Connect with us

Economics

How to prevent AI from further widening the racial wealth gap

Published

on

Human resources and technology concept for AI augmenting team work.

Leowolfert | Istock | Getty Images

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has been stunning in both its speed and impact. According to data from Goldman Sachs, investment in AI is expected to reach $100 billion in the U.S. and $200 billion globally by next year. Last year, in private equity alone, generative AI (GenAI) investments reached $2.18 billion – double from the year before.

Yet, while we often hear about the boundless promise of AI – as we should – we also need to pay more attention to the careers, lives and communities it will disrupt, including those who have so far been left out. For example, according to a recent McKinsey study, Black Americans are 10% more likely to be working jobs slated for AI automation. In addition, the same study anticipates that AI will disrupt 4.5 million jobs for Black workers. This disruption has the potential to impact billions of dollars in Black economic potential and growth. If current trends hold, the new wealth created by GenAI alone will increase the racial wealth gap by $43 billion annually, according to McKinsey.

We have already seen firsthand how the rapid adoption of technology can exacerbate gaps and create new divides. One only needs to look at the creation and adoption of computers and the internet. In 1987, economist Robert Solow famously claimed that “you can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics.” Today, we almost take for granted how much productivity the digital age has brought. But, that digital age has also created a digital divide, which exacerbates racial economic gaps. And, one of the legacies of failing to address this digital divide and ensure broadband access to Black and other communities without access to resources and opportunities has been limited engagement with these tools.

How to prevent the another wealth gap

As we stand at the beginning of this next revolution in AI and its early waves of value creation, our urgent task is to prevent another gap. We can do that by empowering all people to take part and be leaders in this evolving field, allowing our economy to reap greater benefits. That begins with infrastructure that supports AI enablement for all, including education on AI tools, access to the internet and power to compute.

One model for this is the work being done by Student Freedom Initiative (SFI). As a first step, we must commit to eliminating the existing digital broadband divide. SFI has been working hard to close the digital divide in Black communities, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), 82% of which reside in broadband deserts. This is a critical gap that must be closed to provide the next generation of diverse leaders with the resources, education and technical access needed to master this evolving tech.

We must also double our efforts to provide education around these tools. A combination of critical thinking and technical skills is increasingly becoming a prerequisite for effectively interacting with GenAI. Our education system, particularly secondary and higher education institutions, must play a key role in equipping students with these essential skills.

In partnership with Stats Perform, a global leader in AI solutions for the sports industry and a portfolio company of my global investment firm, Vista Equity Partners, SFI launched an “AI in Basketball” course at Morehouse College last year. This course provided hands-on instruction in AI-use cases, which helped prepare those students to be leaders in this field. It also offered students internship opportunities to use what they learned in a real-world setting, allowing them to build experience and competitive resumes for AI careers. Soon, we will be expanding these courses to other HBCUs, creating on-ramps to this growing industry. 

Another notable example of this is the work being done at internXL, which offers opportunities like free training and certifications in artificial intelligence, data science, and machine learning, including access to over 500 AI training courses. The internXL initiative also connects highly-qualified HBCU students with AI experts and employers for internships, enabling them to gain practical experience in the field. And internships are critical – studies show that an internship at a hiring organization, or in the same field, are among the highest differentiators used in choosing between qualified candidates. This work is bridging access gaps and ensuring that underrepresented talent thrives in the rapidly growing and in-demand field of AI.

Finally, we must also ensure widespread access to compute, or processing power, to run these new tools and their applications. If we use the example of smartphones, compute was made possible thanks to telecommunication organizations updating their infrastructure to handle 4G, 5G and LTE – all of which have been underinvested in across Black communities. If we want to fully harness the potential impact of AI on our economy, all communities need to have access to these tools and the infrastructure that underpins the technology. This includes computing power, requisite energy sources, and large language models and other machine learning and reasoning tools.

Economic toll

We know that the racial wealth gap will cost the U.S. economy $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion between 2019 and 2028. Imagine what it would mean for the economy if we took steps to prevent AI from becoming a new economic wedge, and it, instead, became a prolific source of generational wealth. What if we were able to ensure access to these tools for communities around the globe? So long as we take appropriate steps to prevent these tools from mimicking and reinforcing racial biases, the innovation and economic growth this would spur has the potential to close many gaps, generating prosperity for all.

With AI’s current trajectory, there will be three distinct waves of opportunity through which value will be captured. We are already seeing the first wave of value creation benefiting hardware vendors. The second wave will go to super scalers like Microsoft, Google, Oracle and other large companies that have the ability to broadly offer connectivity to compute. The third wave will benefit enterprise software vendors who provide AI and GenAI solution sets on top of their existing products. These are three distinct verticals where we must focus our equity efforts to impact the long-term growth of AI and GenAI.

The good news is that, unlike the digital revolution, we have the luxury of foresight. As AI evolves and established companies and new start-ups scale products, develop features and capture value at each stage, we must commit ourselves to ensuring that everyone has access to the incredible benefits of AI. If we fall short, we will not be equipped, nor able, to fully harness and unlock its potential. As we stand at these crossroads, we must think expansively and act decisively to ensure we build the infrastructure to support AI and GenAI enablement.

Robert F. Smith is the founder, chairman and CEO of Vista Equity Partners. He serves as chairman of Student Freedom Initiative (SFI) and Carnegie Hall, founding director and president of the Fund II Foundation and co-lead of Southern Communities Initiative (SCI). In 2019, Smith eliminated the student debt of approximately 400 Morehouse College graduates and was named one of TIME 100’s Most Influential People in 2020.

Economics

Democrats need to understand: Americans think they’re worse

Published

on

If you think Donald Trump is too crass or cruel or incompetent to be president—if you are disappointed or even astonished that, having tried and failed to subvert the will of the people in the last election, he has come back to win fair and square—you should be asking yourself this question: why, to so many Americans, does the Democratic Party seem worse?

This victory is a tremendous achievement for Mr Trump, who after his loss in 2020 and the attack on the Capitol on January 6th 2021 was counted out even by leaders of his own party. At the time Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, who privately regarded Mr Trump as “a sleazeball” and “stupid”, called the insurrection “further evidence of Donald Trump’s complete unfitness for office”, according to reporting he has not disputed in a new biography by Michael Tackett, a journalist.

Yet what might seem a psychological frailty—an inability to brook criticism or concede mistakes, much less defeat—has for Mr Trump been a mighty source of political strength, one that intensifies his connection to the voters he has made the base of the Republican Party. As in 2016, Mr Trump wielded his command of that bloc of voters this year to clear a path through crowded Republican primaries, and then relied upon “negative polarisation”, or fear of the other guys, to unite the party. “Can you believe he endorsed me?” Mr Trump chortled at a rally in North Carolina on November 3rd, gloating over how Mr McConnell eventually fell into line. Mr Trump felt no obligation to reciprocate. “Hopefully we get rid of Mitch McConnell pretty soon,” he said.

Mr Trump has shown courage, not only in weathering assassins’ attacks but in insisting on views on trade, entitlements and other matters that a few years ago were heresy within his party. With his sophisticated grasp of new and legacy media and his instinct for the basic needs and fears of many Americans, he has revolutionised how American politics is conducted and shifted the policy terrain over which it is waged. In terms of disrupting what came before, he has had more effect than even Ronald Reagan.

Unlike Reagan—or the other two-term presidents since, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama—Mr Trump has never been very popular, though he managed, in this third run as the Republican nominee, at last to win the popular vote. Unlike those predecessors, Mr Trump has relied upon division, not addition, for his electoral maths. In his first term his average approval rating of 41% was the lowest ever measured by the Gallup Poll, which began tracking the statistic under Harry Truman. Democrats have good reason to think Mr Trump repels many voters when he calls adversaries “vermin” or “the enemy from within” or says illegal immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country”.

Yet, after this victory, whatever disdain Democrats have for Mr Trump should be cause only for humility and self-scrutiny. As in 2016, Mr Trump’s broad support will present his adversaries with a Rorschach test in which they can see their preferred image of America, and it will be ugly. For some, white supremacy and misogyny will explain Mr Trump’s success, while others may attribute it to tax cuts and greed. Some will conclude that poor, non-white or female Americans have been ensorcelled into voting against their self-interest. Rather than retreat into some grand theory, they would so better ro think through how, in a divided country, President Joe Biden might have nudged the balance a few points away from Mr Trump, rather than to him. Kamala Harris was no bystander, but pime responsibility lies with the president she served.

Mr Biden did not heed his own warnings about Mr Trump. He tried to eat into Mr Trump’s support with blue-collar workers through giant investments in manufacturing and infrastructure that offered something to everyone. But, unlike Mr Clinton or Mr Obama, he ducked choices that would have respected the concerns of most Americans but disappointed left-wing Democrats. A political strategy of addition still requires some division.

Most egregious, Mr Biden resharpened Mr Trump’s most effective political wedge by doing away with obstacles he had created to illegal immigration, with no alternative. By the time he restored some of Mr Trump’s restrictions this spring, more than 4m migrants had crossed the southern border, compared with fewer than 1m under Mr Trump. That was terrible for the Democrats as a party, and worse for people they want to help and the cause they believe in: under Mr Biden, Americans who say they want a decrease in legal immigration rose from a minority to a majority, as did the number who favour mass deportation.

How to defend democracy

Even where Mr Biden had accomplishments that undermined Mr Trump’s arguments, he let himself be constrained by his party’s loudest activists. Oil production rose to record levels, but Mr Biden did not boast about that. He was also no longer up to the demands of presidential communication that Mr Trump understands so well. He was not constantly, energetically promoting his success in sustaining economic growth and raising wages. His approval rating sagged as low as 36% just asother Democrats were forcing him to face the obvious: he should not be running again. In the short time Ms Harris had, she waged a good campaign. But any politician would have struggled under such burdens. She could not separate herself enough from Mr Biden, or from the video Mr Trump’s ads used, to devastating effect, of her recently declaring positions that were alienating to most Americans.

“We have learned again that democracy is precious,” Mr Biden proudly declared during his inaugural address almost four years ago. “Democracy is fragile. And at this hour, my friends, democracy has prevailed.” Now it has prevailed again. Will Democrats get the message this time? 

Continue Reading

Economics

The Fed is likely cutting rates again Thursday. Everything you need to know

Published

on

Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell holds a press conference following a two-day meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee on interest rate policy in Washington, U.S., September 18, 2024. REUTERS/Tom Brenner

Tom Brenner | Reuters

The Federal Reserve likely will stick to the business at hand when it wraps up its meeting Thursday with another interest rate cut, but will have its eye on the future against a backdrop that suddenly has gotten a lot more complicated.

Financial markets are pricing in a near-certainty that the central bank’s Federal Open Market Committee will lower its benchmark borrowing cost by a quarter percentage point as it seeks to “recalibrate” policy for an economy that is seeing the inflation rate moderate and the labor market soften.

The focus, though, will turn to what’s ahead for Chair Jerome Powell and his Fed colleagues as they navigate a shifting economy — and the political earthquake of Donald Trump’s stunning victory in the presidential race.

“We think Powell will refuse to give any early judgment on the implications of the election for the economy and rates, and will seek to be a source of stability and calm,” Krishna Guha, head of global policy and central bank strategy at Evercore ISI, said in a a note issued before the election’s outcome was known.

In keeping with policymakers’ historical desire to stay above the political fray, Powell “will say the Fed will take the time it needs to study the new administration’s plans” then will “refine this assessment as actual policies are developed and enacted,” Guha added.

So while the immediate action will be to stay the course and enact the cut, which equals 25 basis points, the market’s attention likely will turn to what the committee and Powell have to say about the future. The fed funds rate, which sets what banks charge each other for overnight lending but often influences consumer debt as well, is currently targeted in a range between 4.75%-5.0%.

Market pricing currently favors another quarter-point cut in December, followed by a January pause then multiple reductions through 2025.

Preparing for Trump

But if Trump’s agenda — tax cuts, higher spending and aggressive tariffs — comes to fruition, it could have a meaningful impact on a Fed trying to right-size policy after the mammoth rate hikes aimed at controlling inflation. Many economists believe another round of isolationist economic moves from the president-elect could reignite inflation, which held below 3% during Trump’s entire first-term despite a similar recipe.

Trump was a frequent critic of Powell and the Fed during his term, which ran from 2017-21, and is in favor of low interest rates.

“Everyone is on the lookout for future rate cuts and whether anything is telegraphed,” said Quincy Krosby, chief global strategist at LPL Financial. “Also, however, there’s the question of whether or not they can declare victory on inflation.”

Any answers to those questions would be largely left to Powell’s post-meeting news conference.

Though the committee will release its joint decision on rates, it will not provide an update on its Summary of Economic Projections, a document issued quarterly that includes consensus updates on inflation, GDP growth and unemployment, as well as the anonymous “dot plot” of individual officials’ interest rate expectations.

Beyond the January pause, there’s considerable market uncertainty about where the Fed is heading. The SEP will be updated next in December.

“What we’re going to hear more and more of is the terminal rate,” Krosby said. “That’s going to come back into the lexicon if yields continue to climb higher, and it’s not completely associated with growth.”

So where’s the end?

Traders in the fed funds futures market are betting on an aggressive pace of cuts that by the close of 2025 would take the benchmark rate to a target range of 3.75%-4.0%, or a full percentage point below the current level following September’s half percentage point cut. The Secured Overnight Financing Rate for banks is a bit more cautious, indicating a short-term rate around 4.2% at the end of next year.

“A key question here is, what’s the end point of this rate cut cycle?” said Bill English, the Fed’s former head of monetary affairs and now a finance professor at the Yale School of Management. “Fairly soon, they’ve got to think about, where do we think this rate cut period changes with the economy looking pretty strong. They may want to take a pause fairly soon and see how things develop.”

Powell also may be called on to address the Fed’s current moves to reduce the bond holdings on its balance sheet.

Since commencing the effort in June 2022, the Fed has shaved nearly $2 trillion off its holdings in Treasurys and mortgage-backed securities. Fed officials have said that the balance sheet reduction can continue even while they cut rates, though Wall Street expectations are for the run-off to end as soon as early 2025.

“They’ve been happy to just kind of leave that percolating in the background and they probably continue to do that,” English said. “But there’s going to be a lot of interest over the next few meetings. At what point do they make a further adjustment to the pace of runoffs?”

Continue Reading

Economics

Donald Trump wins big and fast

Published

on

IT IS AN extraordinary comeback—or, as Donald Trump triumphantly put it in West Palm Beach, Florida, in the early hours of November 6th, “a political victory that our country has never seen before”. After losing four years ago he has survived impeachment, conviction as a felon, numerous other indictments and two assassination attempts, and will become America’s 47th president, to add to his stint as the 45th. He becomes the oldest man ever to win the White House.

Many had expected a long wait for the result of an extremely close election to become clear. In the event, the outcome was evident within hours. Mr Trump looked set to win all seven of the critical swing states: he triumphed in North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and had strong leads in Michigan, Arizona and Nevada. That translates into a decisive advantage in the electoral college.

It appears that Mr Trump was able to draw support from both urban and rural voters at levels notably higher than in his contest against Joe Biden in 2020. In state after state, Mr Trump performed better than he had in 2020. In Florida, for example, where he won by three percentage points last time, his margin is on track to surge to 12 points. And although opinion-poll aggregates had consistently shown Kamala Harris to be ahead in the national popular vote, it seems that Mr Trump may have won that too. Just as in 2016 and 2020, in other words, the polls underestimated Mr Trump’s support.

What went wrong for Ms Harris? For one thing, her advantage among women voters, on whom Democrats were pinning their hopes, turned out to be smaller than expected. The gender gap, between the votes of men and women, actually narrowed, from 23 points in 2020 to 20, according to exit polls. Among Hispanic voters, Mr Trump made striking inroads, improving his margin by ten percentage points compared with 2020, according to CNN’s exit poll. The trend was particularly strong among Hispanic men: Joe Biden won their vote by a margin of 23 points; this time Mr Trump was on track to prevail among them by a margin of ten points. More broadly, dissatisfaction with high inflation and immigration contributed to a sense among voters that the country was on the wrong track, for which they naturally blame the incumbent. Much as Ms Harris sought to present herself as the candidate of change, she was stuck with her association with the current administration.

As well as the White House, the Republicans also wrested back control of the Senate. It was always going to be hard for Democrats to hold on to their slender majority in that chamber, given that they were defending a disproportionate number of seats (a third of which are up for election in each election cycle). Not only did Republicans take the vacant seat in West Virginia, as expected; they also flipped Ohio and Montana and prevailed in a close contest in Nebraska. The upsets Democrats hoped for in Florida and Texas failed to materialise. Republican control of the Senate smooths the way for Mr Trump to make important appointments—from cabinet secretaries to generals to Supreme Court justices—that require Senate confirmation.

Whether the Republicans complete their sweep by retaining control of the House of Representatives is still not clear. Results in California, to arrive later, will determine that. But Mr Trump, in his victory speech, was confident that the House would be his, too.

“This will truly be the golden age of America,” he declared. Few will question that the country is indeed entering a new age. Whether Mr Trump will truly “heal” America, as he promised, is more debatable. Beyond America’s borders, too, the consequences are momentous. From tariffs to climate change to Ukraine, the world must brace itself for Trump II.

Continue Reading

Trending