Sterling Minor
.jpg "Sterling's Portrait")
.jpg "Mexico City Street Food")
A vendor's table next to a street in Mexico City's Centro neighborhood. Photo by Sterling Minor 2026
Experiences and thoughts
My Journey
Particularly for those persons who have known me during my life, click "Explore Now" to go to my short autobiography of life stages and the occurrences within them. [Birth-Law School]
Percentage by which the average four-year in-state public-university tuition has increased since 2011: 45By which financial aid has increased since then: 11
Percentage of attendees at the "No Kings" protest in Washington, DC in March who are white: 86
Percentage of attendees at the "No Kings" protest in Washington, DC in March who are white: 86
Harper's Index is a trademark owned by the Harper's Magazine Foundation. Harper's Magazine is published monthly by the foundation, 666 Broadway, New York, NY 10012, Jackson Lears, Chairman, John R MacArthur, President. The archive of its 176 years of issues is available at harpers.org/archive
Numbers from Harper's Index®, July 2026
Commentary i have read that I want to share
But I urge cooler heads to see something else in the rising populism within both parties — a potential political alliance. Neither income nor wealth are zero-sum contests in which some people’s success can be achieved only at the cost of other people’s losses [as some, especially on the right, have argued]. But power is a zero-sum contest. And as power has gone to the [leftist cultural elites and the rightist fabulously wealthy, our society has not been improved. Both the Declaration and the Constitution center power in "the people" and the people simply cannot be substituted for by corporations, oligarchs, entertainers, or pastors who take over] . Both never-Trumper Republicans and “moderate” Democrats are [failing] to articulate a message that isn’t just “we’re not Trump.” Robert Reich, June 26, 2026
According to the prevailing yet misguided story, rising inequality is due to higher earnings of those with more education. That story was never entirely true even in the past. But to the extent it was ever true, it mainly explains rising inequality between around 1980 and 2000. Since then, and especially in recent years, the main story is [that] more and more of the economy’s rewards are going to a small group that overwhelmingly derives its income from the assets it owns [capital gains from stock, which are being taxed at a lower rate]. (emphasis supplied)Suppose that new technologies offer businesses a way to reduce costs — but that the cost reductions come entirely from employing fewer workers, while requiring that businesses invest more than before in structures, equipment and software. Other things equal, capital-biased technological change will lead to reduced employment and capital shortages [higher interest rates and profits]. An alternative explanation of a rising share of income going to profits could be growing monopoly power, with big corporations exploiting their market dominance to raise prices and hold down wages. Again, this is consistent with what we’re seeing, and also with casual observation about the behavior of big tech in particular. I won’t try today to figure out which of these stories is right about changes since 2000. Paul Krugman, Ph.D. The New Inequality from Substack, May 31, 2026
But I urge cooler heads to see something else in the rising populism within both parties — a potential political alliance. Neither income nor wealth are zero-sum contests in which some people’s success can be achieved only at the cost of other people’s losses [as some, especially on the right, have argued]. But power is a zero-sum contest. And as power has gone to the [leftist cultural elites and the rightist fabulously wealthy, our society has not been improved. Both the Declaration and the Constitution center power in "the people" and the people simply cannot be substituted for by corporations, oligarchs, entertainers, or pastors who take over] . Both never-Trumper Republicans and “moderate” Democrats are [failing] to articulate a message that isn’t just “we’re not Trump.” Robert Reich, June 26, 2026
According to the prevailing yet misguided story, rising inequality is due to higher earnings of those with more education. That story was never entirely true even in the past. But to the extent it was ever true, it mainly explains rising inequality between around 1980 and 2000. Since then, and especially in recent years, the main story is [that] more and more of the economy’s rewards are going to a small group that overwhelmingly derives its income from the assets it owns [capital gains from stock, which are being taxed at a lower rate]. (emphasis supplied)Suppose that new technologies offer businesses a way to reduce costs — but that the cost reductions come entirely from employing fewer workers, while requiring that businesses invest more than before in structures, equipment and software. Other things equal, capital-biased technological change will lead to reduced employment and capital shortages [higher interest rates and profits]. An alternative explanation of a rising share of income going to profits could be growing monopoly power, with big corporations exploiting their market dominance to raise prices and hold down wages. Again, this is consistent with what we’re seeing, and also with casual observation about the behavior of big tech in particular. I won’t try today to figure out which of these stories is right about changes since 2000. Paul Krugman, Ph.D. The New Inequality from Substack, May 31, 2026