DEATH KULT USA
Study reveals alarming trend in US death rates since 2000

“Historically, the US was the first to start smoking at really high rates and then the rest of the world caught up,” noted Vierboom.“That seems to be happening with drug use, obesity etc…[the US] is like a sad trendsetter.”

Natalie Grover

THE GUARDIAN 

4/12/2021

How many Americans would die each year, on average, if the country had European mortality rates? Far fewer, suggests a new analysis, which compared mortality trends before the Covid-19 pandemic.

Despite spending far more than other wealthy countries on healthcare, the United States has relatively higher mortality rates and lower life expectancy – attributed to a plethora of factors including obesity, opioid overdoses, gun violence, suicides, smoking, road accidents and infant deaths.

Given the US does not have a universal healthcare system like most high-income European countries, researchers also think access to healthcare and medicines is patchwork, a problem exacerbated by pronounced racial and socioeconomic disparities and the rural-urban divide.

In the latest analysis, the authors worked on the basis of a counterfactual assumption – what if the US had the death rates by age and sex of an average peer European country (in this case, the combined mortality rates of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, England and Wales)? – and estimated how many fewer deaths there would have been in the US in 2000, 2010 and 2017 under that assumption.

The lead author, Samuel Preston, professor of sociology at the University of Pennsylvania, first compared mortality rankings between the US and a broader set of European countries in 2010, finding that the US ranked among the worst in people aged below age 75 among the 18 countries considered. “I just decided it would be interesting to update that analysis and was surprised to find how much the excess had grown between then and now,” he said.

In the latest analysis, the authors found mortality conditions in the US have worsened significantly since 2000 – and resulted in more than 400,000 excess deaths in 2017 alone. That year, Americans aged 30 to 34 were three times more likely to die than their European counterparts, which the researchers suggested was probably driven by drug overdoses – in particular opioids – as well as gun violence.

Paradoxically, in 2017, the US had lower death rates in people aged over 85 – the country had 97,788 fewer deaths than if subject to the European standard. The advantage in this age range has only increased since 2000, according to the analysis published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Preston and his co-author Dr Yana Vierboom, a researcher at Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, said they weren’t sure why elderly Americans appeared to be better off. One potential explanation, said Vierboom, was that the US tends to spend more on aggressive end-of-life care and treatments.

The analysis also assessed the performance of the US on years of life lost – a metric that weighed the number of excess deaths at a particular age by US life expectancy at that age (somebody who is younger has more potential years of life to live versus someone who is older).

Overall, the US experienced roughly 13m years of life lost to excess deaths in 2017, which represents a 64.9% increase since 2000, after adjusting for changes in size and age distribution, the authors found.

Jessica Ho, assistant professor of gerontology, sociology, and spatial sciences at the University of Southern California, attributed higher US mortality rates to a combination of behavioral and structural factors.

“Americans … often practice poor health behaviors, and this may interact with structural conditions like patchwork access to health care to produce worse outcomes,” she said. “For example, high rates of homicide are related to inequality and residential segregation; high rates of firearm-related deaths are influenced by both behavioral factors and the greater availability of guns in the US.”

Mauricio Avendano Pabon, professor of public policy and global health at King’s College London, suggested another explanation might be the strong governmental intervention across many dimensions of people’s lives in European countries, such as minimum wage and maternity leave.

“This is, of course, true for the US as well, but in general to a much less degree. While one may argue that less intervention increases efficiency and improves economic outcomes, the market is unlikely to emphasise values that relate to people’s health or inequality.”

The US Centers for Disease Control attributed 376,504 deaths to Covid-19 in 2020, a figure that was eclipsed by the excess deaths and lost years of life in 2017, the analysis found.

Although drug poisoning rates have come down since 2017, the story repeats itself with Covid-19, which again had a greater mortality impact in the US than European peer countries, said Patrick Heuveline, a professor of sociology at the University of California, Los Angeles, who was not involved in the analysis. Preston was one of his PhD advisers in the late 1990s.

Looking at the period between 31 March 2020 and 31 March, 2021 and using the same five European countries as the standard, a little over one-third of Covid-19 deaths in the US during those 12 months (36%) were excess deaths, Heuveline estimated.

So, what does the future look like for the US and peer high-income countries in Europe? It’s difficult to say for sure, Preston and Vierboom said.

“Historically, the US was the first to start smoking at really high rates and then the rest of the world caught up,” noted Vierboom.

“That seems to be happening with drug use, obesity etc…[the US] is like a sad trendsetter.”

TINY TOWN, ONTARIO
'Cleaner than ancient arctic ice,' university scientists plan to study Tiny-area groundwater

Two University of Alberta scientists gave Tiny council a taste of the municipality's superior groundwater while asking the township to collaborate on a project they hope to launch next year.

William Shotyk and Michael Powell were at a recent committee of the whole meeting to present the work they've done so far studying the artesian spring present in this region of Ontario.

"The groundwater has below detection limits of nitrates and phosphates," said Shotyk, professor and Bocock agriculture and the environment chair. "It's an indication of the water quality. The other perimeter is chloride.

"Based on the work I've done to-date, chloride is just a little bit less than 1 mg per litre. It's rather outstanding, because according to Prof. John Cherry (University of Waterloo), pristine groundwater has less than 5 mg of chloride per litre."

He said he studies trace elements in the environment and has dedicated research wells on his Tiny Township property for studying the water.

"This groundwater contains one part per trillion of lead," said Shotyk. "It's cleaner than ancient arctic ice."

However, he said, some of this ultra-clean water is young.

"It's more recent than 1950," said Shotyk, explaining he determines that based on traces of tritium, which show up in water after the 1950s.

"This water I'm talking about is not just great water, it's absolutely exceptional water," he added. "I think we should treasure this water. The Elmvale Foundation will do everything it can to protect this water for future generations."

Powell, a professor with the university's Agricultural, Life and Environmental Science, Renewable Resources Department, then talked about the specific area of concern to council: French's Hill, where the Teedon Pit is located.

"Water that falls on the top of French's Hill infiltrates down into the clay bed," he said. "It's a gentle slope from French's Hill. There are wetlands at the 250-metre elevation. There are also wetlands below that."

However, Powell added, to unwrap the hydrogeology of the area, they would have to drill three holes on top of French's Hill, and then drill wells on Shotyk's farm.

"It's very expensive and complicated," he said. "We're not looking just to publish a bunch of information in journals, we want to impact land-use change and have value addition.

"That comes in through partnership. We're especially concerned with the needs of Tiny Township and how the project can actually help the municipality. We formally want to involve Tiny Township as a stakeholder in this project. The data that we provide potentially can inform policy for protection of the resource."

The way they want to do that, said Powell, is through an NSERC (National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada) Alliance grant, for a multi-million-dollar, five-year project.

"We will give regular updates on all the information we collect," he added. "We know resources are stretched and we have to work out the modalities of just how much time and effort Tiny can put into this. But we hope somebody can be a liaison with us for Tiny Township."

Powell said they wouldn't dictate what the township needs to do to participate, but hope there will be an in-kind contribution.

"That some staff will have to dedicate some hours to us to stay up-to-date on it and be aware of what's going on," he said. "As far as the land goes, Bill has already arranged for a spot with a private landowner for a spot the well will go in."

Coun. Gibb Wishart was immediately onboard.

"I'm desperate to see your investigation produce a document that we can put in the face of the ministry of natural resources and the province of Ontario with the long-term thought that we stop all gravel extraction on French's Hill," he said. "I think that's a bit of a hope because there is some serious money that will be working to diminish the importance of your work.

"They're determined that the political types will decide that gravel is more important than water. I'm a fan of your work, but I'm also a fan of filling the lawn at Queen's Park."

Where both said they couldn't comment on the impact of the permit to take water applications without studying the area, they did answer a pointed question posed by Coun. Tony Mintoff.

"In terms of the potential availability of water," he asked, "do you feel the drawing of millions of litres of water from that area could have any kind of negative impact on the future availability of the water resource itself?"

Powell said if one looks at the number of people that rely on that water, it makes sense that anything that disrupts water to that water table is going to impact that water flow.

"How much? We don't know that yet," he added. " When you remove that soil cover, there are going to be consequences. That is also what we want to know through the study."

That's why Shotyk said it's very important to have all of the stakeholders at the table, even the aggregate companies vying for the water.

"Tiny Township council could help us get everybody to the table," he said. "In the interest of transparency, if an aggregate company has data that shows there's no possible way for their industry to impact the water, please show us the data. What we're looking for is engagement and involvement and transparency. For local citizens to have trust, there needs to be transparency."

Council received the presentation as information and directed staff to report back on the parameters of a partnership with the project, including the role the township would play.

Mehreen Shahid, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, OrilliaMatters.com

Edmonton pub closes amid threats after defying COVID-19 restrictions

The Crown and Anchor Pub and Grill was closed Sunday, just one day after remaining open despite orders requiring the closure of dine-in service in Alberta.

© Charles Taylor, Global News Edmonton's Crown and Anchor Pub and Grill defies provincial COVID-19 measures by remaining open for in-person dining, Saturday, April 10, 2021.

In a letter posted on restaurant's Facebook page, owners Theresa and Terry Shaw said they made the decision to close after receiving threats online and through phone calls.

"We feel the decision to close is the safest and wisest move for our staff, business and property because having that one per cent of the people that did not [want] us by threatening us verbally or on social media," the statement read.

READ MORE: Edmonton pub defying COVID-19 restrictions, remains open

On Saturday, the Shaws said they were defying health orders and remaining open for dine-in service to support staff and customers.

Effective noon Friday, Alberta restaurants were mandated to close to indoor dining service. Takeout, delivery, curbside pickup and patios are still allowed to operate under additional public health restrictions announced Tuesday by Premier Jason Kenney.

READ MORE: Alberta restaurants close to in-person dining as COVID-19 restrictions take effect

It is the third time since last March that Alberta restaurants have been forced to close their doors.

The Shaws said they complied with the restrictions on the previous two occasions but do not agree with the measures announced last week.

"The government in its illustrious reasoning has decided to close us in more ways than you can imagine by threatening to pull licenses and forcing us to fight while being closed to get them back," the owner's statement read.

READ MORE: Rural Alberta restaurant defies public health orders

A number of other restaurants and pubs around Alberta have defied provincial restrictions and remained opened for in-person dining.

Premier Jason Kenney has said Alberta is on track to have 2,000 new infections a day and 1,000 people in hospital with COVID-19 by the end of April and the third wave is being driven by variants.

BC's Horgan warns forestry sector, but no mention of old-growth

Though the battle to protect ancient trees is brewing in his own backyard, B.C. Premier John Horgan did not utter the word old-growth when talking to logging industry leaders Thursday.

Horgan — keynote speaker at the Council of Forest Industries conference — did not highlight what steps the province is taking on its promise to meet recommendations from the strategic old-growth review, which calls for a radical shift from timber extraction to protection of at-risk ecosystems.

Meanwhile, increasing numbers of people, frustrated by the rate at which the province is protecting old-growth, are heading to the Fairy Creek blockades near Port Renfrew in Horgan’s Vancouver Island riding.

Demonstrators at roadblocks to various entry points to Teal-Jones' Tree Farm Licence (TFL) 46 were served an injunction on Tuesday, although the RCMP had not arrived as of Friday morning.

However, Horgan said Forests Minister Katrine Conroy had a mandate to modernize forestry, and she’d issue an intentions paper in the weeks ahead.

“Our vision for the forest industry is very clear. It's going to be diverse, it's going to be competitive, and it's going to be sustainable,” said Horgan.

“One that places people first, and one that works directly with Indigenous peoples.”

The shrinking supply of timber from the pine beetle infestation and forest fires is an undeniable challenge with too many people chasing too few trees, Horgan said.

The premier expressed disappointment on the lack of progress by large companies holding most of B.C.’s forestry tenure in reaching deals with First Nations and smaller communities, so they could access timber to create value-added products and add jobs.

He sent a salvo over the bow of the sector, warning his government would step in to make it happen.

“There’s no magical solution to the lack of fibre,” Hogan said, adding work can be done to encourage companies and Indigenous nations to reach agreements.

“And those who do have tenure, and do not want to share it, well, we'll have to step in and ensure that there is fair compensation,” he said.

Horgan reiterated the province’s pursuit of value over volume, citing Wednesday’s announcement of a $4.2-million investment to develop mass timber for the construction sector, and the establishment of an advisory council to help facilitate that goal.

“An essential part of our approach to the industry is to make sure that we do focus on that value-added marketplace, and we stop chasing every stick to get it out as quickly as we can,” Horgan said.

He cautioned industry to put money away now with the “staggering” prices for lumber for rainy days associated with a cyclical sector.

“We all need to make sure that we're taking advantage of these extraordinarily high prices,” Horgan said.

“So, when the market starts to stabilize again, we're not looking back to government or out to workers to make concessions to make sure that the companies can continue to be profitable.”

Environmental groups pushing the province to act on the old-growth strategic review said Horgan’s desire to ensure small communities and First Nations are involved in forestry is positive.

But it does not address the problem that only three per cent of the remaining old-growth forests in the province support massive, ancient trees.

“Right now, all it sounds like is a new way of dividing the pie for logging without acknowledging it’s becoming smaller and smaller,” said Jens Wieting of Sierra Club BC.

“Action must be tied to acknowledging that we have an ecological crisis and what old-growth remains is so important for our survival from a climate risk perspective.”

The all-time high prices for lumber paired with the looming expectation in the industry that government will increase old-growth protections mean companies are motivated to log big trees as fast as they can, Wieting said.

“As the province continues to talk and log, companies will try to get as many big trees as possible,” he said.

“So we really have to find those mechanisms — now — to preserve what’s left.”

Rochelle Baker / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada’s National Observer

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

The Archegos meltdown will result in a $10 billion loss for global banks, JPMorgan says

ilee@insider.com (Isabelle Lee) 

4/12/2021

© Matteo Colombo/Getty Images Big Tech recovers after a rough day Wednesday on Wall Street. Matteo Colombo/Getty Images

Global banks are expected to lose up to $10 billion from the Archegos meltdown, JPMorgan said.

This is 5x the normal loss level for a collateralized daily mark-to-market business, JPMorgan added.

It however cited three lessons the industry could take away from the implosion that has roiled the markets.

Global banks are expected to lose up to $10 billion following the Archegos Capital Management meltdown, JPMorgan said Monday - raising its estimate from an initial $2 billion-$5 billion - with Credit Suisse Group and Nomura Holding hardest hit.

"One line of argument which could explain why the scale of losses suffered by [Credit Suisse] and Nomura was higher could be a higher level of leverage extended by these banks compared to [Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley], which seem to have suffered smaller losses if any," JPMorgan analysts led by Kian Abouhossein said in a research note Monday.

JPMorgan clarified that there may also be additional considerations that determined the sizable difference between the scale of losses suffered, such as the timing of the sale of positions, among others. Nonetheless, the entire episode affects the industry overall, given that global banks could end up losing five times the normal loss level for a collateralized daily mark-to-market business.

JPMorgan cites three lessons the industry could take away from the fund's implosion.

First, investment banks in general are in better shape today and are more focused on high-volume execution platforms.

"There is no excessive leverage in the [investment banking] or [private banking] industry," JPMorgan said. "Although [private banking] leverage has been increasing, it is nowhere near prior peaks."

The bank also said it sees no excessive equity-swap growth, a simple instrument all parties will benefit from.

Second, US regulatory frameworks like Basel III and the Dodd-Frank Act have improved the risk profile of investment banks. JPMorgan, however, noted that there is still weak oversight for non-bank entities, especially when it comes to family offices.

Archegos, a family office founded in 2012, did not have to disclose investments, unlike traditional hedge funds. JPMorgan also pointed to the lack of transparency when it came to equity-swap filings.

The Archegos sell-off exposed the fragility of the financial system, especially those involving lesser-known practices such as total return swaps, a derivative instrument that enabled Bill Hwang's office not to have ownership of the underlying securities his firm was betting on and the secrecy of family offices. Typically, family offices enjoy the "private adviser exemption" provided under the Advisers Act to firms as these usually advise less than 15 clients, among other conditions.

But JPMorgan said, "filing requirements would have applied to Archegos given its sizable exposure to some US securities. However, the fact that Archegos did not file with the [Securities and Exchange Commission] can be explained by the usage of total return swaps, which seems to be the primary method through which the sizable positions were built by Archegos."

Dan Berkovitz, a Democratic commissioner on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, denounced family offices and their ability to skirt some oversight.

"A 'family office' has nothing to do with ordinary families," he said in a statement on April 1. "Rather, it is an investment vehicle used by centimillionaires and billionaires to grow their wealth, reduce their taxes, and plan their estates."

Third, JPMorgan said private banks, specifically those linked to Archegos, moving forward could improve their onboarding, especially with clients with backgrounds such as Hwang, who has run into trouble in the past. Private banks could also strengthen their risk management by giving less leverage to non-transparent family offices with concentrated positions and ensure checking the clients' rehypothecation risk, among others.

Archegos in late March used borrowed money to make large bets on some stocks until Wall Street banks forced Archegos to sell over $20 billion worth of its shares after failing to meet a margin call. Hwang grew his family office's $200 million investment to $10 billion. Reports say the former Tiger Management trader lost $8 billion in 10 days.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Progressive group targets FedEx, Nike in campaign calling for higher corporate taxes

Brian Schwartz 
4/12/2021

A progressive group pushing Congress to raise the corporate tax rate is launching an ad campaign targeting FedEx and Nike, two large American companies with light federal tax bills.

Tax March, which held dozens of demonstrations in 2017 calling on former President Donald Trump to release his tax returns, plans to release ads targeting FedEx on Tuesday.
Tax March also plans to target Nike with a newspaper ad next week in the shoe giant's home state of Oregon.

© Provided by CNBC A FedEx employee loads up deliveries in San Francisco.

A progressive group pushing Congress to raise the corporate tax rate is launching an ad campaign targeting FedEx and Nike, two large American companies with light federal tax bills, the group said Monday.

Tax March, which held dozens of demonstrations in 2017 calling on former President Donald Trump to release his tax returns, plans to release ads targeting FedEx on Tuesday. The TV ads will air in Washington, D.C., and in Memphis, Tennessee, where FedEx is headquartered.

A report by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy says FedEx "zeroed out its federal income tax on $1.2 billion of U.S. pretax income in 2020 and received a rebate of $230 million." The report says the lack of payments in taxes by some corporations is likely linked to historic tax breaks as well as Trump's 2017 tax reform plan and certain elements of the coronavirus relief bill known as the CARES Act.

Tax March also plans to target Nike with a newspaper ad next week in the shoe giant's home state of Oregon, according to Dana Bye, the campaign director for the group. She said the newspaper ad will have a message similar to that of the TV spot focusing on FedEx.

The institute's report said Nike "didn't pay a dime of federal income tax on almost $2.9 billion of U.S. pretax income last year, instead enjoying a $109 million tax rebate."

Representatives for Nike and FedEx didn't respond to CNBC's request for comment before this story was published.

President Joe Biden has said he wants to raise the corporate tax rate to 28% to help pay for his $2 trillion infrastructure reform package. He has since said that he's willing to negotiate on the potential corporate tax hike as moderate Democrats such as Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., have pushed back on raising the rate to 28%.

Bye said the campaign as a whole will cost almost $500,000. It will also include digital ads on Facebook and other platforms.

The TV ad, first reviewed by CNBC, takes aim at FedEx as one of several companies that paid little to no federal corporate income taxes recently.

"Tell Congress: It's time to put the people first," a voiceover on the FedEx ad says. "Make corporations like FedEx pay their fair share."

FedEx recently told CNBC that it is against raising corporate taxes as way to pay for Biden's infrastructure plan. Advocacy groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable have also opposed the idea of raising the corporate tax rate as a way to pay for infrastructure.

"I think the biggest statement we are trying to make through this campaign is that we can't let corporate tax dodgers like FedEx drive the debate on taxes," Bye said.

Tax March is a project of the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a dark money 501(c)(4) organization that contributed just over $60 million to Democratic-aligned groups during the 2020 election, including millions to super PACs backing Biden, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

The campaign by Tax March is one of the first to take on corporations since Biden became president. It comes as corporations are under pressure to respond to new voting laws such as those recently passed in Georgia.

A Nobel-prize winning economist says the wealthy will just find a way to dodge any wealth tax

insider@insider.com (Juliana Kaplan) 

© Provided by Business Insider British-born economist Angus Deaton of Princeton University answers questions in a news conference after winning the 2015 economics Nobel Prize in Princeton, New Jersey, October 12, 2015. REUTERS/Dominick Reuter

Nobel Prize-winning economist Angus Deaton said a one-off wealth tax is a "bad" way to pay for the pandemic.

Without addressing its morality, Deaton told Bloomberg it would be hard to implement and the rich would avoid it.

One-off wealth taxes have been gaining traction recently, and even the IMF has endorsed them.

Wealth taxes have become an increasingly prominent topic as inequality surges in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, when the world's billionaires tacked $4 billion onto their net worths while 54 million people fell out of the global middle class.

One possible solution, touted by everyone from an Oxfam report on inequality to the International Monetary Fund to Sen. Elizabeth Warren: A tax on the wealthiest members of society.

But a Nobel Prize-winning economist famous for his work on inequality has raised concerns about using a wealth tax to pay off pandemic costs. The problem: He thinks the wealthy will try to dodge it.

In an interview with Bloomberg, Angus Deaton said wealth taxes would not only be difficult to implement, but would give the ultrawealthy incentives to avoid it. "And avoid it they will," he said.

Billionaire Leon Cooperman said as much in an interview with CNBC while discussing Warren's proposed wealth tax. "If the wealth tax passes, go out and buy yourself some gold because people are going to rush to find ways of hiding their wealth," Cooperman told CNBC.

Concerns over implementation have been a major talking point in wealth tax discussions. Another is the myriad ways that the ultrawealthy use to hide their wealth and assets from taxation.

A recent study from the IRS and economists found that America's richest seem to have been hiding billions from the agency. The US, where Warren has been continually pushing for a more permanent wealth tax to address inequality, has become a leading tax haven for the world's richest.

One-off wealth taxes have gained traction recently

Deaton is a famed scholar of inequality. As Bloomberg reports, he's currently leading an expert panel in the UK that's aimed at reducing inequality. In December, another panel in the UK - the Wealth Tax Commission - recommended a one-off tax on the UK's wealthiest residents. They said that a a 1% tax for five years on individual wealth over £500,000 could raise £260 billion (around $357 billion).

The IMF recently recommended one-off wealth taxes as a way to help improve the global rebound; one such tax has already been implemented in Argentina.

Deaton said that if implemented, any one-off wealth tax would likely become permanent. He also cautioned against cutting social services in the UK, pointing to the negative impacts of austerity after the financial crisis. He declined to comment further to Insider.

In the US, President Joe Biden hasn't seemed to favor an explicit wealth tax, although he's currently trying to increase the tax rate for corporations and has said taxes will go up for the $400,000 and above income bracket.

"I'm not trying to punish anybody, but damn it, maybe it's because I come from a middle-class neighborhood, I'm sick and tired of ordinary people being fleeced," he said in a speech defending his proposal to increase the corporate tax rate to 28%.

Universal child care could boost women’s lifetime earnings by $130 billion—and ensure more stable retirement options

Megan Leonhardt 

CNBC 4/12/2021

Since last February, over 2.3 million women have dropped out of the workforce, compared to just 1.8 million men who left the labor force between February 2020 and 2021, according to data compiled by the National Women's Law Center. And many of those women are still unemployed because they are caring for children who are not in school or daycare.

© Provided by CNBC

New research from Columbia University and the National Women's Law Center finds that a universal child-care system — one that provides affordable, reliable child care from birth to age 13 — would not only help many of those out-of-work employees get back into the workforce, but would also dramatically increase the lifetime earnings and security of women across the country.

An average woman with two children could see a $97,000 increase in her lifetime earnings under universal child care, according to the report. Collectively, about 1.3 million women in the U.S. could experience about a $130 billion boost in income over their lifetimes.

Overall, the number of women working full-time would increase by 17% if the U.S. expanded access to stable and consistent child care. The number of women working without a college degree would jump by about 31%.

"When there's an increased investment in child care, there's a measured increase in women's labor force participation," says Melissa Boteach, vice president of income security and child care/early learning at the National Women's Law Center. The highest gains can be seen for women in their 30s and 40s, since those are the decades when women are most likely to raise children, she adds.

This increase in workforce participation and lifetime earnings could also lead to a significant impact on women's retirement situations, the report finds. Women would have an additional $20,000 in private savings on average and about $10,000 more in Social Security benefits. That adds up to about $160 per month in additional funding in retirement, the report finds

.

© Provided by CNBC

Those extra earnings could especially help improve the financial situations of older women, who are more likely to experience poverty later in life than men. "Senior women have significantly higher poverty rates than senior men because of all the discrimination and all of the financial challenges that compound over their lives [and] stick with them in retirement," Boteach adds.

But child-care reform could reduce poverty among senior women by about 21%, the report finds.

The report's projections are based on a model of universal child care that provides stable and consistent care to children from birth to age 13. Under the model, child-care costs would not exceed 7% of a family's annual income and child-care workers would earn a livable wage rather than the pre-pandemic average of $11.65 an hour.

These policies would dramatically impact low-income women and women of color. Currently, women who earn lower incomes typically spend about a third of their take-home pay on child care, Boteach says. That can affect a family's choices around whether one or both parents work. If a parent needs to stay at home or reduce their hours to care for children, it's generally going to be the woman, she explains.

When talking about economic solutions that will improve the workforce and reduce poverty, child care is probably not top of mind, Boteach says. But the findings show that child care is an economic driver that can be used to improve financial stability throughout women's lives.

"If we start with this generation of women and start investing in their ability to be breadwinners and caregivers, then you will see the fruit of that 30 years from now," Boteach says.

CNBC VIDEO WOMEN AND WORK INTERVIEW WITH (D) REP KATIE PORTER

22.00 MINUTES

https://wus-streaming-video-msn-com.akamaized.net/6ab08f0a-88f2-4b27-8485-1d0af22bcae6/c345b761-5c11-43ab-9635-4df9cbfe_2250.mp4

It's time to declare a national climate emergency

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), opinion contributor 

THE HILL 4/12/2921

This month, President Biden will convene 40 world leaders to discuss the urgency of climate action and strengthen global cooperation on key climate goals. But before the president takes the global stage at the Leaders Summit on Climate, there's something he should do at home: declare a national climate emergency here in the United States.

© Getty Images It's time to declare a national climate emergency

In recent years, we have seen the effects of the climate crisis, both in our own backyard and around the world. From wildfires raging across Oregon and the West, to hurricanes wreaking havoc in the southeast, and increasing average temperatures everywhere in between, the impacts have been devastating.

The severity of the crisis necessitates bold action. And the scientists and experts have been clear: If we do not adequately address this climate emergency now, the impacts will only become more catastrophic.

Despite the other challenges facing our country, the Biden administration has done an admirable job of prioritizing climate action in the first months of his administration. After years of practiced ignorance from former President Trump and congressional Republicans, however, an even larger mobilization is needed.

That's why I've taken steps - alongside Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) - to mandate a national climate emergency. By directing the president of the United States to declare a national climate emergency, our National Climate Emergency Act will ensure every resource is at the country's disposal to halt, reverse, mitigate and prepare for the consequences of this climate crisis.

This could not be more important, as the climate crisis is connected to, and exacerbates, almost every other crisis we are currently dealing with. Of course, we cannot ignore that the current and lasting effects of climate change are disproportionately impacting Black, Indigenous and other communities of color.

Fighting the climate crisis means fighting racial injustices. Fighting the climate crisis means fighting public health injustices. And fighting the climate crisis means combatting economic injustices.

Declaring a national climate emergency is more than just a symbol of our commitment to this fight. It will literally unlock the tools needed to get the job done. This includes the ability to invest in large-scale mitigation and resiliency projects, such as public infrastructure to expand access to clean and affordable energy, and the opportunity to develop and transform the industrial base of the U.S. while creating high-skilled family-wage jobs.

As we look ahead to this month's summit, I'm thrilled that the new administration wants the United States to once again lead the global fight against climate change. But right now, other countries are taking greater steps than we are.

In fact, 38 individual countries have already declared a climate emergency. Many of the leaders invited to Biden's upcoming climate summit represent those countries, including President Emmanuel Macron of France, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, and President Moon Jae-in of the Republic of Korea.

If we are going to encourage stronger climate action across the globe, it's important that we also take every possible step to combat the climate crisis here at home. That includes a national climate emergency declaration.

After four years of Trump's environmental recklessness, it's a relief to see Biden's real commitment to a whole-of-government response to the climate crisis. His American Jobs Plan centers climate action in our infrastructure conversation. It also includes some of my environmental legislative priorities, such as the elimination of tax preferences for fossil fuels that will help spur investments in clean energy technologies and a reinstatement of the Superfund tax that will finally shift the cleanup responsibility at toxic and hazardous waste sites back to polluters.

Our National Climate Emergency Act, which mandates the declaration of a climate emergency, is in line with all of this. Not only will it lay the necessary framework for countless other actions we will take, but it will put us in line with the very allies we're hoping to motivate and encourage in the fight against the climate crisis.

Before Biden takes the global stage, let's take a stand at home. The time is now to declare a national climate emergency.

Blumenauer, a Democrat, represents Oregon's 3rd District in the U.S. House of Representatives. He is the author and primary sponsor of the National Climate Emergency Act.

Opinion: California wildfires. Hurricanes on the coast. Is anywhere safe from the climate crisis?

Opinion by John D. Sutter Video by McKenna Ewen and Gabe Ramirez, CNN 

4/12/2021

Tracy thought she'd built her forever home. She and her 5-year-old granddaughter live in an energy-efficient house in Northern California that Tracy designed — by a pond that's frequented by otters, ducks and herons (oh my!).

© Provided by CNN John D. Sutter

Then came the fires, the smoke, the evacuations, the days when the sky turned red and they were unable to see the sun. It was terrifying, she said. Understandably. And it's poised to get worse because of the climate crisis, which is contributing to longer and more dangerous wildfires in the West as humans dump fossil fuel pollution into the atmosphere.

Because of this, Tracy made the difficult decision to leave.

Then came more questions that seemed even trickier.

Where to go?

Is anywhere safe from the climate emergency?

She left CNN a voicemail about the conundrum. (She did that as part of an ongoing series of mine that's called "Let's talk about the climate apocalypse.")

"The big question I have is: If not here, where?" she said.

Feeling a little bit like a climate journalist (which I am) and a little bit like an annoying HGTV host (which I am not — yet?), I went on a quest to try to answer that question for Tracy.

I had a hunch that she wasn't alone in asking this question. The last several years have shown the degree to which human carbon emissions already are shaping reality: more-frequent wildfires raging in California, rapidly intensifying hurricanes pounding the Gulf of Mexico, sea levels rising on the Atlantic and droughts become more severe in the West. I'm sure there are plenty Americans asking themselves if home will ever feel safe.

I've done pretty extensive reporting on climate-induced migration — including from Honduras, Puerto Rico or the Marshall Islands, where people tend to be thinking less about where they will move to and more about the climate disasters that are pushing them out.

But I have to admit: I haven't thought much about where people should go.

Or about who's able to move and why.

Tracy knows she is privileged to be able to plan this move and to have the resources to make it comfortably — to choose while others are forcibly displaced. Her house is still standing and in good shape. The fires came to a nearby ridge, but not to her pond or land.

Rather than pretending the fire risks will recede, or waiting for a fire to come and force her out, she is facing harsh realities and trying to make what I would consider a wise decision — one that, for her, focuses on her granddaughter's future.

When this happens at the community level, climate adaptation specialists call it "managed retreat." Without government programs to help people relocate out of harm's way (there are very few, and they're not scaled appropriately), climate migration will only widen gaping inequalities in this country. Some can choose to move. Others will be left to fend for themselves. It's the scattered, diffuse successor to the Dust Bowl in the 1930s, the Great Migration of Black Americans from the South in the 1900s and of White flight to the suburbs in the 1970s.

And it usually happens with little discussion.

In taking up Tracy's question, I had my own.

Were there other people like her? And if so, where were they moving?


'Climate refuge'

One of my first calls was to Jesse Keenan of Tulane University, who studies the movement of people and the ways we're adapting to climate risks.

In recent years, Keenan and other researchers, including A.R. Siders and Mathew Hauer, have been raising awareness about how the climate crisis will force people to move.

The scale is far greater than most people realize.

"This is on the scale of the great Dust Bowl and the migration that came along with that," Keenan told me. "There are too many unknowns" to fully quantify the scope of climate-induced migration, he said, "but we do recognize that this is in the order of millions of people."

The World Bank, for example, estimates that more than 140 million people could become internally displaced by the climate crisis in coming decades — and their assessment only includes a few regions of the world. The rise in sea levels alone (which does not account for Tracy's situation, fleeing fire or other climate calamities like floods) is expected to displace 13 million people in the US by 2100, according to Hauer's research published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

In this context, Keenan has become fascinated by the same question as Tracy -- the where. Where will people move as the world continues to warm? And are there any places that would be smart to position themselves as a "climate refuge?"

His answer: Yes.

In particular, the Great Lakes region and the American Rust Belt.

And in hyper-particular: Duluth, Minnesota.


'Not as cold as you think'

In 2019, after conducting a statistical analysis of US cities — including the cost of living, relative vulnerability to climate-related disasters and effects, availability of diverse housing stock, natural resource availability, and so on — Keenan began discussing Duluth, Minnesota, as one of the most climate-friendly places in the United States. Scientists and other academics from the University of Minnesota Duluth caught wind of this and asked Keenan to come to town to present his research in town.

In a public lecture, Keenan introduced some tongue-in-cheek slogans — "Duluth: not as cold as you think!" — and outlined his vision for Duluth as a climate refuge.

People in Duluth are still talking about the visit two years later.

His thesis rests on a few key points:

Water: Duluth sits at the western point of Lake Superior, which is among the largest freshwater lakes in the world, containing about 10% of the world's accessible freshwater (10%!). California is running out of water. (The massive Colorado River often is sucked dry by cities in the Southwest before it meets the Gulf of California). The West is getting drier, overall. And here's Duluth sitting on an abundant, stable supply of the stuff.

Housing: Duluth, like other Rust Belt cities, has available and affordable housing stock. According to the mayor's office, the city was built for 130,000 people. Manufacturing declined. Now the city's population is only 86,000. In other words: room to grow.
Infrastructure and mindset: Duluth has been investing in a clean-energy future in ways that not all former industrial towns have, according to Keenan. It has abundant public parks, health care facilities and water infrastructure that could support a growing population, he said.

Cool factor: Keenan describes Duluth in his presentation and interviews as progressive, inclusive and welcoming — the type of place a Californian can tolerate. There's an art scene, breweries, a distillery that makes gin from the area's spruce and juniper trees. The county — St. Louis County — is reliably blue in a blue-leaning state that happens to have the nation's highest voter turnout rate. It's an engaged, interesting place.

The entire Great Lakes region is poised to succeed in this way, Keenan told me. Thinking across decades and generations — not right away — that northern region could undergo a Renaissance as people flee fire, rising seas, floods, hurricanes and extreme drought. There are still climate risks in the upper Midwest, to be sure. But they are expected to be less intense than those affecting other parts of the United States.

Lucinda Johnson, associate director of the Natural Resources Research Institute at the University of Minnesota Duluth, recalls thinking that this idea of "refuge" was the most natural thing in the world. She studies other organisms that seek it — and they're usually looking for freshwater.

"There's no reason to think that humans are going to be any different from other species" when it comes to seeking out that resource, Johnson told me. "We are part of the ecosystem, so there's not a lot we can do to separate ourselves from the natural world."


'San Francisco of the North'

I decided to follow in Keenan's footsteps and take a trip to Duluth.

After all, if I were going to recommend this place as a future home for Tracy — and all of the other people considering similar moves — I should at least set eyes on it. Duluth sounds fine on paper, but "House Hunters" teaches us that listings aren't always what they seem.

I'm not going to sugarcoat my first impression: Driving into town, Duluth struck me as a Midwestern version of Pittsburgh. The city is about two hours north of Minneapolis by car. The first thing you see from that direction is its industry — a paper mill, factories, heaps of ore.

Plus, the weather. In mid-March, after one brilliantly sunny afternoon, it was very windy and therefore fairly cold. (I'm not going to say "frigid" even though it felt that way to me at times, coming from Salt Lake City; Minnesotans, who are known for being super nice, also are known for being super not-nice to people who complain about their weather.) In February, before my visit, the temperature dropped to minus 27 degrees Fahrenheit.

Get a little closer, though, and Duluth's allure begins to reveal itself. You can see the hillside that plunges with San Francisco-like steepness toward Lake Superior. And then, of course, there's the lake. I've spent relatively little time in the Great Lakes region, but this is a lake that looks and sounds like an ocean. Signs alert visitors of its substantial currents. There's a light house, a boardwalk and a lift bridge that crosses St. Louis Bay. Waves crash on the rocky shore of the lake — and, truly, you can forget for a moment that you're not on the Pacific.

I felt conflicted right from the start.

One of my first stops was to meet the city's mayor, Emily Larson.

"We are known as the San Francisco of the North," Larson said with smile.

"I'll let you decide if you think that's true."

At first, Larson didn't know how to feel about Keenan's proposal — Duluth as climate refuge. The idea "really challenged me, actually," she told me, "like, challenged me personally."

She found it difficult to grapple with the fact that people are being forced from homes they've built and have loved — that human-caused warming would undercut entire ways of life.

Given that stark reality, though, she wants to help.

"It's a wonderful place to live. It's an extraordinary place," she said of Duluth.

"And we want to be that (refuge) for people."

It happens to be a potential refuge where the average home price, according to Zillow, is just north of $200,000. Far short of San Francisco's $1.4 million.


'Cultural genocide'

Not everyone shares this vision of Duluth-as-climate-refuge.

There are fears in town that property values will go up — that the clean water, ample parks and relatively affordable housing may not survive thousands of new arrivals.

The state and nation's painful legacy of colonialism complicates matters further.

I spoke with Karen Diver, a member of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and a former adviser to President Obama on Native American affairs, about this idea.

For her, the stakes could not be higher.

"If you are going to come here, then you need to support us as Indigenous people so that your climate solution doesn't end up in our cultural and spiritual genocide," she said.

"This is treaty area for the Fond du Lac Band (of Lake Superior Chippewa). And, once again, we are going to bear the brunt of colonization," she said. "These will be new colonizers coming to the area, but it's going to because they're going to come here for reasons that have nothing to do with anything that Tribal people have done."

Diver said it's not that she doesn't sympathize with people who are moving because of the climate crisis. It's that she wants to be sure their arrival doesn't further degrade the natural resources that make northern Minnesota special — and that Indigenous people aren't further marginalized (or further pushed off of their land) by new migrants.

"If you're coming for the clean water, can we still promise you clean water with 50,000 or 100,000 more people?" she said. "Don't kill the thing you love, you know?"

Larson, the mayor, told me the city is planning for sustainable growth. She said she's sensitive to Diver's concerns and the fact that "this land has been inhabited for centuries," well before Duluth existed as a town, should be front of mind during this potential transition.


'Our home didn't feel habitable'

Largely, Duluth-as-climate-refuge is still a theory.

But I did meet two people for whom this is reality.

Jamie Beck Alexander and Doug Kouma both moved to Duluth, separately, in circumstances similar to Tracy's. They lived in California and became fearful of wildfires and toxic air quality. They sought out Duluth in part because of its perceived insulation from climate disaster.

Kouma, who was living in Sonoma County, created a spreadsheet with some of the qualities he was looking for in a new city. Duluth ranked near the top for him, particularly for its lack of climate risks and its relatively progressive politics. A visit in 2019 sealed the deal.

"Duluth is today is sort of maybe what San Francisco might have been 20 or 30 years ago?" he told me, not 100% sure about this but also not willing to dismiss the comparison. "It's crunchy. It's granola. You can be who you want to be and live the life you want to live here."

As for the winters? They're super cold, he said. But people embrace it by cross-country skiing and snowshoeing. He actually didn't mind it. His biggest complaint seems to be the small size of the 40-something dating pool. He jokingly asked me to encourage dating prospects to check Duluth out.

Jamie Alexander, meanwhile, left San Francisco with her husband and two young children last summer. They didn't want to live through another fire season — particularly because of their children's health. "Our home didn't feel habitable to us anymore," she said.

They started driving east and kept going until they felt like they were a safe distance from fire risk. That ended up being Minnesota, and eventually Duluth. Alexander is the director of Drawdown Labs at Project Drawdown, which is a climate-focused organization, so she was familiar with the risks.

They couldn't be more pleased with Duluth. Alexander told me she feels more at home here after several months than she'd felt in other locations the family had lived in for years.

"We've been really warmly welcomed," she said.

Given the similarities between Alexander's story and Tracy's, I asked Alexander if she had anything she wanted to say to the woman struggling with the question of where to move.

"I would say, 'We're all in this unknown together.' I don't think there are some people who have the answers and other people who are searching for them. I think we're all, you know — we're all searching and we're all trying to make sense of what's happening" to the planet.

"There's no guidebook for this," she added.

"History is no guide for the future."


'I'll go look'

After the trip, I called Tracy.

I wasn't trying to convince her to move to Duluth, per se. This isn't actually HGTV. I share Mayor Larson's sentiment that none of this feels good. There are terrible inequities baked into the way climate migration is unfolding in the United States. My true wish is that the world would stop burning fossil fuels, which would slow down the rate of warming that's driving these changes.

Short of that, it's logical to me that Americans like Tracy would seek to adapt.

If only this country could help lower-income people do the same.

And if only the United States could become a global leader in a push to include the climate as a valid criterion for status under the Refugee Convention. Currently, climate migrants are not covered under international refugee law like political refugees, for example.

I also want people like Tracy to find safety — to find home in this troubled world.

I told her about Keenan and Duluth.

About how it meets many of her personal criteria — the sense of community, the progressive politics, the availability of freshwater and (for the most part) the apparent reduced risk of wildfire.

"I'll go look!" she said, partly just to placate me, I think.

"Maybe it's closer to San Francisco than I realized. If so, that would be wonderful."

There's no easy or happy ending to this story. Tracy has decided to move. But she still doesn't know where. The idea of the Midwest doesn't appeal to her culturally, and she's worried about the cold winters.

Maybe Vermont? New England?

Nothing feels exactly right — or doesn't yet.

Even Alexander, who is happy now in Duluth, told me this transition has been extraordinarily painful. She left San Francisco without really saying goodbye to a place she loved.

I thought back on my conversation with Keenan, who told me that the United States is "an extraordinarily mobile country." We're people who adapt to problems by moving — for better and worse. The climate crisis may prove to drive the Greatest Migration of them all.

It's playing out today with relatively little notice.

And with little support from governments or international organizations.

Nowhere is truly safe.

But perhaps it's only human to seek whatever refuge you can find it.










a man wearing sunglasses: Karen Diver, member of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and a former adviser to President Obama on Native American affairs.Next Slide
Auto Rotation On
Full Screen

1/9 SLIDES © McKenna Ewen

Karen Diver, member of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and a former adviser to President Obama on Native American affairs.