The Great Near (& Far)
Community revitalization, big tech philanthropy, meaningful work, broadband, & more about Jack Dorsey...
Hey folks. This is the 18th edition of The Great Near. Back after a short holiday break! I’ll be re-launching “TGN 2.0.” in 2022 with a refresh and a bit more regularity. In the meantime, here’s a weekly curation (read: no more long-form posts for a bit) of content that might push your thinking about power and the systems that shape our lives. I’m talking about the economy, public policy, finance, capitalism, the social sector, and more. Follow for new research, op-eds, hot takes, my favorite explainers, the best learning resources, and fun nuggets so that our heads don’t explode.
—
The Great Near (& Far) 👀 ✨
On community revitalization — If you’ve followed TGN these past months, you’ve read about The Guild, East Bay Permanent Real Estate Cooperative (EBPREC), Historic Clayborn Temple, and the Kataly Foundation. The New York Times caught up this week, profiling these 🔥🔥🔥 organizations in an article about the revitalization of Black neighborhoods. To these orgs, revitalization means more than real estate investments; it’s about preserving arts, culture, affordable housing, and a thriving small business ecosystem. To do this, they’re getting creative about who owns what, for example, structuring cooperatives so that community investors become owners. This is the case with Esther’s Orbit Room, being developed by EBPREC. Attracting capital for these creative projects can be a big challenge, especially for Black developers, and alternative lending sources must be available. Kataly Foundation is one such source, offering loan guarantees, grants, and low-cost loans to finance these initiatives. (For more on alternative capital, check out this story on Common Future's character-based lending fund in YES! Magazine this month. It’s been written about in TGN and listed alongside dozens of other racial equity funds in a new list put out by Bridgespan, The GIIN, PolicyLink, and CapEQ.)
On big tech philanthropy — I don’t love talking about Jack Dorsey, or Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk for that matter, but they have a big influence on the economy (yes, obvious). They wield this power to normalize shameful labor practices, manipulate the market via tweets, and in Dorsey’s case, shift philanthropy to bend to the interests of the rich and powerful. (Though this won’t be the biggest news today with Dorsey’s upcoming departure as Twitter’s CEO.) I recently shared Dorsey’s #startsmall tracker which made waves when he made his philanthropy public. With just two employees helping to direct these mega-gifts, some upwards of $20 million, “he’s bringing Silicon Valley’s favored mantra “move fast and break things” to philanthropy.” Though I am sure many of these dollars are being put to good use—some small BIPOC-led organizations were surprised to receive funding through an opaque process—even Beyonce isn’t the best arbiter of nonprofit funding.
Who influences Jack Dorsey’s donations (Credit: Cedric Sam, Bloomberg)
(More) on philanthropy — Did you catch the news about McKenzie Scott giving away $6 billion in 2020? You probably did; she got praise in every major publication. While this praise is merited, particularly towards her no-strings-attached approach, this had unexpected downsides for some nonprofits who received large gifts. Rakiba Kibria and Jess Feingold, my colleagues at Common Future, speak about harmful dynamics in philanthropy on Medium, specifically how some of our funders reconsidered their support after we secured a large gift from Scott. This is well worth a read for funders.
On divestment — First Harvard, then Boston University, now the city of Boston. “Mayor Michelle Wu signed an ordinance Monday to divest $65 million in city investments from companies that profit off fossil fuels. The new ordinance prohibits city funds from being invested in the stocks, securities, or other obligations of any company which derives more than 15% of its revenue from fossil fuels, tobacco products, or prison facilities.” That’s fantastic news if you believe divestment is a winning strategy. Others, like the investment group Engine No. 1, are betting that active investment is the key. In other words, affect change in corporations from the inside by becoming major shareholders. Both strategies have their place in fighting the climate crisis. On the other hand… Texas Governor Greg Abbot recently banned state investments in businesses that cut ties with oil and gas companies. 💀 This position is shortsighted, partisan, and nonsensical. If sustainable investments shouldn’t discriminate against oil and gas producers, as Texas representatives have argued to the SEC, then, well… I’m done.
On media — Love to see news in my inbox about Capital B: “a Black-led, nonprofit local and national news organization reporting for Black communities across the country, launching early 2022.” Looking forward to this publication!
On work — Common Future adopted the four-day work week this year to invest in employee wellbeing. Though my friends lovingly resent me, it’s had a big impact on my team’s productivity and general satisfaction about work. Many other orgs are experimenting with people-centric policies as the pandemic continues, and there’s been an uptick in conversation about the meaning of work. This podcast between Rogé Karma and Sarah Jaffe explored whether we feel more burnt out when we seek meaning or fulfillment in work. Jaffe argues that work should be more transactional to maintain better boundaries between work and leisure time—especially in the nonprofit sector. (thoughts below?) Erin A. Cech recently argued in The Atlantic that “Loving Your Job Is a Capitalist Trap.” Both Cech and Jaffe argue that pursuing work we are passionate about can manipulate our sense of self, meaning that our value becomes enmeshed in our productivity as employees.
So… how does wellbeing relate to economic justice? Employees finally have leverage in the market to secure better pay, benefits, or working conditions. Many are quitting their jobs to pursue their passions or seek work that aligns with their values. But this point from Cech’s analysis was revealing. As more people seek meaningful work, there are potential downsides for working-class individuals:
“I found that when working-class college graduates pursue their passion, they are about twice as likely as wealthier passion seekers to later end up in unstable, low-paid work far outside that passion.“
It’s great that corporations are finally thinking about purpose and shaping work culture to meet the needs of caregivers, differently-abled individuals, and others. But if creating meaningful jobs (“come make the world better”) comes at the expense of better pay or benefits, it will only increase burnout and job dissatisfaction for the most marginalized workers.
Speaking of meaningful work… Chobani’s CEO, Hamdi Ulukaya, caused a stir five years ago when he granted shares worth 10% of the company’s value to 2,000 full-time employees. Now, as Chobani ramps up to go public, “some of its hourly workers could stand to make $1 million or more in stock awards.” 🎉 Now that’s reimagining capitalism.
On broadband — I have the privilege of high-speed broadband in New York—except sadly at my home desk in Brooklyn—so I appreciate the reminder that millions of people in the U.S. lack a stable internet connection. This has serious ramifications if you’re, say, trying to log in to Zoom school or bring your business online during a pandemic. Here’s what the coverage map looks like:
Blue counties = <15% of the population are using the internet at 25Mbps or above (Credit: The Verge)
It’s a big deal that the infrastructure bill set aside $65 billion for broadband improvements. (The FCC is now calling on interested parties to weigh in). Though major infrastructure projects don’t have the best track record, this could be a win for rural and Native communities if executed well. I often look to The Center for Rural Affairs, a community financial institution based in Nebraska, as an important voice on rural broadband access and other rural issues.
A few perspectives…
a. Robert Reich explored on substack why we choose to reduce poverty for the elderly (through Medicare), but not for children. Though Biden’s Child Tax Credit lifted three million children out of poverty in its first month, nearly 30% of Black and Latino children still live in poverty. Here’s how the U.S. compares to our neighbors:
“America’s current rate of child poverty is among the highest of all advanced nations. We do have a Children’s Health Insurance Program, but it’s not close to what other advanced nations give their children. Hell, we don’t even provide what other advanced nations offer by way of childcare. Norway spends about $30,000 per child each year on early childhood care. Finland spends $23,000. Germany, $18,000. The United States? We spend $500 per child — or 1/60th of what Norways spends on its toddlers. As it stands now, Biden’s Build Back Better bill will provide additional funding. But it’s astonishing how little the richest nation in the world has done for its kids.”
b. Judd Legum explored the shoplifting “crisis” on Open Information. He found that there were 300+ stories about petty theft from one man in San Francisco at a Walgreens, yet there was only one story about the $4.5 million class-action lawsuit that the pharmacy retailer settled for stealing wages from its employees. In Legum’s words: “only certain types of theft are newsworthy.“
c. Eric Ohrn put out a working paper earlier this year on corporate tax breaks, which found that “for every dollar a firm benefits from the tax breaks, compensation of the firm’s top five highest paid executives increases by 15 to 19 cents.” As he explains in a Twitter thread, there were no comparable effects of a tax break for average employee wages, though “in firms with really strong governance, the tax breaks have no effect on executive compensation.”
e. this👇 🤔
until next time,
caitlin