has affected me very much so. when one travels over 500 miles (in-state) to plead his case before a board of unelected, unaccountable, yet powerful bureaucrats (a regulatory troika wherein they have all three powers at their flippant disposal), and when one tries to inform others and receives the kind of reception that teachers must receive on the first day of school...and most days thereafter....education, after all, being the only thing an american is willing to pay for, and hopes he don't get....where was i?
he records a few "help wanted" ads....irish need not apply. lankton, in his book, hallowed ground about the copper country's mining legacy has recorded, too, the discrimination against the finns.
williams sub-titles a section: licensing as a strategy of exclusion
yes. very much so. occupation licensing also happened when those swarthy europeans came across the pond.
too, john taylor gatto, in his book, an underground history of american education mentions occupational licensing...here i think among other jobs, he had in mind unlicensed pedlars of hot dogs on the coney island boardwalk, yet the point he makes is that kings and queens of europe granted the "right to work" in occupations, and here in the land of the free, we have followed suite, granting the powers (the regulatory troika, remember) of gov't to unelected bureaucrats. isn't that fascism?
williams writes this brief historical overview has aimed simply to highlight several important principles that will be discussed in subsequent chapters. gross racial discrimination alone has never been sufficient to prevent blacks from earning a living and bettering themselves...
pt: the relative color blindness of the market accounts for much of the hostility towards it. markets have a notorious lack of respect for privilege, race, and class structure.
chapter 3 race and wage regulation
concerns the davis-bacon act...makes this point: that wave of unemployment, together with resulting complaints, ultimately strengthened the hand of unions pressing for the enactment of a prevailing wage law at the federal level.
effects of the davis-bacon act
d-b exemplifies collusion between a seller (labor) and contractors (buyers) on federal construction projects to insure payment to workers of a minimum ("prevailing") wage.
d-b wages are higher than market wages...
(at some point herein this chapter, i considered my situation, my experience bidding on jobs where the taxpayers money pays...wuppdr....msda...housing rehabs etc...either low income or low interest (low as 1%)...)
cases of davis-bacon exclusion
the u.s. dept of housing urban development finances housing rehabs...here in michigan...the wuppdr/msda...dunno if that is only state taxes or both or only....
think of it this way...we bid on a job....we know the job is going to be awarded. you do not KNOW that usually. it is, a gamble. w/gov't money involved, you KNOW the job is going to be awarded and regardless, the cost is more....that's what i was trying to think/rethink moments ago...
constitutional test of the davis-bacon act
1993....brazier construction....this is really interesting, the idea behind this...that a statute may have discriminatory purpose even it if it not expressed....so? licensing acts? surely ALL of them had at their heart discriminatory roots...a way to hinder competition, rather than allow the free market of competition. so let's all go occupy wall street and demand more freakin gov't intervetion! gaaaaaaa!
minimum wages
begins back around 1923, etc. supreme court decision...adkins v children's hospital...a wage law held unconstitutional...another one held constitutional.
minimum wage effects
studies....one study, card/krueger...came under instant professional scrutiny and has been thoroughly discredited. one realizes that just as laws had discriminatory roots, so too have the opposing swing of the pendulum.....there are several pages of statistics....
williams argues that minimum wage laws have negative effects on people, youth and untrained, unskilled.
minimum wage and racial disrimination
the idea that is is sometimes necessary forsome individuals to lower their price in order to sell their services offends the sensibilities of many people who support the minimum wage law as a matter of moral conviction motivated by conern for equity in the distribution of income. the ole pendulum....swinging the other way...or having enough masses of peoples w/sufficient idle time that they can occupy a thought and promote it.
fashionable ideology.
visits south africa for an example. heh! some of the things we have done! white racist unions recognized that equal-pay-for-equal-work laws (a variation of the minimum wage laws) would lower the cost of racial discrimination and thus improve their competitive position in the labor market.
dunno if it is right here in 3...well...it is...but IN the chapter he illustrates how the price for all concerned rises as discriminatory wage laws go into effect.
intentions versus effects
south africa....he develops a nonracial example to illustrate the effects of such 'price-setting'. filet mignon and chuck steak. if both cost $9/pound, what will you buy? what will the majority buy? if one is honest?
makes this point: this line of reasoning gains additional weight when we consider that blacks experienced less unemployment at times of far greater racial discrimination.
and he certainly showed that with the examples from history, both here and around the world.
american union support for minimum wage laws
here it is, i believe...where he shows how prices rise for all concerned...makes this point, again: "effects of a policy are by no means necessarily determined by its intentions
ptthe efffect of the minimum wage is to price that worker's competition out of the market
oh you bet. the union tried desparately here to get one company to go union...a larger company that won a lot of work--remember, when the taxpayer dollar pays for the job, cost goes up...plus....the job WILL BE DONE...anyway...the union lost. pound sand.
u.s. business support for minimum wage laws
to protect themselves from competition...and he uses an example of jfk...other examples...
historically, for example, the minimum wage law for very little political support from low-wage states, especially those in the south.
labor market myths
1. if teenagers are allowed to work at subminimum wages, they will be employed while their parents for unemployed.
2.the employment problem faced by youths and others is that there are simply no jobs available.
3. many people are unemployed because they have few skills and other qualifications.
(he goes again to the time of slavery, chattel slavery, instead of what we have now, slavery w/weekends off...wherein slaves were making it, though they had little to no formal education)
4. widespread automation causes high unemployment rates among a large sector of the labor force.
5. higher minimum wages give workers increased purchasing power that in turn sustains high employment.
(too many assumptions built into this myth.)
6. the minimum wage law is an antipoverty weapon.
(this is like the bible verse, love never fails. if this were true, the world would be a different place)
7.the poor benefit most from minimum wage increases.
point: the minimum wage law has imposed incalculable harm on the most disadvantaged members of our society.
the minimum wage vision
"we observe people who share identical goals advocating different public policies, and quite often the policies produce unintended consequences."
baffling, isn't it? all those people in suits and nice dresses, even teeth, every last one of them, the sun in their eyes and no need to raise a hand to shade themselves? baffling indeed.
"one question we might ask is, how can honest and intelligent people, w/o a self-serving purpose, arrive at polar-opposite policy conclusions?"
i'll offer an answer: demon-possession.
the view that ignores or perceives no response to changes in wages is what economists call zero elasticity of response.
invisible victims
self-interest (demons like to be in control and cackle like, well like demons when their plans work.)
"the real problem is that workers are not so much underpaid as they are under-skilled."
yes. spot on. this is my #1 problem as a "used to employ" people employer. one, no skills....two, no interest in learning skills. when you show a man how to do step a, b, and c, and gamble and show him steps d, e , and f on days one and two, and then...have to show him those same steps for each of the following two weeks, that man has no intention of learning. he is there taking up space until friday. find another. you do. you repeat the process. you find another. you repeat. eventually, you go it alone...or, you wish you lived closer to the border....i can see canada from my back door.
chapter 4 occupational and business licensing
"some 800 occupations are licensed in at least one state."
read a newspaper article, me, once, a tattoo-artist on record in the article, lamenting that the state had not put more effort forth....apparently they are not licensed here, as yet. start a guild!
"the state of georgia used to require those who seek to be a commercial photographer to pass a wassermann test for syphilis."
(heard the other day that to qualify for a loan one needed a sperm count.)
"they have state police powers at their disposal to enforce concurrence and compliance among practitioners." i'll go one step further and say they are a regulatory troika, having all three powers of gov't in their reins.
suggests "probably the primary intent of licensing is to raise the incomes of incumbent practitioners." probably.
taxicab licensure
this is an interesting section, new york city cabs...and "liveries" and "gypsy cabs"....to the tune of 30,000...haas act of 1937 (when that fdr guy was prez and uncle joe stalin was our buddy) 13,566 medallions (to cab) were issued. and they sell for ungawdly sums today. originals for $10...2010: $603,000.
he makes the point that at 6% interest in the bank, 500-grand would earn 30-grand a year...so...assumption being there is that much profit in the cab. the gypsy cabs go where the "regular" cabs do not....and then some.
the entrepreneurial response to the taxi monopoly
already mentioned some of it above....but it is dangerous....going where the regular cabs do not...."since 1990, 180 drivers--an average o over two a month--have been killed while on duty according to the n.y.c. taxi and limousine commission."
taxicab operations in other cities at the 37% mark on the kindle
the sketch about denver reads like orwell's 1984...in denver there is something called PUC...
"starting in 1946, and as late as 1995, every application to operate a new taxi company in the city of denver was denied."
so much for benevolent gov't, hey? who can defend this/these kind of practices? nobody! nobody can defend this! the trajedy is that the newspapers and jq-public allows it to happen....we're all to freakin busy trying to make a dollar to attend meetings!
he illustrates an action that went through the courts....shows an "interrogatory" sent/used by PUC to intimidate and hinder those seeking life, liberty, and happiness. bizarre. orwellian! colorado!
highlights washington d.c. that is, ironically (they had some of the most draconian gun laws on the books) has some of the better/freer/more open/more liberty-ish laws regarding taxis.
other regulatory reforms
minneapolis...taxis number 343...
oh, here it is...about washington d.c....the taxicab industry in washington, d.c.
(heh! this is an aside, but the pretty boy reservoir, in maryland...that likely provides drinking water for our most holy servants there in the area has stringent laws governing the use of the water...gas-powered boats are not allowed. in iowa, at the coralville reservoir once we witnessed thousands of dead fish on the shore...this after the rainfall washed the farmers' fields into the watershed...someone said had i had a chem-test prior to moving to iowa, another after, i'd test radioactive...but then....the coralville reservoir does not service our servants in d.c.)
i suspect the laws that govern taxis in d.c. are like those governing the water usage....do as i say, not as i do. bastards, every last man jack one of them, including nasty pelosi.
a foreign experience with taxi deregulation
ireland.
jitney services
some historical background that is interesting...a regional story from houston...
new york city van services
heh! the occupy wall streeters are, IN NO WAY, protesting things like this....city monoply/control of tax/bus service...union marriage w/politicians...no sir...occupy wall street does not have its sight on this at all...i'd hazard they are willing dupes of those they're yelling about.
basically, covers the orwellian, draconian schemes that politicians and the incumbent--those who work the field already--have used to keep out competition.
racial effects of occupational and business licensing
licensing of cosmetologists
cites a study from stuart dorsey....missouri/illinois...
the case of monique landers
high school girl in wichita who was a good student, did what was asked of her, won an award, started a business--braiding hair--and the city jumped on her ass and put her out of business.
orwellian.
orwellian.
yet...the occupy wall streeters won't mention this if they ever find the time to articulate their petition.
the cornwell case
other adverse effects of licensing
one study showed there is more electrocution...amateurs..."do-it-to-yourselfers" do it to themselves, get electrocuted...because they're too cheap to call a professional. (i've seen 22 years of it.)
he fails to mention another aspect that i have witnessed...and that is the hoity-toity hires the unlicensed man because they know they can get the work done cheaply. simply because an individual holds a piece of paper from gov't in his or her hands saying one is "licensed" does not a moral person make. nor knowledgeable...given the "take our class and pass the test!" guaranteed!
April 4, 2022
This was an incredible read! It was eye-opening and informative.
“The underlying premise of this book is that racial discriminatory preferences do not explain all they are purported to explain. This is not to say that racial discrimination does not exist and has no effects. The policy-relevant question is how much of what we see can be explained by discrimination alone and how much other phenomena?“ (p. 135)
Williams documents very well the history of the successes and failures of economic racial discrimination. This book is a must read for anyone who accepts the narrative or who is unaware of how to think about the accusation that loan denials, lending and hiring practices, incarceration rates, and other disparities between blacks and whites are lingering evidence of systemic racial injustice.
“The underlying premise of this book is that racial discriminatory preferences do not explain all they are purported to explain. This is not to say that racial discrimination does not exist and has no effects. The policy-relevant question is how much of what we see can be explained by discrimination alone and how much other phenomena?“ (p. 135)
Williams documents very well the history of the successes and failures of economic racial discrimination. This book is a must read for anyone who accepts the narrative or who is unaware of how to think about the accusation that loan denials, lending and hiring practices, incarceration rates, and other disparities between blacks and whites are lingering evidence of systemic racial injustice.
June 18, 2020
This wasn't exactly what I was looking for in reading material involving race but it turned out to be very interesting anyway. I downloaded this on my Kindle so I'm not sure if this is a textbook but it definitely reads like one. So beware of that. It was a little tough to get through at spots because textbooks have always been difficult for me. Worth the read though for sure!
March 30, 2019
Another well thought out and well written book by Walter E. Williams about the economics of race from the past, before and after slavery was abolished, until recent history. He makes a case for free-market resource allocation over political allocation being better for minorities. He also debunks common myths about the labor market and shows how minimum wage laws harm the most disadvantaged members of society. He states the the real problem is a lack of skills resulting in lower pay for minorities that occurs when they are blocked, often due to restrictive licensing and regulation pushed by those who already have the jobs, from getting the training that would help them move up. Great read if you are interested in how laws, regulations, licensing, and similar methods have been used throughout our history to exclude certain groups of people, usually minorities, from getting better jobs with higher pay.
February 11, 2017
So many relevant topics to today's discussions, a great read for anyone interested in economics. "Everybody likes a monopoly in what they sell and competition in what they buy." "The more difficult problem lies in the political arena: how to reduce or eliminate the power of interest groups to use governments to exclude?"
August 13, 2011
So far I think this is an excellent book. Tom...are you reading this?
January 1, 2012
last book read for 2011, #74
November 13, 2025
Walter E. Williams’ (1936 - 2020) „Race & Economics“ stellt die provokante Kernthese auf, dass nicht der Markt diskriminiert, sondern der Staat Minderheiten behindert. Kapitalismus, so Williams, sei von Natur aus farbenblind – Leistung zählt, nicht Herkunft. Stattdessen seien es gut gemeinte staatliche Eingriffe wie der Mindestlohn, die Geringqualifizierte aus dem Arbeitsmarkt drängen, sowie exzessive Regulierungen und Lizenzpflichten, die als künstliche Eintrittsbarrieren dienen und Schwarzen Unternehmern den Weg verbauen.
Williams unterscheidet scharf zwischen persönlichem Rassismus, den er nicht leugnet, und rationalem ökonomischem Handeln, wobei er argumentiert, dass der freie Markt Vorurteile „teuer“ und damit unrentabel macht. Er kommt zu dem Schluss, dass viele der heutigen sozioökonomischen Probleme in der schwarzen Gemeinschaft, wie der Zerfall der Familienstruktur, weniger auf aktuelle systemische Diskriminierung zurückzuführen sind als vielmehr auf die unbeabsichtigten, negativen Konsequenzen von Sozialprogrammen (Welfare State) und interne kulturelle Faktoren.
Die fundamentale Kritik an dieser libertären Position setzt jedoch genau bei Williams’ Grundannahme der „Vertragsfreiheit“ an und hält sie für eine Fiktion, die Machtasymmetrien ignoriert. Ein einzelner Arbeitnehmer, der seine Arbeitskraft verkaufen muss, um zu überleben, ist nie ein gleichberechtigter Verhandlungspartner eines Unternehmens; seine „Freiheit“ besteht lediglich darin, die Bedingungen des Stärkeren zu akzeptieren oder zu verhungern. Aus dieser Perspektive sind Gewerkschaften und ein Mindestlohn keine „Marktverzerrungen“, sondern notwendige Instrumente zur Herstellung von Waffengleichheit, die einen fairen Verhandlungsprozess erst ermöglichen.
Ein zweites Kernargument gegen die prinzipielle Ablehnung von Regulierungen ist das Problem der „Externalitäten“ – also der Kosten, die der Markt systematisch auf die Allgemeinheit abwälzt. Ein unreguliertes Unternehmen maximiert seinen Profit logischerweise, indem es Kosten externalisiert, sei es durch Umweltverschmutzung (die Allgemeinheit zahlt die Reinigung) oder durch die Inkaufnahme von Gesundheitsrisiken für Arbeiter und Kunden. Staatliche Regulierungen – wie Umwelt- oder Arbeitsschutzgesetze – werden hier als der notwendige Schutz öffentlicher Güter vor den destruktiven Profitinteressen Einzelner gesehen, die der Markt nicht von sich aus bereitstellt.
Drittens wird historisch und sozial argumentiert, dass ein völlig unregulierter Markt zu einem „Race to the Bottom“ (Abwärtswettlauf) führt, der seine eigenen Grundlagen zerstört. Ohne Lohnuntergrenzen oder kollektiven Schutz zwingt der Wettbewerb die Unternehmen in eine Spirale aus sinkenden Löhnen und schlechteren Bedingungen, was zu einer Verarmung der Bevölkerung, einer Aushöhlung der Kaufkraft und extremer Vermögenskonzentration führt. Die Einführung sozialer Standards und starker Gewerkschaften, so die Kritik, habe den Kapitalismus historisch nicht geschwächt, sondern ihn (etwa nach 1929) vor sich selbst gerettet und jene stabile Massenkaufkraft geschaffen, die er zum Überleben braucht.
Williams’ Argumentation bleibt jedoch deshalb so wirkmächtig, weil sie die moralische Sprache der Gleichheit mit der ökonomischen Sprache der Effizienz kurzschließt – und damit ein Freiheitsversprechen formuliert, das gerade in seiner Einfachheit fasziniert.
Die Geschichte scheint zu zeigen, dass Kapitalismus und Regulierung kein Gegensatz, sondern ein symbiotisches Paar sind – das eine ohne das andere verkommt zur Ideologie.
Williams unterscheidet scharf zwischen persönlichem Rassismus, den er nicht leugnet, und rationalem ökonomischem Handeln, wobei er argumentiert, dass der freie Markt Vorurteile „teuer“ und damit unrentabel macht. Er kommt zu dem Schluss, dass viele der heutigen sozioökonomischen Probleme in der schwarzen Gemeinschaft, wie der Zerfall der Familienstruktur, weniger auf aktuelle systemische Diskriminierung zurückzuführen sind als vielmehr auf die unbeabsichtigten, negativen Konsequenzen von Sozialprogrammen (Welfare State) und interne kulturelle Faktoren.
Die fundamentale Kritik an dieser libertären Position setzt jedoch genau bei Williams’ Grundannahme der „Vertragsfreiheit“ an und hält sie für eine Fiktion, die Machtasymmetrien ignoriert. Ein einzelner Arbeitnehmer, der seine Arbeitskraft verkaufen muss, um zu überleben, ist nie ein gleichberechtigter Verhandlungspartner eines Unternehmens; seine „Freiheit“ besteht lediglich darin, die Bedingungen des Stärkeren zu akzeptieren oder zu verhungern. Aus dieser Perspektive sind Gewerkschaften und ein Mindestlohn keine „Marktverzerrungen“, sondern notwendige Instrumente zur Herstellung von Waffengleichheit, die einen fairen Verhandlungsprozess erst ermöglichen.
Ein zweites Kernargument gegen die prinzipielle Ablehnung von Regulierungen ist das Problem der „Externalitäten“ – also der Kosten, die der Markt systematisch auf die Allgemeinheit abwälzt. Ein unreguliertes Unternehmen maximiert seinen Profit logischerweise, indem es Kosten externalisiert, sei es durch Umweltverschmutzung (die Allgemeinheit zahlt die Reinigung) oder durch die Inkaufnahme von Gesundheitsrisiken für Arbeiter und Kunden. Staatliche Regulierungen – wie Umwelt- oder Arbeitsschutzgesetze – werden hier als der notwendige Schutz öffentlicher Güter vor den destruktiven Profitinteressen Einzelner gesehen, die der Markt nicht von sich aus bereitstellt.
Drittens wird historisch und sozial argumentiert, dass ein völlig unregulierter Markt zu einem „Race to the Bottom“ (Abwärtswettlauf) führt, der seine eigenen Grundlagen zerstört. Ohne Lohnuntergrenzen oder kollektiven Schutz zwingt der Wettbewerb die Unternehmen in eine Spirale aus sinkenden Löhnen und schlechteren Bedingungen, was zu einer Verarmung der Bevölkerung, einer Aushöhlung der Kaufkraft und extremer Vermögenskonzentration führt. Die Einführung sozialer Standards und starker Gewerkschaften, so die Kritik, habe den Kapitalismus historisch nicht geschwächt, sondern ihn (etwa nach 1929) vor sich selbst gerettet und jene stabile Massenkaufkraft geschaffen, die er zum Überleben braucht.
Williams’ Argumentation bleibt jedoch deshalb so wirkmächtig, weil sie die moralische Sprache der Gleichheit mit der ökonomischen Sprache der Effizienz kurzschließt – und damit ein Freiheitsversprechen formuliert, das gerade in seiner Einfachheit fasziniert.
Die Geschichte scheint zu zeigen, dass Kapitalismus und Regulierung kein Gegensatz, sondern ein symbiotisches Paar sind – das eine ohne das andere verkommt zur Ideologie.
January 17, 2022
What went wrong with the subprime lending bubble in 2008? Why are their food deserts in inner cities? What will be the fallout from the BLM riots in major cities? How will the teacher unions harm the students they’re responsible for? What will big government solutions from the pandemic result in?
“Everyone loves a monopoly when they’re selling and a competitive market when they’re buying.”
A solid argument for a free market approach to race relations. The less government regulation and union interference there is, the better all races will do. Remove the minimum wage and allow all people to work for what they are willing to work for, and suddenly employers cannot hire based on racial preferences. Instead they will choose the people who will make them the most money. Race simply becomes less of an issue.
Higher crime rates drastically affect the cost of doing business in an area, thus restaurants and grocery stores will charge more. Hiring security guards to stand in for ingrained moral and social obligations means those costs will be passed on to the consumer.
Lending rates are directly linked to the risks of lending to people who may not be able to pay the bank back. Requiring subprime mortgages of banks actually forces black owned banks out of the lending game.
Final analysis: good intentions and big government solutions always are anti-people. Special interest groups only serve themselves not the people. Those in a special interest group (like a union) harm themselves and the community by their demands while also trampling on those who are not part of their collective.
“Everyone loves a monopoly when they’re selling and a competitive market when they’re buying.”
A solid argument for a free market approach to race relations. The less government regulation and union interference there is, the better all races will do. Remove the minimum wage and allow all people to work for what they are willing to work for, and suddenly employers cannot hire based on racial preferences. Instead they will choose the people who will make them the most money. Race simply becomes less of an issue.
Higher crime rates drastically affect the cost of doing business in an area, thus restaurants and grocery stores will charge more. Hiring security guards to stand in for ingrained moral and social obligations means those costs will be passed on to the consumer.
Lending rates are directly linked to the risks of lending to people who may not be able to pay the bank back. Requiring subprime mortgages of banks actually forces black owned banks out of the lending game.
Final analysis: good intentions and big government solutions always are anti-people. Special interest groups only serve themselves not the people. Those in a special interest group (like a union) harm themselves and the community by their demands while also trampling on those who are not part of their collective.
July 20, 2020
I dusted this off in light of the current racial unrest. Critical Theory is carrying the day in the cultural discourse, but is it the best explanation? Williams makes a thoughtful case for why blacks have not fared as well. Biggest takeaways are well-meant policies that wound up doing catastrophic damage to the black community. The biggest offenders were minimum wage laws and barrier-to-entry regulations. Here's a summary of my understanding. African Americans have a history of oppression going all the way up to the highest tiers of government. Slavery. Jim Crow. Segregation. Finally they won recognition as full citizens with the Civil Rights Act. The trouble is, they were still the poorest and most unskilled people group. Consequently they were less able to procure trade certificates to compete with established workers. Furthermore, because young blacks were less skilled than competitors of other races, they were passed over. This was a direct result of well-meaning but poorly considered minimum wages. The problem was compounded by economic policies that moldered the family unit, incentivized bad habits, and hindered hard work. This effectively fixed the black community at the lowest rung of society. The law of unintended consequences.
It's undeniable that African Americans have not flourished in America in spite of the Civil Rights Act. The reasons are complex, but Williams's ideas are worthy of consideration
It's undeniable that African Americans have not flourished in America in spite of the Civil Rights Act. The reasons are complex, but Williams's ideas are worthy of consideration
March 11, 2021
More insight on mechanisms behind unequal outcomes
Short answer, it’s not racism.
Author goes through history of U.S. focussing on the laws and economic outcomes for Blacks (who are called various things depending on time period). Shows that in lead up to civil rights era, blacks were doing better vis a vis whites, with main down turn coming in New Deal legislation in 1930’s, continuing to present day (not ameliorated by 1960’s Great Society programs).
Main culprit argued to be a variety of laws enacted and enforced by government at behest of nascent labour union movements that restrict the ability of people to sell their labour at a price agreeable to the purchaser of said labour.
Things such as minimum wage laws, licensing requirements, diploma or degree requirements have disparate impacts on individuals (especially minorities) trying to better their lives.
When created, many of these factors were explicitly anti-Black, less so now, but the effects persist.
Heavily footnoted, so readers can check the analysis.
Short answer, it’s not racism.
Author goes through history of U.S. focussing on the laws and economic outcomes for Blacks (who are called various things depending on time period). Shows that in lead up to civil rights era, blacks were doing better vis a vis whites, with main down turn coming in New Deal legislation in 1930’s, continuing to present day (not ameliorated by 1960’s Great Society programs).
Main culprit argued to be a variety of laws enacted and enforced by government at behest of nascent labour union movements that restrict the ability of people to sell their labour at a price agreeable to the purchaser of said labour.
Things such as minimum wage laws, licensing requirements, diploma or degree requirements have disparate impacts on individuals (especially minorities) trying to better their lives.
When created, many of these factors were explicitly anti-Black, less so now, but the effects persist.
Heavily footnoted, so readers can check the analysis.
January 9, 2018
A well researched and challenging book
I highly enjoyed this book, as it has caused me to explore race and how we “get ahead” or stay stuck. The author seemed to have done a good deal of historical research, and explained common ideas about race and prejudice and how the barriers faced today are more than just prejudice (though to be clear I believe strongly these exist).
My background is in clinical social work and I currently practice psychotherapy. Though I don’t work with African Americans very often, I have observed that at times the economic structures in our nation can make it difficult for the disadvantaged to get ahead. The author makes some good points however I don’t agree with everything that is argued in this book, such as relying on free markets to fix everything or that unions and licensing laws are all to blame, however I liked that this book challenged me and caused me to think beyond the standard narrative.
I highly enjoyed this book, as it has caused me to explore race and how we “get ahead” or stay stuck. The author seemed to have done a good deal of historical research, and explained common ideas about race and prejudice and how the barriers faced today are more than just prejudice (though to be clear I believe strongly these exist).
My background is in clinical social work and I currently practice psychotherapy. Though I don’t work with African Americans very often, I have observed that at times the economic structures in our nation can make it difficult for the disadvantaged to get ahead. The author makes some good points however I don’t agree with everything that is argued in this book, such as relying on free markets to fix everything or that unions and licensing laws are all to blame, however I liked that this book challenged me and caused me to think beyond the standard narrative.
August 9, 2019
Definitely recommend. Gave a lot of clarity on areas in which there is actual systematic oppression in the 21st century US.
Main takeaways, in brief:
-in its zeal to emphasize the evils in American slavery/racism, my public schooling failed to provide adequate coverage of the nuances of the antebellum and Reconstruction era southern economies, and in so doing, deprived recognition to tens to hundreds of thousands of hard-working, enterprising slaves and freed men and women for their accomplishments
-the main obstacles to black economic advancement since the Civil War have been white-exclusive unions, government interventionism on behalf of unions, license laws, and sometimes-well-intended minimum wage laws, nearly all of which have been ignored or reinforced by the most prominent voices ostensibly pursuing equality.
Main takeaways, in brief:
-in its zeal to emphasize the evils in American slavery/racism, my public schooling failed to provide adequate coverage of the nuances of the antebellum and Reconstruction era southern economies, and in so doing, deprived recognition to tens to hundreds of thousands of hard-working, enterprising slaves and freed men and women for their accomplishments
-the main obstacles to black economic advancement since the Civil War have been white-exclusive unions, government interventionism on behalf of unions, license laws, and sometimes-well-intended minimum wage laws, nearly all of which have been ignored or reinforced by the most prominent voices ostensibly pursuing equality.
August 5, 2020
Great book that does what it sets out to do: explores the extent to which 'racial preferences' in society impact economics.
Among the great insights I gleaned here are these: the fact that wage or purchasing collusion for greater profits or lower prices tempts all races, and that such tokenary discrimination or selection as that based on skin color is sometimes an unavoidable shorthand engaged in by all persons, akin to picking the tall guy for your basketball team, if you are given no other information about his athletic abilities.
Had never heard of the New York Taxi Medallion system. The section on how such a monopoly is just bad economics (and induces cab drivers, even and especially minority drivers, to make choices as to who they can pick up based on appearance in connection with the danger of where they assume they'll be asked to go) was very interesting.
Among the great insights I gleaned here are these: the fact that wage or purchasing collusion for greater profits or lower prices tempts all races, and that such tokenary discrimination or selection as that based on skin color is sometimes an unavoidable shorthand engaged in by all persons, akin to picking the tall guy for your basketball team, if you are given no other information about his athletic abilities.
Had never heard of the New York Taxi Medallion system. The section on how such a monopoly is just bad economics (and induces cab drivers, even and especially minority drivers, to make choices as to who they can pick up based on appearance in connection with the danger of where they assume they'll be asked to go) was very interesting.
May 23, 2018
Dr. Williams, economist, has written an excellent book about the ever-volatile subjects of race and employment discrimination. From the historic record he details the racial and socioeconomic exclusionary intentions and effects of minimum wage laws, professional licensing and labor unions from their geneses. Includes loads of information about the anti-competitive objectives of many labor laws, acts, etc., the exclusion of blacks from practicing trades, prohibition of unskilled labor, prohibition of underbidding for income. Includes discussion of what discrimination as a concept actually is, and discussion as to whether under-representation = racism.
May 26, 2024
It was nice to get to take a class from Walter Williams again. Funnily enough, this book was published the year I enrolled in graduate school, and I can remember him making references in class to many of the same topics covered in this book. In particular, I wanted to read his thoughts on how occupational licensing and restrictions from entering occupations impacted the economic progress of Black workers and households, and the book includes a treasure trove of historical references. He does not spend as much time on the effects of de jure discrimination, especially with regard to banks, schools, and housing, but the economic analysis is direct and hard-hitting.
June 7, 2021
Excellent, excellent book. Well researched, well written, engaging, and an "easy" read in terms of understanding... even while Dr Williams challenges many widely-held assumptions about "systemic racism."
In this relatively short book, Walter Williams sheds light (through simple facts) on the reality behind many many assumed cases of systemic racism. (NOTE: he is not in any way a racists, nor supportive of racism or racial discrimination.)
I won't include any spoilers. Just Read This Book. :-D
In this relatively short book, Walter Williams sheds light (through simple facts) on the reality behind many many assumed cases of systemic racism. (NOTE: he is not in any way a racists, nor supportive of racism or racial discrimination.)
I won't include any spoilers. Just Read This Book. :-D
July 24, 2022
The late Walter Williams in persuasive fashion defends the ability of free markets to organically resolve racism’s weight on progress for minorities. In Williams’ view, it is government regulation that is the main impediment to financial advancement for blacks and other minorities.
I particularly found compelling the final chapter, in which Williams draws a much needed clarification over the difference between prejudice and racial preference.
The book is not too long and you learn a lot of history too, especially about the racist practices of early labor unions.
I particularly found compelling the final chapter, in which Williams draws a much needed clarification over the difference between prejudice and racial preference.
The book is not too long and you learn a lot of history too, especially about the racist practices of early labor unions.
July 3, 2020
Food for thoughts.
The book is easy to read and well written. It doesn’t deny the existence of race discrimination (or racism), it gives possible solutions to mitigate the racial preference from an economic stand-point. You may agree or disagree with the solutions suggested, but it is a book worth to be read with an open mindset because there are many counter-intuitive insights. I am still digesting part of the information since I am not an expert in economy.
The book is easy to read and well written. It doesn’t deny the existence of race discrimination (or racism), it gives possible solutions to mitigate the racial preference from an economic stand-point. You may agree or disagree with the solutions suggested, but it is a book worth to be read with an open mindset because there are many counter-intuitive insights. I am still digesting part of the information since I am not an expert in economy.
August 2, 2020
Unreal the vision sold in the world and the reality of the world. The world is so much better then what the news says it is and material such as this confirms that. This book is more about the policies in place and the net negative consequences they are having. You would figure people would tire of the same ol same ol but alas......
Until people can talk about hard truths things will not improve. Reading this book will help push constructive dialogue though.
Until people can talk about hard truths things will not improve. Reading this book will help push constructive dialogue though.
September 28, 2020
Great book that challenges the contemporary perspective that "race" is the central or largest contributing problem with the economic position of minorities, most notably blacks. The author raises the conversation out of the coffin of approaching social problems with emotional thinking to the experience of a truly vibrant society - logic and discussion based on facts. I've always enjoyed Walter William's discussions and commentary. This book did not disappoint.
December 1, 2021
Book explains how and why racial discrimination cannot always be the root cause of labor issues.
This book was very interesting. Walter provided historical data that support his points and questions. I was shocked to learn that many blacks could not join unions, but the field of trade still hired blacks for their cheap labor. Great book to be read for educational purposes to show relation between economics and race.
This book was very interesting. Walter provided historical data that support his points and questions. I was shocked to learn that many blacks could not join unions, but the field of trade still hired blacks for their cheap labor. Great book to be read for educational purposes to show relation between economics and race.
September 22, 2019
More people need to read studies of economics like this. The bold and broad claims about the reasons things are the way they are and how our government should fix them just don’t hold up under detailed analysis. In fact, we find that it is the policies that have created the problem in the first place.
June 21, 2020
A work of true critical thinking. In a world of extremes, it's always refreshing to hear from someone who has truly submerged themselves in the data, with a lifetime's worth of economic knowledge behind them. This one's definitely staying on my bookshelf.
August 17, 2020
Interesting perspectives, old data
Some interesting stuff about how minimum wages and unions may have been either unintentionally or actually intentionally descriminatory, but it doesn't discuss much beyond the 1960's, and the world has changed a lot since then.
Some interesting stuff about how minimum wages and unions may have been either unintentionally or actually intentionally descriminatory, but it doesn't discuss much beyond the 1960's, and the world has changed a lot since then.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews