How would the US react to the collapse of the Petro-dollar system?

The petrodollar system entails that oil can be bought or sold only in dollars.
As a result, most countries need (a) to acquire dollars through trade with the US and (b) to keep reserves of dollars in order to meet their oil demand. The net effect is to create global demand for dollars which is anchored in global demand for oil.

Global demand for dollars creates upward pressure on their value which protects (to some significant extent) against losses in purchasing power associated with inflation. This allows the US to pursue policies which might otherwise erode the value of the dollar and accrue large debts without foreign creditors losing confidence in the value of the repayments.

Countries which have attempted to leave the petrodollar system by trading oil in other currencies (Iraq and Libya) have shortly afterward been targeted by the US in military interventions. Some commentators have posited a connection, arguing that the real goals of US foreign policy are to protect the petrodollar system rather than to locate WMDs or fight terrorism. Whether or not this view can be substantiated, it is probably true to say that the collapse of the petrodollar system would be very damaging to the US economy.

Inflation would increase substantially, increasing the cost of business and the cost of living. Foreign countries may no longer be willing to accept dollars in exchange for their exports to the US. This would adversely affect import-based industries. Additionally, foreign creditors may lose confidence – impairing the ability of the US to roll over or its national debt. This could lead to a default, an inability of the government to meet social security obligations and possible civil unrest. In order to offset these effects the US may try, as has been said already, to become more self-sufficient and less dependent on foreign imports. This could be achieved through reversing the balance of trade; shifting from an import-based consumer economy to an export-based manufacturing economy. However, kickstarting a manufacturing base within the US may be difficult as this requires investment and with dollars losing purchasing power, there would be little capital available to invest.

Just my two cents (no pun intended)

Why Louisiana Stays Poor

With all Louisiana’s wealth in natural resources and industry, WHY DO WE STAY SO POOR?


Wow, as an outsider (not from Louisiana) I’ve visited the state numerous times, and the impression is always the same—shocking poverty and decay. I’ve always thought of Louisiana as an under-developed state that has just been passed-by the 20th & 21st Centuries. To learn that economically, it’s a very wealthy state with huge economic production and growth from which residents are deriving little to no benefit SCREAMS exploitation. This is a clear lesson in the vital importance of taxes and how they are used.


I am a native Louisianaian. If the people would stop electing and re-electing corrupt politicians we could be such a better state. Louisiana is a fantastic state but corruption has ruined us.
I remember working at a hotel when I lived in New Orleans and met a man from there that had moved to Colorado. He told me prior to moving to Colorado he never left Louisiana and thought it was the best state ever. He then said “I got so use to seeing the clean interstates and meeting nice people in Colorado, I came back here to visit 3 years later. I looked around and realized this is a NASTY ass city with no opportunities I can’t believe I stayed here most of my life”. He was happy he left and at that moment I started a plan to leave. I’ve been gone for 4 years and never going back.
The world’s shortest book is entitled “A List of Honest Louisiana Politicians.”
This is why I moved to Texas 16 years ago. EVERY citizen in Louisiana needs to see this. Thank you so much for making this video.
This is absolutely amazing I live in Louisiana and I am one paycheck away from being homeless and corporations get away with murder this absolutely sickens me
“If the wealth of a nation is mostly dug out of the ground, it is a terrible place to live, because a gold mine can run with dying slaves and still produce great treasure.” -CGP_Grey [Rules for Rulers] Corollary: Great places to live are founded on the economic strength of happy productive citizens.
Great video. Another thing to keep in mind is Louisiana has some of the highest sales tax rates in the country, and they are high partly to make up for the lost property tax revenues. Sales taxes hit the poorest the hardest.
I cried watching this. I was born and raised here. I’ve watched my friends and family vote consistently for politicians who sell them out. They worship Industry and Big Oil, they think bending over & letting the big companies have their way is the only path to economic opportunity. I have such a deep connection to this land, such a love and appreciation for it, but I just can’t be here anymore. I can’t watch the thing I love and cherish be ripped apart and torn asunder so greedy politicians and corporations can glean every last drop of wealthy we have.
I’ve lived in Gonzales, Louisiana my entire life. I can count on one hand the times I’ve left the state longer than 48 hours in my 21 years. Honestly until seeing this video I’ve felt very optimistic about living in this state, and have always wanted to come back home anytime I leave. I grew up thinking we were one of the best states because the amount of plants ascension pairsh, and neighboring parishes have to then see/hear all of this. It’s a real slap in the face, and we all deserve better. If it wouldn’t for me honestly not having the means to leave, and how much I love my community I’d leave. The other states I’ve been too not every so I don’t know for sure the people aren’t as kind, nore hospitalitie as us in Louisiana are. My take on all of this is that we as citizens of this great state need to fight for our share of what WE ALL put in with taxes. Let’s not forget the men, and women working the plants who have some pretty dangerous jobs who are nothing but numbers. Finally how about all of us who don’t work in that industry? We have the Devine “privilege” of breathing, smelling, and for some living in such close proximity to them all. For that alone we deserve some sorta system related to Alaska where it’s citizens get a percentage of the revenue in OUR pockets, and more importantly that these multi billion, maybe trillion dollar companies pay AT LEAST a fair share of the property value/profits!!!!
Great video… I went to school in Louisiana, now living in Texas. I’ve always been amazed at the stark contrast in infrastructure… as soon as I cross the border from Texas into Louisiana, the roads are noticeably inferior. I’ve never been able to explain this, since both states have similar natural resources… this video makes sense. Thank you for doing this.
As an immigrant I feel this video resonating with the reasons we leave our counties, it’s not because we are land poor without the beautiful riches nature has to offer but because they are poorly managed and hoarded by a small corrupt few. Louisiana looks more beautiful, and I regret not going out during the reconstruction after Katrina and offering my little grain of sand when I had the chance.
And don’t forget Louisiana’s “cancer alley”, where the rates of cancer are significantly higher than the national average. This is so bad that it was used as a case study in one of my environmental courses for how bad out of control pollution can get.
I’m from western New York and this just stuns me. I thought the disparity and corruption is bad here but it doesn’t hold a candle to this. I hope the people of Louisiana get justice and a properly funded future!
it’s amazing that corporations can be exempt from property tax but that individual’s homes cannot.
My uncle served in the Air Force in Louisiania and absolutely loved that state, but he was shocked by the poverty and the rampant corruption.
This was an outstandingly professionally produced video.
As someone who works in data, great job keeping this data driven and factual and not based on “Feelings”. Its very easy to follow your research and understand a cause and effect relation. I’m not from Louisiana but I’m from another “traditionally poor state” – Michigan and I think some of the problems you face are some of the same ones we also face. I hope your politicians can turn it around.
It wasn’t until I moved away from Louisiana that I realized how bad the situation was there. I love my people, but it is too hard for me to see them taken advantage like this and just roll over for it. All of this wealth rightfully belongs to the people of Louisiana, but they don’t even realize it. Honestly, once my mother passes away, I probably won’t ever return to the state. It’s too heartbreaking for me.
As a foreigner living in the US, I’ve always wondered why the “South” is always so poor. This explains so much. Thank you for explaining this.
So glad to know you exist and are fighting against these inequities with great skill, and showing some results! It gives me hope for the state where family and friends still live. I left Louisiana decades ago for college out of state. I saw how other states operated and never seriously considered returning. I sadly began to see Louisiana a a state operating much like a Central American kleptocracy, but embedded in the US. Even the most corrupt other states had nothing on Louisiana.
This is absolutely terrifying. I honestly wonder if Louisiana’s natural resource infrastructure and tax exemptions are part of the reason why school privatization was pushed so hard in New Orleans after Katrina hit.
I’m German, could care less and stumbled upon this video by accident – but my God did they do a good job in presenting this!!! One of the best visualizations and presentations I’ve ever come across and I work in white color automotive. Congratulations! Hope this had the wanted outcome and the situation has gotten better for the people …
I tend to be one of the last to support a tax increase, and being Louisiana, my initial thought was of corruption and levee funding being diverted. But this is a very solidly argued point that Louisiana went way too far in practically exempting industrial properties from property taxes. Then my next reaction was that there was no way the political fight would be won so I was pleasantly surprised to see the progress shown at the end. Congratulations to you guys for helping to create a significant improvement in public policy! Now I hope the money will be well-spent.
With those property tax exemptions, there’s also the point of them not paying for services and public right of ways that they need to operate. More dense development typically is the only property that returns more than it costs cities to maintain. This means not only are the urban poor subsidizing suburban development, but they’re subsidizing the giant corporations they work for. And they’re not even paid a fair living wage to begin with due to deregulation.
Let me just take a wild guess and say that practically everything has gotten worse and almost nothing has gotten better for Louisiana residents since this video was produced. Get out while (if) you still can. I’ve struggled here my whole life and I’ve finally had enough. I’m selling my possessions and moving away with whatever fits in my beat up 90’s car as soon as I can manage it, and I will never look back.
I’m from Mississippi, a genuinely poor state with poor natural resources and high corruption – not so much on the corporate-political level, but rather internally to our politics. Both sides of the government participate in these practices, and its no wonder that our state remains poor. Whenever I cross over into Louisiana, however, I’m always shocked at how destitute things are. Like this video states, there are so many reasons that Louisiana should be one of the richest states in the United States, and I’ve been aware of them for a long time. It’s baffled me for years that a state so strategically placed and rich in natural resources could possibly be on a level of poverty like Mississippi. Now I know why, and it breaks my heart to see a state that could be so prosperous falling to corruption and poverty that has no business being in it. Unlike Mississippi, there is no excuse for Louisiana to be at the bottom. I sincerely hope this changes.
You think those good ol’ boys on the state board might be getting some kick backs from all those tax exemptions they hand out so freely ?
Having lived in Alaska, where every citizen received a yearly dividend from investment of oil lease fees, this is sickening to hear. Louisiana should be one of the most flush states in the nation if it weren’t for trickle-down economics and tax breaks for the wealthy. The impact of these industries should be beneficial to the area not debilitating. The bottom line is that the people of the state of Louisiana are paying (or losing out on) the taxes that should be spread out to all the consumers. Good luck to all in Louisiana, I hope you finally get this corrected.
“No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems – of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.”
OMG, I had no idea how bad this was. I lived in New Orleans, Louisiana for 10 years. I actually left because of lack of opportunities, widespread poverty and lackluster healthcare system. I also knew that my life expectancy would go down drastically if I stayed. I did develop endocrine health issues during and and immediately after living there. It took 10 years to figure out what was wrong with me. My DNA may have been predisposed to these problems, but maybe they may never have come up if I never lived there.
This could also be useful to show to the decision makers in most other states if nothing else to show what not to do.

But how does bitcoin actually work? (2017)

The math behind cryptocurrencies.
Help fund future projects:
An equally valuable form of support is to simply share some of the videos.
Special thanks to these supporters:
This video was also funded with help from Protocol Labs:

Some people have asked if this channel accepts contributions in cryptocurrency form. As a matter of fact, it does:
ENS: 3b1b.eth

2^256 video:

Music by Vincent Rubinetti:…

Here are a few other resources I’d recommend:

Original Bitcoin paper:

Block explorer:

Blog post by Michael Nielsen:
(This is particularly good for understanding the details of what transactions look like, which is something this video did not cover)

Video by CuriousInventor:

Video by Anders Brownworth:

Ethereum white paper:


Other Videos by video creator



this was awesome! I was having trouble on understanding the nodes vs. miners as well as the random number / difficulty adjustment but this totally cleared it up!
It’s an extremely information dense lecture. You have to watch portions of it again and again to grasp the underlying concepts. But once you’ve finished it, you feel so damn confident.
5 years later and I still comeback to this Blockchain explanation to check if my understanding, love it
You have no idea how much I’ve tried to find an article or video actually explaining how cryptocurrencies work. Everyone else just goes around with analogies. They probably don’t understand fully themselves. Thanks man.


This is the clearest video I’ve ever seen, and I still don’t get it.
10:00 “The history of transactions is the currency” interesting Edit: 17:30 I love how I now know what a block chain is, and it wasn’t as mind blowing as people on the internet made it seem. And I’m pretty sure blockchains are done in introductory coding courses. (Though not as complex). Edit 2: 18:25 so THAT’S why mining is profitable. I get it now. That circles back to the claim made ~10 mins in. Edit 3: 21:15 So, bitcoin ‘authority’, in essence, is computing power, and bitcoin ‘identity’ is the a blockchain made by the original owner? Great video. As you can see I am still shaky on complete understanding, BUT this was the only useful explaination of Bitcoin and crypto I’ve seen so far (for me). So I am greatful. and maybe this will lead me to understanding others.
Prior to watching this I didn’t really understand the link between mining and validating the transactions. Its quite interesting how the system can self-adjust to make sure that mining\validating is always profitable, and therefore even if there is a big crash in mining profitability it should just result in a slowdown of transactions until the system balances. I guess the issue is that there is a big problem if the coin is used for real large scale commerce\business that rely on guaranteed volume. If a large enough proportion of bitcoin transactions were for real vital goods and services, then a crash in mining profitability could drive he value to zero since the value would be much more tied to the amount of volume the system can handle. Lack of trust could continually inflate it, which would then continually make it harder to restore validation capacity. Volatility is an issue for real world business even if the overall trend is continually upwards. If I am correct, then it would suggest that bitcoin will remain a speculation asset and a store of value rather than a replacement for sovereign currencies?
at around 20:30, theyre discussing how it isnt viable for Alice to try to commit fraud because she cant out-compute the other miners on the network all by herself. could someone explain what would happen if a group of miners (that formed the majority of the network) decide to commit fraud together?
>>  It’s 100% possible. And in fact, the top 4 miners of bitcoin have more than 50% of the network’s total hashing power. However, if you have 50% of the total mining network’s computation, you’re probably better off using it to make ~$2.2 Million a day with honest mining than you to defraud a single individual.


>> the specific name for this scenario is a “50% attack”



What Is White Privilege, Really?

Today, white privilege is often described through the lens of Peggy McIntosh’s groundbreaking essay “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.” Originally published in 1988, the essay helps readers recognize white privilege by making its effects personal and tangible. For many, white privilege was an invisible force that white people needed to recognize. It was being able to walk into a store and find that the main displays of shampoo and panty hose were catered toward your hair type and skin tone. It was being able to turn on the television and see people of your race widely represented. It was being able to move through life without being racially profiled or unfairly stereotyped. All true.

This idea of white privilege as unseen, unconscious advantages took hold. It became easy for people to interpret McIntosh’s version of white privilege—fairly or not—as mostly a matter of cosmetics and inconvenience.

Those interpretations overshadow the origins of white privilege, as well as its present-day ability to influence systemic decisions. They overshadow the fact that white privilege is both a legacy and a cause of racism. And they overshadow the words of many people of color, who for decades recognized white privilege as the result of conscious acts and refused to separate it from historic inequities.

In short, we’ve forgotten what white privilege really means—which is all of this, all at once. And if we stand behind the belief that recognizing white privilege is integral to the anti-bias work of white educators, we must offer a broader recognition.

A recognition that does not silence the voices of those most affected by white privilege; a recognition that does not ignore where it comes from and why it has staying power.


Racism vs. White Privilege

Having white privilege and recognizing it is not racist. But white privilege exists because of historic, enduring racism and biases. Therefore, defining white privilege also requires finding working definitions of racism and bias.

So, what is racism? One helpful definition comes from Matthew Clair and Jeffrey S. Denis’s “Sociology on Racism.” They define racism as “individual- and group-level processes and structures that are implicated in the reproduction of racial inequality.” Systemic racism happens when these structures or processes are carried out by groups with power, such as governments, businesses or schools. Racism differs from bias, which is a conscious or unconscious prejudice against an individual or group based on their identity.

Basically, racial bias is a belief. Racism is what happens when that belief translates into action. For example, a person might unconsciously or consciously believe that people of color are more likely to commit crime or be dangerous. That’s a bias. A person might become anxious if they perceive a Black person is angry. That stems from a bias. These biases can become racism through a number of actions ranging in severity, and ranging from individual- to group-level responses:

  • A person crosses the street to avoid walking next to a group of young Black men.
  • A person calls 911 to report the presence of a person of color who is otherwise behaving lawfully.
  • A police officer shoots an unarmed person of color because he “feared for his life.”
  • A jury finds a person of color guilty of a violent crime despite scant evidence.
  • A federal intelligence agency prioritizes investigating Black and Latino activists rather than investigate white supremacist activity. 

Both racism and bias rely on what sociologists call racialization. This is the grouping of people based on perceived physical differences, such as skin tone. This arbitrary grouping of people, historically, fueled biases and became a tool for justifying the cruel treatment and discrimination of non-white people. Colonialism, slavery and Jim Crow laws were all sold with junk science and propaganda that claimed people of a certain “race” were fundamentally different from those of another—and they should be treated accordingly. And while not all white people participated directly in this mistreatment, their learned biases and their safety from such treatment led many to commit one of those most powerful actions: silence.

And just like that, the trauma, displacement, cruel treatment and discrimination of people of color, inevitably, gave birth to white privilege.


So, What Is White Privilege?

White privilege is—perhaps most notably in this era of uncivil discourse—a concept that has fallen victim to its own connotations. The two-word term packs a double whammy that inspires pushback. 1) The word white creates discomfort among those who are not used to being defined or described by their race. And 2) the word privilege, especially for poor and rural white people, sounds like a word that doesn’t belong to them—like a word that suggests they have never struggled.

This defensiveness derails the conversation, which means, unfortunately, that defining white privilege must often begin with defining what it’s not. Otherwise, only the choir listens; the people you actually want to reach check out. White privilege is not the suggestion that white people have never struggled. Many white people do not enjoy the privileges that come with relative affluence, such as food security. Many do not experience the privileges that come with access, such as nearby hospitals.

And white privilege is not the assumption that everything a white person has accomplished is unearned; most white people who have reached a high level of success worked extremely hard to get there. Instead, white privilege should be viewed as a built-in advantage, separate from one’s level of income or effort.

Francis E. Kendall, author of Diversity in the Classroom and Understanding White Privilege: Creating Pathways to Authentic Relationships Across Racecomes close to giving us an encompassing definition: “having greater access to power and resources than people of color [in the same situation] do.” But in order to grasp what this means, it’s also important to consider how the definition of white privilege has changed over time.


White Privilege Through the Years

In a thorough article, education researcher Jacob Bennett tracked the history of the term. Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “white privilege” was less commonly used but generally referred to legal and systemic advantages given to white people by the United States, such as citizenship, the right to vote or the right to buy a house in the neighborhood of their choice.

It was only after discrimination persisted for years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that people like Peggy McIntosh began to view white privilege as being more psychological—a subconscious prejudice perpetuated by white people’s lack of awareness that they held this power. White privilege could be found in day-to-day transactions and in white people’s ability to move through the professional and personal worlds with relative ease.

But some people of color continued to insist that an element of white privilege included the aftereffects of conscious choices. For example, if white business leaders didn’t hire many people of color, white people had more economic opportunities. Having the ability to maintain that power dynamic, in itself, was a white privilege, and it endures. Legislative bodies, corporate leaders and educators are still disproportionately white and often make conscious choices (laws, hiring practices, discipline procedures) that keep this cycle on repeat.

The more complicated truth: White privilege is both unconsciously enjoyed and consciously perpetuated. It is both on the surface and deeply embedded into American life. It is a weightless knapsack—and a weapon.

It depends on who’s carrying it.


White Privilege as the “Power of Normal”

Sometimes the examples used to make white privilege visible to those who have it are also the examples least damaging to people who lack it. But that does not mean these examples do not matter or that they do no damage at all.

These subtle versions of white privilege are often used as a comfortable, easy entry point for people who might push back against the concept. That is why they remain so popular. These are simple, everyday things, conveniences white people aren’t forced to think about.

These often-used examples include:

  • The first-aid kit having “flesh-colored” Band-Aids that only match the skin tone of white people.
  • The products white people need for their hair being in the aisle labeled “hair care” rather than in a smaller, separate section of “ethnic hair products.”
  • The grocery store stocking a variety of food options that reflect the cultural traditions of most white people.

But the root of these problems is often ignored. These types of examples can be dismissed by white people who might say, “My hair is curly and requires special product,” or “My family is from Poland, and it’s hard to find traditional Polish food at the grocery store.”

This may be true. But the reason even these simple white privileges need to be recognized is that the damage goes beyond the inconvenience of shopping for goods and services. These privileges are symbolic of what we might call “the power of normal.” If public spaces and goods seem catered to one race and segregate the needs of people of other races into special sections, that indicates something beneath the surface.

White people become more likely to move through the world with an expectation that their needs be readily met. People of color move through the world knowing their needs are on the margins. Recognizing this means recognizing where gaps exist.


White Privilege as the “Power of the Benefit of the Doubt”

The “power of normal” goes beyond the local CVS. White people are also more likely to see positive portrayals of people who look like them on the news, on TV shows and in movies. They are more likely to be treated as individuals, rather than as representatives of (or exceptions to) a stereotyped racial identity. In other words, they are more often humanized and granted the benefit of the doubt. They are more likely to receive compassion, to be granted individual potential, to survive mistakes.

This has negative effects for people of color, who, without this privilege, face the consequences of racial profiling, stereotypes and lack of compassion for their struggles.

In these scenarios, white privilege includes the facts that:

  • White people are less likely to be followed, interrogated or searched by law enforcement because they look “suspicious.”
  •  White people’s skin tone will not be a reason people hesitate to trust their credit or financial responsibility.
  •  If white people are accused of a crime, they are less likely to be presumed guilty, less likely to be sentenced to death and more likely to be portrayed in a fair, nuanced manner by media outlets (see the #IfTheyGunnedMeDown campaign).
  •  The personal faults or missteps of white people will likely not be used to later deny opportunities or compassion to people who share their racial identity.

This privilege is invisible to many white people because it seems reasonable that a person should be extended compassion as they move through the world. It seems logical that a person should have the chance to prove themselves individually before they are judged. It’s supposedly an American ideal.

But it’s a privilege often not granted to people of color—with dire consequences.

For example, programs like New York City’s now-abandoned “Stop and Frisk” policy target a disproportionate number of Black and Latinx people. People of color are more likely to be arrested for drug offenses despite using at a similar rate to white people. Some people do not survive these stereotypes. In 2017, people of color who were unarmed and not attacking anyone were more likely to be killed by police.

Those who survive instances of racial profiling—be they subtle or violent—do not escape unaffected. They often suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, and this trauma in turn affects their friends, families and immediate communities, who are exposed to their own vulnerability as a result.

study conducted in Australia (which has its own hard history of subjugating Black and Indigenous people) perfectly illustrates how white privilege can manifest in day-to-day interactions—daily reminders that one is not worthy of the same benefit of the doubt given to another. In the experiment, people of different racial and ethnic identities tried to board public buses, telling the driver they didn’t have enough money to pay for the ride. Researchers documented more than 1,500 attempts. The results: 72 percent of white people were allowed to stay on the bus. Only 36 percent of Black people were extended the same kindness.

Just as people of color did nothing to deserve this unequal treatment, white people did not “earn” disproportionate access to compassion and fairness. They receive it as the byproduct of systemic racism and bias.

And even if they are not aware of it in their daily lives as they walk along the streets, this privilege is the result of conscious choices made long ago and choices still being made today.


White Privilege as the “Power of Accumulated Power”

Perhaps the most important lesson about white privilege is the one that’s taught the least.

The “power of normal” and the “power of the benefit of the doubt” are not just subconscious byproducts of past discrimination. They are the purposeful results of racism—an ouroboros of sorts—that allow for the constant re-creation of inequality. 

These powers would not exist if systemic racism hadn’t come first. And systemic racism cannot endure unless those powers still hold sway.

You can imagine it as something of a whiteness water cycle, wherein racism is the rain. That rain populates the earth, giving some areas more access to life and resources than others. The evaporation is white privilege—an invisible phenomenon that is both a result of the rain and the reason it keeps going.

McIntosh asked herself an important question that inspired her famous essay, “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”: “On a daily basis, what do I have that I didn’t earn?” Our work should include asking the two looming follow-up questions: Who built that system? Who keeps it going?

The answers to those questions could fill several books. But they produce examples of white privilege that you won’t find in many broad explainer pieces.

For example, the ability to accumulate wealth has long been a white privilege—a privilege created by overt, systemic racism in both the public and private sectors. In 2014, the Pew Research Center released a report that revealed the median net worth of a white household was $141,900; for Black and Hispanic households, that dropped to $11,000 and $13,700, respectively. The gap is huge, and the great “equalizers” don’t narrow it. Research from Brandeis University and Demos found that the racial wealth gap is not closed when people of color attend college (the median white person who went to college has 7.2 times more wealth than the median Black person who went to college, and 3.9 times more than the median Latino person who went to college). Nor do they close the gap when they work full time, or when they spend less and save more.

The gap, instead, relies largely on inheritance—wealth passed from one generation to the next. And that wealth often comes in the form of inherited homes with value. When white families are able to accumulate wealth because of their earning power or home value, they are more likely to support their children into early adulthood, helping with expenses such as college education, first cars and first homes. The cycle continues.

This is a privilege denied to many families of color, a denial that started with the work of public leaders and property managers. After World War II, when the G.I. Bill provided white veterans with “a magic carpet to the middle class,” racist zoning laws segregated towns and cities with sizable populations of people of color—from Baltimore to Birmingham, from New York to St. Louis, from Louisville to Oklahoma City, to Chicago, to Austin, and in cities beyond and in between.

These exclusionary zoning practices evolved from city ordinances to redlining by the Federal Housing Administration (which wouldn’t back loans to Black people or those who lived close to Black people), to more insidious techniques written into building codes. The result: People of color weren’t allowed to raise their children and invest their money in neighborhoods with “high home values.” The cycle continues today. Before the 2008 crash, people of color were disproportionately targeted for subprime mortgages. And neighborhood diversity continues to correlate with low property values across the United States. According to the Century Foundation, one-fourth of Black Americans living in poverty live in high-poverty neighborhoods; only 1 in 13 impoverished white Americans lives in a high-poverty neighborhood.

The inequities compound. To this day, more than 80 percent of poor Black students attend a high-poverty school, where suspension rates are often higher and resources often more limited. Once out of school, obstacles remain. Economic forgiveness and trust still has racial divides. In a University of Wisconsin study, 17 percent of white job applicants with a criminal history got a call back from an employer; only five percent of Black applicants with a criminal history got call backs. And according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, Black Americans are 105 percent more likely than white people to receive a high-cost mortgage, with Latino Americans 78 percent more likely. This is after controlling for variables such as credit score and debt-to-income ratios.

Why mention these issues in an article defining white privilege? Because the past and present context of wealth inequality serves as a perfect example of white privilege.

If privilege, from the Latin roots of the term, refers to laws that have an impact on individuals, then what is more effective than a history of laws that explicitly targeted racial minorities to keep them out of neighborhoods and deny them access to wealth and services?

If white privilege is “having greater access to power and resources than people of color [in the same situation] do,” then what is more exemplary than the access to wealth, the access to neighborhoods and the access to the power to segregate cities, deny loans and perpetuate these systems?

This example of white privilege also illustrates how systemic inequities trickle down to less harmful versions of white privilege. Wealth inequity contributes to the “power of the benefit of the doubt” every time a white person is given a lower mortgage rate than a person of color with the same credit credentials. Wealth inequity reinforces the “power of normal” every time businesses assume their most profitable consumer base is the white base and adjust their products accordingly.

And this example of white privilege serves an important purpose: It re-centers the power of conscious choices in the conversation about what white privilege is.

People can be ignorant about these inequities, of course. According to the Pew Research Center, only 46 percent of white people say that they benefit “a great deal” or “a fair amount” from advantages that society does not offer to Black people. But conscious choices were and are made to uphold these privileges. And this goes beyond loan officers and lawmakers. Multiple surveys have shown that many white people support the idea of racial equality but are less supportive of policies that could make it more possible, such as reparations, affirmative action or law enforcement reform.

In that way, white privilege is not just the power to find what you need in a convenience store or to move through the world without your race defining your interactions. It’s not just the subconscious comfort of seeing a world that serves you as normal. It’s also the power to remain silent in the face of racial inequity. It’s the power to weigh the need for protest or confrontation against the discomfort or inconvenience of speaking up. It’s getting to choose when and where you want to take a stand. It’s knowing that you and your humanity are safe.

And what a privilege that is.

Collins is the senior writer for Teaching Tolerance.


Ash Bennington, senior crypto editor for Real Vision, sits down with James Bianco, president of Bianco Research, to discuss his view of the financial markets, DAOs, macro strategies, regulation, and the role of government in the economy. When he began looking into Bitcoin and Ethereum in 2017, Bianco did not see much utility for these new assets. However, during the crypto winter of 2018-2019, Bianco noticed the rise of DeFi and saw last summer how these new emerging rails were being built as a parallel financial system. Bianco sees this new system as 1.0, “the Wild West,” but more innovation will come. To him, DeFi is headed toward the creation of a whole new financial system. Filmed May 17th, 2021. Key Insights: Bianco states that volatility is part of any emerging technology—investors, regardless of experience, should understand that high-growth, tech companies go through “boom and bust” cycles all the time. For crypto, Bianco advises that it’s critical to separate the concept from the protocol. When choosing what to invest in, he urges investors to consider, “Is this concept too early? Does the system have longevity? What research has been done?” This will be paramount to understanding the future of the space and, by extension, will open the door for users from all generations and technical prowess to enter.

Their world doesn’t benefit from it because they are at the top of the heap (6 min remaining)
I can see that this isn’t ready yet for the whole world but I can see how useful it could be.

The Curious Death of Sandra Bland w/Malcolm Gladwell | Joe Rogan

Taken from JRE #1383 w/Malcolm Gladwell:…
communication and he is this attitude
that he’s a cop and that you have to
listen to the cops because he’s them and
you’re you yeah and that that’s like
when he’s telling her to put the
cigarette out and she’s saying I don’t
have to do that and he’s saying get out
of your vehicle and she’s saying I don’t
have to do that and then he’s screaming
at her I mean that’s that’s all right
there yeah so it seems like to me he
wants compliance he won’t sir to listen
he does yeah he does what he gets it’s
funny the what’s remarkable about that
tape which I must have seen 50 times and
which has been viewed on YouTube you
know even a couple million times is how
quickly it escalates you know the whole
thing is it’s insanely short yeah you
you would think if I was telling you the
story of this you would think oh this
unfolds over 10 minutes and it doesn’t
it unfolds over a minute and a half and
that what I remember years ago I wrote
my second book blink and I have in that
book a chapter about a very famous
infamous police shooting in New York
case of amadou diallo I remember that I
remember that was shot like 40 times by
cops yeah and one of the big things I
was interested in talking about in that
case was how long does it take how long
did it take for that whole terrible
sequence to go
down so from the moment the police
develop it suspicions about amadou
diallo to the moment that amadou diallo
is lying dead on his front porch how
long how much time elapsed and the
answer is like two seconds
it’s boo boo boo it’s like and I had a
conversation with them actually here in
the valley with Gavin de Becker
has he ever been on your show no
fascinating guy was a security expert on
a security expert incredibly interesting
guy’s friends with Sam Harris I know
that yes yeah yeah and he was talking
about this question of time that when
you’re a security guard guarding someone
you know famous a lot of what you’re
trying to do is to inject time into the
scenario instead of you don’t want
something to unfold in a second and a
half where you have almost no time to
react properly and what you want to do
is to uh knit to unfold in five seconds
if you can an align this up I can’t
remember his exact term but basically
what your job is is to add seconds into
the the encounter so that you have a
chance to intelligently respond to
what’s going on and so he was hit this
great riff about um how good Israeli
secrets of Secret Service guys are and
one of the things they do is they’re
they’re they’re either not armed or they
don’t they’re trained not to go for
their weapons in these situations
because this point is so say you’re
guarding the president you’re a body man
for the president you walk into a crowd
somebody comes up to you like pulls a
gun wants to shoot the president
his point is if you’re the secret
security guy and your first instinct in
response to someone pulling a gun is to
go for your own gun you’ve lost a second
and a half right your hands got to go
down to here your whole focus is on
getting to your own gun and in the
meantime the other guy whose guns
already out has already shot you’ve lost
you need to be someone who forgets about
your own gun and just focuses on the on
the man in front of you right and
protected the president but he was all
in the context of time is this really
variable in these kind of encounters and
everything as a police officer you
should be doing is slowing it down wait
I you know
analyze what’s happening and that’s what
he doesn’t do the cop in this instance
speeds it up right he goes to DEFCON you
know she likes a cigarette and within
seconds he’s screaming at her this is
like you know a parent shouldn’t do that
I mean let a little police officer by
the side of the highway Brett but the
difference is he knows she’s not a
I mean he must know it’s [ __ ]
he’s pulling her over because he’s
trying to write a ticket and the way
he’s communicating with her when she
lights a cigarette
it’s like she’s inferior like he this is
not someone who’s scared he’s not scared
of a perpetrator he’s not scared that
there’s a criminal in the car about to
shoot him he’s not scared of that at all
he wants uh Terr total complete
compliance and he’s talking to her like
like he’s a drill sergeant but can’t you
can’t both those things be true how so
well in this so in the deposition he
gives which I get to the end of the book
and I got the tape of the deposition
it’s bad it’s totally fascinating
it’s like he’s sitting down with the
investigating officer in looking into
the death of Sandra bland and he’s got I
don’t know how long it is two hours now
he’s walking them through what he was
thinking that day and he makes the case
that he was terrified that he was
convinced he says he goes back to his
squad car comes up and there’s submit
there’s some evidence to support this so
he pulls her over and he goes to the
passenger side window and leans and says
ma’am you realize why I pulled you over
blah blah and is are you okay because he
she doesn’t seem right to him she gives
him her license he goes back to his
squad car and he says while he’s in the
squad car he looks ahead and he sees her
making what he calls furtive movements
so he’s like furtive movements also he
thinks she’s being all kind of jumpy and
you know isn’t he just says I saw her
moving around in ways it didn’t make me
happy and then when he returns to the
car he returns driver’s side which is
crucial because if
you’re a cop you go driver’s side only
if you think that you might be in danger
right he doesn’t if you go driver’s side
you’re exposing yourself to the road
when you reason you do that is it when
your driver’s side you can see the it’s
very very difficult if someone has a gun
to shoot the police officer who’s pulled
them over if the police officer is on
the driver’s side right you have an
angle if they’re on the passenger side
so why does he go but if he thinks she’s
harmless there’s no reason to go back
driver’s side I think this guy I think
these two things are linked I actually
believe him he constructs this
ridiculous fantasy about how she’s
dangerous but I think that’s just what
he was trained to do he’s a paranoid cop
and then why is he’s so insistent that
she be compliant for the same reason
because he’s terrified he’s like do
exactly what I say cuz I don’t know what
the what’s gonna happen here right and
she’s I you know I I don’t know I I
don’t think those two those two strains
of of interpretation are mutually
exclusive mmm that’s interesting it
didn’t sound like he was scared at all
it sounds like he was pissed that she
wasn’t listening to him yeah I didn’t I
didn’t think he sounded even remotely
scared I felt like he had I mean we’re
reading into it right right I have no
idea but from my interpretation was he
had decided that she wasn’t listening to
him and he was gonna make her listen him
yeah that’s what I got out of it I
didn’t get any fear and I thought that
version of it that he described just
sounds like horseshit it sounds like
what you would say after the fact to
strengthen your case well they so
there’s another element in here that I
get into which is I got his record as a
police officer he’d been on the on the
force for I forgot nine ten months and
we have a record of every traffic stop
he ever made and when you look at his
list of traffic stops you reason you
realized that what happened that day
with Sandra bland was not an anomaly
that he’s one of those guys who pulls
over everyone for [ __ ] reasons mmm
all day long so I think I’ve forgotten
exact number but in the hour before he
pulled over Sandra bland he pulled over
for people for other people for equally
ridiculous reasons he’s that cop no and
he’s that cop because he’s been trained
that way right that’s a kind of quotas
strange strain of modern policing which
says go beyond the ticket pull someone
over if you if anything looks a little
bit weird because you might find
something else now if you look at his
history as a cop he almost never found
anything else his history is a cop in
fact I went through this I forget how
many hundreds of traffic stops he had in
nine months if you go through them
he has like once he found some marijuana
on a kid and by the way the town in
which he was working as a college town
so I mean how hard is that I think he
found a gun once misdemeanor gun but
everything else was like pulling over
people for you know the the light above
their license plate was out got that’s
the level of stuff he was using he did
this all day long every day
so he’s like to him it’s second nature
yeah pull her over like who knows what’s
going on she’s out of state she’s young
black woman was this comparable to the
way the rest of the cops on the force
and his division did it well I looked at
I didn’t look at the rest of the cops on
his voice what I looked at were state
numbers to the wherever they’re several
American states give us like North
Carolina for example will give us
precise complete statistics on the
number of traffic stops done by their
police officers and the reasons for
those stops so when you look at that so
I have the I look at the North Carolina
numbers for example in the North
Carolina Highway Patrol it’s the same
thing they’re pulling over unbelievable
numbers of people and finding nothing
like night you know one percent less
than one percent hit rates in some cases
of being hit rate being finding
something of interest
so like they’re pulling over ninety nine
people for no reason in order to find
one person who’s got you know a bag of
dope or something in the car
you cannot conduct policing in in a
civil society like that and expect to
have decent relationships between law
in the civilian population yeah no
question but doesn’t that sort of
support the idea that he’s full of [ __ ]
that he was really concerned that she
had something he’d never encountered
anything well or or this was the one the
fantasy in his head is so what so the
questions why does he keep doing it if
this is a guy who day in day out pulls
over people for no reason and finds
nothing and continues to do it
now there’s two explanations one is he’s
totally cynical and thinks this is the
way to be an effective police officer X
mission number two is this is a guy who
has a powerful fantasy in his head that
one day I’m gonna hit the jackpot and
I’m gonna open the trunk and is going to
be 15 pounds of heroin and I’m gonna be
the biggest star who ever lived I think
there’s also a rush of just being able
to get people to pull over this the the
compliance thing which is another reason
why he was so furious that what she
wasn’t listening to him yeah and she
kept a cigarette lit yeah or she was
listening but not complying yes yeah um
what are the laws I mean are you allowed
to smoke a cigarette in your car when a
cop pulls you over how does it work like
yeah I mean of course yeah they can’t
stop you from engaging they can’t tell
you to put out your cigarette there’s no
law no he could have said I mean no
there’s no law I mean the car though two
things the courts historically give
enormous leeway to the police officers
in a traffic stop as opposed to a
person-to-person stop but uh but no I I
mean right this is about what he should
have said is he could have said ma’am do
you mind I would prefer if you put out
the cigarette while we’re talking or I’m
allergic to smoke or whatever I mean
he’s a million ways to him to do it
yeah but he’s he’s a jackass about yeah
but I mean he’s basically doing the job
like a jackass he’s doing a jackass
version of being a cop well so this is
so this is one of a really really
crucial point in the argument of the
book which is I think the real lesson of
that case is not that he’s a bad cop
he’s in fact doing precisely as he is
was in trained and instructed to do he’s
a he’s the ideal cop and the problem is
with the particular philosophy of
law enforcement that has emerged over
the last ten years in this country which
has incentivized and encouraged police
officers to engage in these incredibly
low reward activities like pulling over
a hundred people or defying one person
who’s done something wrong that has
become enshrined in the strategy of many
police forces around the country they
tell them to do this I have a whole
section of book right go through in
detail one of the most important police
training manuals which is you know
required reading for somebody coming up
and which they just walk you through
this like it is your job to pull over
lots and lots and lots and lots of
people even if you only find something
in a small percentage of cases why
that’s what being a proactive police
officer is all about right so they are
trained that that phrase go beyond the
ticket is a is a term of art in police
training like you got to be thinking you
sure you pulled him over for having a
taillight that’s out
but you’re look you’re thinking beyond
that is there something else in the car
that’s problematic that’s to try to find
so there he was being a dutiful police
officer and the the answer is to
re-examine our philosophies of law
enforcement not know I mean you can’t
dismiss this thing by saying oh that’s
just a particularly bad cop not great
but I don’t know if he’s any worse than
you know he’s just doing what he was
trained to do that’s the issue
he should be trained to do something
different right that is the issue right
the issue is there this is standard
practice a treat citizens that are doing
nothing wrong as if they’re criminals
yeah and pull them over and give them
extreme paranoia and freak them out yeah
I hope you find something I was home I’m
Canadian and I was home in Canada
small-town Canada couple weeks ago and I
saw in the pack you know how these cars
always have there’s often that our
slogan on the side of the car the back
of the commune so in my little hometown
in southwestern Ontario sleepy you know
farm country the slogan on the back of
the police cars is people helping people
so Canadian like the X know understand
country with very low levels of gun
ownership which means that a police
officer does not enter into an encounter
with a civilian with the same degree of
fear or paranoia that the civilian has a
handgun right which is a big part of
this regardless of how one feels about
gun laws in this country the fact that
there are lots of guns mean makes the
job of a police officer a lot harder and
every police officer will tell you that
in Canada they don’t have that fear but
it’s also Canada and its small town
Canada and so when you encounter a
police officer in my little town he’s
like he’s people helping people he’s
like he’s like driving like a Camry and
he’s you know he’s like this genial
person who was a really camera amis I
forgotten exactly what the driver was
not like they’re not driving scars yeah
explorers painted black with like big
bull bars at the front right and then
you go you know I was you go I mean even
in LA I hate you know I like that
cars are painted black and white so they
look ferocious I mean the whole thing
that was it is still look ferocious do I
just look they identify as police to
connait to a Canadian looks to me it
looks a little why do they have to paint
them black forgets nothing Oakland
Raiders I mean it’s like what do you
think they should paint them something
mild and like bright yellow something
lovely something lovely like a nice can
you imagine a like a teal or a
lime-green well that would be yeah
because there’s a lot of black cars a
lot of white cars a lot of teal cars
it’s good so it would yeah it would
stand out like oh it’s cop this paint
car but you know this kind of symbolism
right matters right right you wanna see
an image sheriff joe arpaio who makes
all those prisoners wear pink yeah yeah
that’s kind of thing but I mean to
against his point though how many women
shoot cops
isn’t that an insanely low number yeah I
mean insanely low I mean what are the
numbers I mean it’s probably almost
yeah well guys pull over women I don’t
think they’re worried about being shot I
really don’t I think it’s horseshit I
think it’s all after the fact yeah he
was trying to concoct some sort of an
excuse I was gonna excuse for
is he still in the force I know he was
either he’s kicked off for I forgotten
the precise language they used but for
basically being impolite to a civilian
but um yeah I don’t think there’s a lot
of but I don’t know whether I mean I I
still think we’re saying the same thing
which is the thing that’s driving him
his motivation is not rational right and
if you were a rational actor you would
never engage in an activity where 99.9%
of your police stops resulted in nothing
yeah he’s he is off in some weird kind
of fantasy land for a reason which is
that’s what in certain jurisdictions in
this country that’s what law enforcement
has come to look at Brooke like yeah
that’s that’s problematic it’s a huge