Slate Money — “It Depends on the Price of the Bonds Edition”

June 23, 2018
Host: Felix Salmon
Co-hosts: Emily Peck, Anna Shymansky

Overview

This episode offers an insightful roundup of the week’s most compelling business and finance stories, focusing on:

• The Koch brothers’ campaign against public transit in the U.S.
• The ongoing reality and impact of pregnancy discrimination at work.
• Rwanda’s economic growth, self-branding, and controversial trade/branding tactics.

The discussion is candid, analytical, and lively, blending policy deep-dives with personal anecdotes and trenchant observations.

Segment 1: The Koch Brothers and Anti-Transit Politics

[00:34–11:47]

Key Points

• The Koch brothers have been funding campaigns to quash public transit initiatives across the U.S., with a particular focus on Nashville’s $5.4 billion transit package.
• Americans for Prosperity, the Kochs’ group, launched an effective anti-transit campaign by leveraging sophisticated voter data, focusing on cost (tax increase) and stoking fears around gentrification and crime.
• The Kochs’ financial interests align—public transit competes with their profits in gasoline, asphalt, and car parts.
• The anti-transit rhetoric is tailored to local anxieties, often exploiting racial and class divisions.

Notable Quotes

• “They make a lot of money when there are more people driving and there are more roads.”
  — Anna Shymansky [03:03]
• “Public transit goes against the liberties Americans hold dear, which we all think in this room we think that’s ridiculous. But ... a lot of Americans might actually believe that.”
  — Emily Peck [11:20]

Memorable Moments

• Felix questions how anti-transit stances gain such broad city support despite cities being “by their nature left wing, progressive, pro equality, pro transit.” [09:14]
• Emily discusses the manipulation of opposition rationale: “...in Nashville they argued that if they improved public transportation, it would lead to gentrification... [Meanwhile] in San Francisco... they argued that BART is responsible for increases in crime because young men do crime on the BART.” [05:55]
• The historical roots of such opposition, drawing parallels to Robert Moses’ racially motivated urban planning in New York. [08:44]

Segment 2: Pregnancy Discrimination in the Workplace

[11:55–21:31]

Key Points

• The New York Times exposé revealed pervasive pregnancy discrimination, from Walmart to Wall Street—manifesting as both overt (denial of accommodations) and subtle (missed promotions) treatment.
• Employers often accommodate other types of disabilities more readily than pregnancy.
• Even in companies with progressive leave policies, unconscious bias among managers still leads to setbacks for pregnant workers.
• Laws such as the Pregnancy Discrimination Act are often insufficient or poorly enforced, and improvements may require both stronger national legislation and cultural change.
• Suggestions include not just better policy but proactive cultural messaging—e.g., visibly promoting pregnant women, and compulsory paternity leave to level the playing field.

Notable Quotes

• “The Times called, cleverly, the maternal wall. There’s widespread discrimination.”
  — Emily Peck [12:19]
• “Do we want to incentivize people having children or do we want to incentivize people driving drunk?”
  — Anna Shymansky [14:54]
• “It’s not just men discriminating against women. It turns out that they make these kind of idiotic assumptions about what mothers and pregnant women want...”
  — Felix Salmon [15:12]

Memorable Moments

• The legal precedent: “Men, male drivers at UPS who had DUIs... were given light duty. But she a pregnant woman... did not get the light duty. I just always found that one such a good example...”
  — Emily Peck [14:19]
• Discussion of “superhuman” examples: “...tends to be these like ultra powerful, ultra successful women who take off about like 10 seconds of maternity leave and then come back sort of more capable than ever... it kind of sends this message of you need to be this superhuman woman.”
  — Felix Salmon [16:32]
• The cultural challenge of making paternity leave truly compulsory and stigma-free in the American corporate context. [19:18–20:45]

Segment 3: Rwanda — From Genocide to Economic Branding

[21:31–31:01]

Key Points

• Rwanda, led by President Paul Kagame, is both hailed for economic growth and criticized for autocracy and human rights crimes—making for a conflicted success story.
• Rwanda’s move to ban secondhand clothing imports (much of it Western donation castoffs) is analyzed—a policy intended to protect its nascent textile industry but with mixed ramifications as it may destroy existing jobs without guaranteeing new industry success.
• The country’s bold $39 million sponsorship of Arsenal Football Club (“Visit Rwanda” patch) is critiqued as part of a global rebranding effort.
• The conversation weighs the effectiveness of such branding, the value of tourism/investment, and the realpolitik of investment decision-making in countries with complex political legacies.

Notable Quotes

• “Did you know that when you throw your secondhand clothes into those... bins... they wind up in a big for-profit industry which winds up sending them to countries which thereby are basically prevented from growing their own apparel industry?”
  — Felix Salmon [23:41]
• “If you were considering an investment in Rwanda... to what extent does it matter that The President is a genocidal war criminal dictator?”
  — Felix Salmon [30:33]
• “Oh, God, I’m say the worst thing in the world, which is it depends on the price of the bonds.”
  — Anna Shymansky [31:01]

Memorable Moments

• “Countries potentially misspend money all the time. And also, who knows that this is misspent?”
  — Anna Shymansky [28:33]
• “Maybe it already has. I mean, we’re talking about this topic right now and I suspect part of the reason Felix suggested it was because Rwanda has become more interesting in the back of your head. Maybe, maybe because you saw it on that sleeve.”
  — Emily Peck [29:30]

Numbers Round

[32:03–36:11]

• $39: The price of the “I Really Don’t Care, Do U?” jacket worn by Melania Trump to visit detained children—a moment of controversy and media speculation.
  — Emily Peck [32:04]
• 9: The number of years in the current U.S. economic boom—the second longest expansion in U.S. history.
  — Felix Salmon [33:49]
• $12.76: Last share price for GE before its ejection from the Dow Jones Industrial Average, symbolizing a shift away from traditional U.S. manufacturing behemoths.
  — Anna Shymansky [34:55]

Tone & Style

The hosts are witty, irreverent, and knowledgeable, using humor and personal experience to illuminate complex topics. They are unafraid to voice strong opinions but support them with clear arguments and historical context.

Suggested Timestamps for Key Segments

• Koch brothers and transit politics: [00:34–11:47]
• Pregnancy discrimination: [11:55–21:31]
• Rwanda’s economic story and branding: [21:31–31:01]
• Numbers round: [32:03–36:11]

Conclusion

This episode skillfully weaves together threads about power, money, and narratives—whether in American city planning, U.S. workplaces, or Rwandan geopolitics—asking hard questions and foregrounding the realities beneath economic headlines.