The document starts off by saying that “it is necessary, in order properly to appraise the credit of a city, to subject it to the same tests which one would subject the individual citizens should they be asking to borrow money”
- fiscally problematic, but OK. But then... (2/7)
It describes how bond-purchasers need to examine the foreign extraction of a city in order to determine whether its citizens had the right "character."
Northern Europeans, for example, were "thrifty," where Southern Europeans "spen(t) money freely." (3/7)
But the document goes on to say that creditors need not consider how many "Negroes (sic), Mexicans, Indians, Chinese or Japanese" were in a community - because many of them did not vote, and "communities more broadly were "run entirely by the white people." (4/7)
The document goes on to "rate" cities based on both their economic diversity and their population, paying special attention to their proportion of "Northern" vs. "Southern" European population. (5/7)
Bond rating guides like this did for cities what the infamous FHA redlining maps did for homeowners: bar areas with marginalized populations from receiving financial aid. And both policies led to the kind of urban disinvestment and crises we saw in the 1970s. (6/7)
The solution here isn't to "liberalize" lending policies necessarily (#predatoryinclusion), but to replace extractive forms of financing with ones owned and operated by the people they serve (fin). (7/7)
In 1975 the New York Times asked Milton Friedman, Jane Jacobs, Buckminster Fuller, Lewis Mumford, Nathan Glazer, John Kenneth Galbraith, and others for their opinions on how New York City could pull itself out of its fiscal crises.
Dr. William Henry Dean Jr., (1910-1952) was a pioneering Black economist and a pathbreaking economic geographer. This is a short thread about his tragically short life and influential - though largely unknown - body of work. (1/12)
William H. Dean Jr. was born in Virginia in 1910, son of a prominent minister. He graduated Bowdoin College and later attended Harvard as a Rosenwald Fellow. He was awarded his Ph.D in economics from Harvard in 1938 on a relatively new subject: economic geography.
Economics largely existed, before the early 1900s, in what one practitioner called "a wonderland of no spatial dimensions." Dean grounded economics by analogizing from Newtonian physics to identify the location of economic activity based on transport, production, and markets.
There's a strain of liberalism and social democracy - communitarian, ethical, and optimistic - I was once attracted to.
I'm grappling with the omissions and weaknesses of this perspective while trying to hold on to its strengths. I'd be curious if this thread resonates. (1)
The hall mark of this perspective is a kind of melioristic humanism: that people, while not omniscient and infallible, are nonetheless able to transform their context through gradual, democratically arrived-at reforms. (2)
Think Dewey, Judt, Kloppenberg, and Whitman.
To arrive at these reforms, individuals need to deliberate with one another, communicating more or less civilly and empathetically in order to arrive at policies that - while not perfect - nonetheless ameliorate conditions. Democracy is both the means and ends of this process.