The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a very significant occurrence that cannot be forgotten in the history of America. The Act came into being after a lot of pressure from various interested parties among which were activists, the minorities, and other imperative organizations. Since then the Act has been of great value to researchers, historians, and geographers worldwide. Through qualitative methodology in which the usage of existing information on the topic shall be gathered and critically analyzed. In seeking to answer the question, is there a connection between the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and income inequality, the research called for a deeper exploration of the different races and how their economic life is impacted on after the implementation of the act. In the findings and conclusion, the act has been seen as a propeller of income imbalances particularly when it comes to house ownership, getting financial securities, mortgages and loans. It also reduces chances of negotiating for better wages among the whites. In addition, the Blacks have their children in schools, yet their schools are taxed as compared to those of the Whites. Nonetheless, the act brings about employment opportunities for Blacks and the minorities, better wages and improved facilities.

Keywords : Civil Rights Act of 1964, Income inequality, economic impact

Background Information

Race and racial inequality is a greatly discussed topic in the history of America. In the 1960s, national leaders woke up to enact a major civil right legislation. Though President Kennedy introduced title one legislation of the act by 1963, it was never discussed until the Birmingham events where school children alongside the adults from minority groups held a demonstration demanding for indiscriminative treatment. They were attacked by hose fire and dogs and the pictures of that went into the media after which Martin was arrested. As result of it, there were a lot of struggles by various activists and pressure on the Congress to vote for what can transform America. However, that enabled the larger bill until 1964, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sign up the bill that real Voting Rights legislation was a reality. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a vital legislative piece which the Congress passed in the 20th C when it eliminated the Jim Crow Act that had drawn lines between people of different races, their actions and exploration. The Act came up with an objective of enforcing the legitimate right to voting, to offer injunctive liberation contrary to segregation in public accommodation, and confer jurisdiction upon the American district courts. Similarly, it aimed at making the Attorney General institute suits that defend constitutional privileges in public amenities and public schooling, to come up with a Commission of Equal Employment Opportunity, and to make it possible that the Commission on Civil Rights reaches many people. Finally, it worked to do away with discriminative actions in the programs rolled out by the federal, and serve other extended roles. The Act contains 11 segments that prohibit discrimination in public accommodations, federal funds, and hiring as generated to serve courts in relevant cases. Additional titles are procedural but with judicial interpretation since then. The act made race exit the national policy agenda.

Study Purpose

History is essential in enhancing an understanding of present situations and the reason why certain social, economic and political issues are the way they are. In America inequality is a commonly discussed issue whose explanations and attachments to other matter in life cannot be avoided. The income inequality is part and parcel of the discussion and matters when the civil act of 1964 is of focus. It has been common for the civil act to be looked at as a tool of social development rather than economic influence. The purpose of the research essay, thus, is to explore the act and to reflect how the Civil Rights Act of 1964 can be comprehended as a scenario that is connected to inequalities in America.

Significance of the study

Several studies have shown interest in the Civil Act as a whole and failed to focus on the 1964 issues. Besides, though the Civil Act has been studied by various people, there has been no direct connection to inequalities that did exist or are there today. It is necessary that historians and geographers intervene this so as to have explanations for some scenarios. The study of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 & connection to income inequality will thus create a new angle of viewing the act rather than making a mere social issue or political affair that involved the activists and political figures in America then. According to Wyle et al. (2012) and Oliver & Shapiro (2006, 2) racist housing disparities created economic disparities that are important for exploration since the command over resources that wealth brings about is more incorporating that is income in education which captures inequality a product of the past.

Scope of study

This study explores the Civil Rights Act of 1964, hence does not explore any other Act within America, even though some may inevitable be mentioned where they came hand in hand with this act. Nevertheless, the study will be limited to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 & connection to income inequality.

Research Objectives

For the research to successfully achieve its mission, the study will be carried out based on the objectives:

1.To examine the elements of inequality prevalent in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

2. To investigate the relationship between the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and inequalities.

Research Questions

In order for objectives to be addressed comprehensively, then it will be necessary to ask the following questions:

1. What elements if inequalities are prevalent in the Civil Rights Act of 1964

2.What relationship does the Civil Rights Act of 1964 have with inequalities?

Research Assumptions

The research is being carried out on assumption that:

1.The Civil Rights Act of 1964 has elements of inequalities

2. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 has a relationship with inequalities

Literature review

The civil act has been addressed by several authors through their angle of attack and objectives have been diverse. Some of them will be explored below so as to help create refutes, support, and development of the topic as research gaps will be identified.

The issues of income and civil act are shown by a number of researchers who explore the act, its impact or its relevance within various scenarios. Kahlenberg (2015) notes that the social fabric had been threatened and made worse by the division of class so that not every race received privileges from being white within America. As it approached 1968, Martin Luther King Jr. saw the importance of addressing the racial and economic equality afresh as a result of the campaign by a Poor People so as to enhance civil rights exertions for blacks. The movement came up aiming to speak about class inequalities that had grown for several decades. The investigation of class, gender, and race issues had the ability to determine the winners and losers in the society—that is the advancement of the minority races and the women as well as the correlation between the poor and working-class Americans.

According to Wright (2015) through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was seen by people like Senator Dickson had indicated at its time that it was not “an idea whose time has come” but rather a ratification and facilitation of a process that was underway, it did precipitate new economic advances for African Americans in educational achievement, income, and occupational status. It is clear that the act ensured that southern filibuster ‘s back was broken and a powerful signal involving race relations was sent.

In response to the civil rights movement, the Republican Party led by Nixon espoused the popularly known “Southern Strategy” in the late 1960s and early 1970s. With the strategy, ethnic fears were deliberately used to have white employed class voters to shift political commitment from the Democrats to the Republicans. A number of scholars acclaim this approach as conveying in a conformist politics era which eventually considerably harmed the financial interests of white employees by waning unions, letting down the minimum wages, and plummeting job securities. Studies on wage inequality have confirmed that in those metropolises and areas of the United States where the black versus white wage variance is supreme it is also the incident that the wages of white workforces are the lowermost and disparity among whites is paramount. The suggestion from this is that racial divisions within the employed weakened the capability of employees as a whole to lay agreements on better or greater wages with their establishments. In the process, White workers would have a better economic situation in the case where there was less disparity and more cohesion between whites and blacks who were hired by several firms.

According to the Wright (2014), the Act established geographic disparities when it gave the South most of the economic gains based on the biased manner in which it had been written. There is an issue of very low economic start points for black southerners in 1964 with explicit segregation systems that continue to survive even after the act because of the Acts focus on public accommodations and private employment under titles ii and vii respectively. Points out that the Act speeded the culmination of legitimate Jim Crow after which Afro-Americans were able to have entrance restaurants, other public amenities, and transportation that they had no access to earlier. Besides, it opened a leeway for both women, Blacks, and other minorities to tame the barriers that had been thriving at the workplaces. Additionally, it was possible for a lot of Southern and Northern Afro- Americans to begin going to school for it enforced such a move (Hall, 2005). Furthermore, alongside The Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Civil Right Act of 1968 made voting and housing open for all races, gender and people so that there was no more racially motivated violence in these situations.

The Act has several titles whose demands were all against discrimination. For example, Title 1 handling voting rights stated that there was barring imbalanced presentation of state voter registration demands for national elections (Billington, 1963). Besides, title 11 that addressed public accommodations banned discrimination off one based on national origin, race, religion in places that offer accommodation like entertainment, restaurants and hotels. In that case Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. V. U.S. in Georgia, Katzenbach v. McClung in Alabama, Hann v. The city of Rick Hill in South Carolina made the title a reality. Title 111 demanded desegregation in public facilities permitting the US justice department to file charges. The US v. Wyandotte County found that the jail segregated prisoners based on race and dealt with them based on the title. The next one is Title IV handling desegregation of public education where the U.S. Attorney General was authorized to gather grievances about individuals who were denied equal protection and file suits against school institutions that segregated learners on grounds of race or failed to provide funds to school boards based on the same standard. Title V on Civil Rights Commission extended its roles and serving time to handle cases of people whose rights to vote had been denied and study other cases of discrimination. The subsequent Title V1 covered Non-discrimination in Federally assisted programs such as Federal funding. Later, title V11 came up with the idea of equal employment opportunities. Being the chair of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Eleanor Holmes Norton initiated title V11 to end discriminatory employment procedures. Then Title V111 handled registration and voting statistics under control of Census Bureau was to gather registration and balloting data considering race, national origin and color without compelling people to provide such information. Title 1X is intervention in court cases by the US as long as they had not been handled and yet they dealt with discrimination of the earlier mentioned scenarios. Title X covered the community relations service that could help societies in resolving conflicts connected to racial, national origin, and color-based discrimination. The final Title X1 addresses court proceedings and legalities in contempt of cases arising under titles 1 to V11. The article considers that the Act was a blueprint and inspiration for several other American groups who wanted to seek quality and access in employment based on race, sex, religion, color, nationality and so is a group of the National Organization for Women that was founded in 1966 (Billington, 1963). The Act further awakened the Congress through activists who decided to protect people with disabilities, pregnant women and older Americans.

According to Nagel et al., (2015) the Act was a turning point for the South for it eliminated Jim Crow system which had made racial separation a norm. It also helped abolish slavery and reduce white dominion in all demesnes of life. For the act to become a reality, there were a lunch counter remonstrations, bus shuns and a March in Selma as well as Civil Rights Movement leaders like Martin Luther and others who inspired non-violent anti-colonial movements. The Jim Crow has worked against social mobility of the minority, so as to keep them in ‘their place’ socially and geologically. With it, institutionalized isolation and controls on Blacks in almost all fields was ensured. In one incident, Martin was killed by Zimmerman for moving in only- white places. Furthermore, ‘driving while Black’ was faced with a lot of challenges, where a stop to check on contraband and minor violations was the order of the day. Stereotypes, insults, arrests and humiliation as black drivers stopped to be frisked were popular. Activists saw the treatment as threatening and brutal when the segregation treatments were becoming a right for the whites. In Legacies of the 1964 Civil Rights Act a book edited by Benard Grofman, there are several discussions. For instance, Flivaroff and Wolfinger note that, the act was enacted by many states and cities to do away with discrimination in public accommodations and employment, a fact that brought about mixed effect and confined to the North where the challenge was limited, The Federal level however, exposes significant achievement once racial discrimination is declared unconstitutional soon after the lawsuits by NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund. With Brown V. Board of Education, that made segregation in public education invalid, some states began to argue against it, especially the Southerners as a law of the land.

Economically, the status of the Black improved accelerative once the Act was passed more so in the South based on Act V11 demands. For example, in the textile industry wages rose and employers had an incentive to acquire jobs in the new source of labor. Even the salaries of teachers in the southern black schools grew and the quality of education improved as the NAACP sponsored litigation for equality and philanthropic sponsorships arose. See the graph below:

According to Bourne (2014) Black men who were in the states that had been discriminative at first benefitted greatly. Though they had dropped out of high school, the wages increased exceeding that of other blacks living elsewhere. In addition, there is an improved funding of school process, street paving, a collection of garbage, and building of recreation facilities.

Wright who is an economic historian applies quantitative research to make a claim that the civil right policies of the time were more than a revolution for the African-Americans as it enhances significant economic wellbeing to them. For instance, the material welfare of the Africans Americans in the South was a ‘true revolution’ breaking the past trends and behaviors that have had an impact on the modern market forces. The incomes grew and African Americans started having proper education, better job positions, social amenities and health care not necessarily at the expense of the white. Proven in the South, civil rights reforms enhanced a boost in the stores and lunch outfits.

Consider the graph below:

The residence-based ratio of black to White mean wage laboring men aged 20-60.

However, it happened that though the wages of Blacks kept rising, even when one acquired an education they could not expect a better salary. Therefore, blacks migrated to larger firms and new occupations to reap bigger benefits.

The scenario indicated above was creating inequality while solving inequality for it is recorded that disparities in economic earnings were reduced, even though up to date, there are still disparities based on race, sex and other factors, but the great change was seen all the same. Moreover, even though some employers had feared that business could go low and clienteles would be scared by the Black employees, however, when desegregation as embraced profits in the stores posted high. Similarly, investment in public works, education, and social services increased as civil rights movements factored moral health (Schmidt, 2015). Since economic justice was the prime component of the act, advances in that section were impressive.

Nagel et al (2015) note further that as Jim Crow Act was dismantled the whole nation pointed an ideological discourse of ‘natural’ filtering and practicing ‘freedom of choice’ in the housing marketplace within the suburban. It livened the resistance of the white suburban and diverted them into desegregation bases through state and federal courts making inequality such a normal pervasive configuration of life and historical defense of meritocratic individualism. Later, suburban tax strikes ushered in ‘Reagan Revolution’ where the individualistic colorblind American meritocratic contact stood out as a cause of poverty among the minority communities with isolation and impoverished life adverse than it had ever been. The urban disinvestment, deindustrialization and discrimination were piled on the minority as a blame for the condition. The color-blind meritocracy made whites seem innocent in the income inequalities, hence put them higher than other races the result to which was ‘banal multiculturalism’. In the situation, ‘culture’ explains and celebrates personal challenges rather than societal hardships that discouraged open discussion on racism and the expanding income inequalities (Thomas, 2011).

To exclude Blacks from wealth, the blockbusting mechanism was utilized to generate fear among whites in the claim that their neighborhoods would become black and so speculators persuaded whites to sell homes cheaply to whites and at a much higher price to Blacks. Since mainstream mortgages were inaccessible, Blacks took mortgage agreements that lacked equity and rendered them to easy eviction whenever they default. The houses they purchased were both unaffordable and of inferior quality as compared to the homes whites bought even though at a similar price. With housing differences, the income disparities began to broaden with time as blacks and minorities had to rent houses and continue paying rent to the white tenants while those who owned houses made money and bought more plots to expand their incomes.

Private lending institutions too continued with the depressive practices against the inner city settlements where the low-income and middle-income tried to develop homes and houses (Newman & Ashton, 2004). In the long run even as several acts were pushed, speculators utilized the federal funds to carry out bogus house rehabilitations where houses were sold exorbitantly to the buyers who did not suspect anything and even for loans Blacks were forced to pay higher interests on high-risk loans that the white borrowers in a predatory lending (Rugh & Massey, (2010) and Shapiro, Meschede, and Osoro (2013, 4). Greater interests made Blacks and minorities be indebted for long periods and live a life that was economically poor. This gives a perspective that the Civil Rights Movement is an enduring narrative of the Black struggle to a narrative of the achievement of whites in doing away their irrational prejudgments in creating a more meritocratic society. As such whites are presented as a savior of the Blacks having agreed to the desegregation policy.

Since the Civil Act legislation was unable to offer secure full inclusion and societal membership of people of color since those who framed never availed themselves to overcome the racial entitlements of the whites in the South. Indeed, the educational system, mobility rights, and housing division created inequalities that persisted. (Ball & Youdell, 2007; Lipman &

Hursh, 2007) note that the freedom to choose schools for all races created marketization and privatization of education in charter schools. In the South, there were segregation academies that were all-white and exempted from tax hence creating greater inequity in society as under-servicing was sustained. It is also clear that as far as inequality had been fought on paper through desegregation, inequality began to thrive in marketization of schools making it impossible for some Blacks and minority to educate their children to the level desirable for the imminent job market in the US.

Even after Civil Right Act of 1964 was established, the housing practices deepened segregation and wealth accumulation disparities that have since then served as a way of a wealth theft mechanism as whites amassed wealth through real estate in the inner-city, suburban, and high-poverty setting. According to McNally (2011, 123), this process enhanced exploitative financial processes that contained “predatory inclusion,” or the surrendering or admittance to credit marketplaces and homeownership in low-income and minority exploiting procedures.

A Gap in the Literature

The existing literature uses various peer reviews, journal articles, reviews and books to research on Civil Act of 1964, but they entangle it with others Acts of the time and even the most recent in America. Looking at the existing ROL, it is clear that authors show the inequalities that led to the demand for the act and the achievements that it later brought about are indicated, yet the connection to income inequality is not deeply delved into as it should. Besides, the literature concentrates much on the changes that the act brought in a manner that its failure to address inequalities that are income based are ignored. It is relevant and significant therefore for such a research to be held so that the source of the current income inequalities in America are understood and handled where possible.

Methodology

The study shall be qualitative to enhance exploration of data on the topic. The study design will be through an in-depth exploration of internet sources and other available sources. Given that this is a historical study that has adequate existing sources, it will be held through a survey of sources. The search shall be enhanced using the keywords such sources shall be chosen as long as they are credible, meaning peer-reviewed journal articles, pdf’s earlier research papers, newspapers, e-books and journal papers. Choice of such sources will be based on the relevance to the topic and adequacy of information on the topic. Keywords such as Civil Rights Act of 1964, the inequalities related to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the economic impact of Civil Rights Act of 1964 will direct the study.

Discussion and Findings

From the existing literature, it is clear that The Civil Act of 1964 is a very important document and phase in the history and geography of America. Not only has the act triggered discussions in the social domain but also in the political landscapes. Nonetheless, this study puts a limelight on the economic exploration of it by focusing on the act and its connection of economic inequalities. In as much as the civil Act has to be discussed in this lane, the reality about race and racial discrimination cannot be avoided due to the fact that these document came handy to do away with Jim Crow, a legislation that had created racial segregation in all public facilities. These included hospitals, schools, public transport, where blatant segregation was displayed. Following the efforts by minorities and activists, there was a need to desegregate systems in America. As such in Title I and Title iv, public accommodations and private employment are covered creating better situations for the Blacks and minorities.

Earlier on, the Blacks and minority could not have a financial mileage, yet after the Act was billed, the wages increased exceedingly so that blacks living had a better living standard. Though such wages did not equal the whites, but still being better it encouraged many Blacks to seek for jobs in places they had never thought of an equally competent with the whites. In the beginning, employers feared that Blacks would be chaotic or pool down their benefits, however when they realized that profits increased when they hired them, there was no more fear and the income level of these people improved. The returns grew and African Americans started having suitable education, better job positions, social services and health care not automatically at the expense of the white. Additionally, there was a better funding of schools, street paving was made a reality, collection of garbage done, and building of recreation facilities enhanced.

Nevertheless, some researchers have shown that despite being a remarkable story of success through the act, particularly in making the minorities and Blacks graduate from being termed as second-class citizens of America but it had its failure. The Act failed to address important matters that resulted in the stripping off the equity among races and people of different origins. The popular weakness it showed is not through failure to touch the socio-economic disparities and making past discrimination and race-based inequalities stand out. It is comprehensively shown that spectators played the role of inciting white owners to sell land or houses to the Blacks at a bit higher price than that which whites bought at since they had a feeling that their neighborhood would ‘turn’ black of they sold too many of them. Such houses were poor in quality and sometimes were taken away in the case where the minority of Black failed to pay the mortgage as expected.

Blacks and minorities though now free to be anywhere, to work in all factories and live a free life, remained an individual who was an easy target for fraud, flipping actions that left them to think they own property, yet they did not. Similarly, the loans lent to them had too high interests that at the end made the Black appear inferior and unequal to the white. The meritocratic culture grew to make whites feel they had been wronged by the Blacks who had demanded equality; hence they played the colorblind course and aimed to show default in them. Moreover, it has been noted that many schools were private, yet did not pay tax as the public ones did and this made the owners rich day after day as compared to the Blacks and a minority whose schools were underserviced and had to fund some projects on their own. As such in the metropolises where the income wages of Blacks have a higher difference with the whites, some low-class whites have the lowest salaries in firms since the act seemed to weaken unions and left the employees with the power to decide how much they can pay their employees with. The two races have failed to collaborate so as to bargain for better salaries and that leaves them in the worst situation economically since then.

Conclusion and recommendation

Based on the preceding investigation, there is a strong empirical support for the hypothesis that residential income inequality has strong correlations with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 due to its effect on the housing ownership, money lending, overbuilding, disproportionate subprime lending, housing price increases, and the failure of lenders sufficiently to evaluate the solvency of borrowers. school resource offers, among others that have been part and parcel of the economic crisis facing Blacks and minority up to today. Simply put, a great number of minority and Blacks within the low and middle class live in rental houses, suburb settings and in poor homes within the inner-city, suburban, and high-poverty settings due to income inequalities created by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The claims of equality among races and desegregation diverted the attention of almost every stakeholder into making that act a social and political issue, and in the long run forget to claim for economic equality. As real estate business became too costly and a dream for the Blacks and the minorities, while the whites quickly took it over and utilized it to expand their wealth and economic status. The act empowered employers into waning wage promotions and offering better pay to the employees whether Blacks or Whites. In some areas of the South as disparities between Whites and Blacks grew, some Whites in the low class were oppressed more and their incomes were posted as the least since unions could no longer be relevant in defending anyone’s right. Besides, the racial difference prevented them from collaborating and demanding for better work conditions and salaries.

Ultimately, the meritocratic culture and marketization of institutions like schools particularly in the South made personal needs seem important that societal needs and spectators utilized the opportunity to benefit their interest through whites who blamed the blacks for revolts and claim for recognition. Exaggerated prices of houses, loans and mortgages on the minorities and Blacks were part of the schemes to maintain the inequality and it worked for the spectators.

Nonetheless, the Act is therefore very positive to some extent for it gave some sense of equality to the minorities and Blacks are they were offered job opportunities in many places including better sites where they had been prevented long ago. As a result of this provision, the incomes improved and the lifestyle of these people became better. Moreover, African Americans started having proper education as they could now choose schools their children could study from and pay for them, the social amenities were better for them and healthcare too. All these changes were not necessarily at the expense of the white, for within a short time lunch counters and selling stores recorded a profit in this moral improvement.

It is recommendable that for future studies a mixed method is used so as to give room for checking validity and reliability of findings. Besides, usage of sources from the American archives would offer a comprehensive exploration of the subject.

References

Ball, S. J., & Youdell, D. (2007). Hidden privatization in public education. In Report to

Education International 5th World Congress. Retrieved from http://ei-ie.org/ .

Billington, J. (1963). The Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Long Struggle for Freedom. Retrieved fromhttp://www.loc.gov/exhibits/civil-rights-act/epilogue.html

Bourne, J. (2014). “A Stone of Hope”: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Its Impact on the Economic Status of Black Americans. Louisiana Law Review, 74(4), 1196-1228. Retrieved fromhttp://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol74/iss4/7

Groffman, B. (Ed.). (2000). Legacies of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Washington.

Hall, J. (2005). The Long Civil Rights Movement and the Political Uses of the Past. The Journal of American History, 94(1), 1-34. Retrieved fromhttp://mejo.unc.edu/sites/default/files/images/documents/redstates/longcivilrights.pdf

Kahlenberg, R. (2015). A new era of civil rights Proposals to Address the Economic Inequalities in Robert Putnam’s “Our Kids”. 1-23. Retrieved from https://tcf.org/assets/downloads/Kahlenberg_ANewEraofCivilRights.pdf

Lipman, P., & Hursh, D. (2007). Renaissance 2010: the reassertion of ruling-class

power through neoliberal policies in Chicago. Policy Futures in Education, 5(2),

160e178.

McNally, D. (2011). Global Slump: The economics and politics of crisis and resistance.

Oakland, CA, USA: PM Press.

Nagel, C.R., Alderman, D.H., Inwood, JFJ., & Derickson, K. (2015). The legacies of the U.S. Civil Rights Act, fifty years on. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2015.06.004

Newman, K., & Ashton, P. (2004). Neoliberal urban policy and new paths to

neighborhood change in the American inner city. Environment and Planning A,

36(7), 1151e1172.

Rugh, J. S., & Massey, D. S. (2010). Racial segregation and the American foreclosure

crisis. American Sociological Review, 75(5), 629e651

Schmidt, C. (2015). The law and economics of the civil rights revolution. The Journal of Things We Like.Retrieved from https://legalhist.jotwell.com/the-law-and-economics-of-the-civil-rights-revolution/

Shapiro, T., Meschede, T., & Osoro, S. (2013). The roots of the widening racial wealth

gap: Explaining the Black-White economic divide Act.

Thomas, M. E. (2011). Multicultural Girlhood: Racism, sexuality, and the conflicted

spaces of American education. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Temple University Press.

Waltham, MA, USA: Institute on Assets and Social Policy, Brandeis University.

Retrieved from iasp.brandeis.edu/pdfs/Author/shapiro-thomas-m/

racialwealthgapbrief.pdf.

Wright, G. (2009). Racial Inequality. 1-46.Retrieved from https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/ContemporaryAmericanSociety/Chapter%2014%20--%20Racial%20inequality--Norton%20August.pdf

Wright, G. (2015). The regional economic impact of the civil. 1-21.Retrieved fromhttp://www.bu.edu/bulawreview/files/2015/05/WRIGHT.pdf

Appendix

Wright, Racial Inequality (2009)