Author: Kerby Anderson

Kerby Anderson
A few months ago, I talked about the future decline in home ownership. For example, the number of first-time homebuyers declined to just 26 percent in 2022. This was the lowest level since the National Association of Realtors began tracking data.
The latest research from Zillow explains this significant decrease. The report estimates that you would need to make more than $106,000 annually to comfortably afford a home. Put another way, that suggests that more than half of American households can’t afford homeownership.
Let’s compare home prices and annual income in 2020 to this year. Back then, an annual income of $59,000 could pay a mortgage without spending more than 30 percent of the income (assuming a 10 percent down payment). That year the US median income was about $66,000. More than half of American households could afford homeownership.
Today the median income is around $81,000, which is far short of the $106,000 need to comfortably maintain payments. The monthly payment on a typical US home has nearly doubled since 2020.
Of course, these are averages. Here is a short list of cities that need a much lower household income to afford a home: Pittsburgh, Memphis, or Cleveland. Compare that to cities that require the highest family income: San Jose and Silicon Valley, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.
The cost of housing has skyrocketed, and interest rates have also increased. First-time home buyers are the families most affected by these increases. That makes it hard not only to find a home but to find one you can afford.
Owning a home used to be the American dream. For an increasing number of Americans, that dream seems out of reach.

Kerby Anderson
Veronique de Rugy begins her column with positive economic indicators (unemployment is low, wages are up, inflation is down), but then acknowledges that “the American people are grumpy about the state of the economy.”
I love it when this brilliant woman with a prestigious doctorate in economics refers to Americans as grumpy. She points to a new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research that concludes the government underestimates the true level of inflation.
One of the authors is Larry Summers, who served as Treasury Secretary under President Clinton. He notes in a recent tweet on X that before 1983, mortgage costs were used in calculating the Consumer Price Index. Car payments were used until 1998. Now the index does not include borrowing costs. When interest payments jumped significantly last year, the index did not capture the effects.
Here’s the shocker. Larry Summers goes on to argue that if we measured inflation the way we did in the 1970s, the inflation rate that started in 2021 would have peaked at 18 percent. That is double the official reported peak of 9 percent. Put another way, we have been living through an inflation rate higher than anything Americans experienced in the 1970s and 1980s.
No wonder Americans are grumpy about the economy. The government statistics are telling them one thing, but their personal experience is telling them something very different. A recent Gallup poll found that two-thirds (63%) said the economy is getting worse. Nearly half (45%) think the economy is already poor.
Government officials and the compliant media can cite all the economic figures they want, but it appears they have underestimated the impact of inflation on the American consumer.

Kerby Anderson
Is there a leftist bias in artificial intelligence? A Washington Post tech writer has written about various research papers about the liberal bias within Open AI’s ChatGPT. Although the AI program tells users that it doesn’t have any political opinions or beliefs, it shows certain biases.
A study by the Springer Journal of Public Choice also found that ChatGPT produced responses that were in line with leftist thought. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that OpenAU’s models typically produce left-leaning responses.
One extensive study came from John Lott, who has been on my radio program many times in the past. His Crime Prevention Research Center asked questions of twenty AI chatbots on topics related to crime and gun control. He then ranked the answers on how liberal or conservative their responses were.
Only Elon Musk’s Grok AI chatbots gave conservative answers on crime. But even these programs gave consistently liberal answers on gun control. Bing was the least liberal chatbot on gun control. The French AI chatbot Mistral in the only one that on average was neutral in its answers.
John Lott concludes that these AI programs are very liberal in their answers on crime and gun control. But they also provide liberal answers on economic and social issues, with Google’s Gemini being the most extreme. He also notes that Musk’s Grok has moved more toward the political center, but much more needs to be done.
As I document in my recent booklet on A Biblical View on Artificial Intelligence, there are many concerns that researchers have about AI, but one that certainly needs to be addressed soon in the obvious leftwing bias in these programs.

Kerby Anderson
What is America’s future? Columnist Cal Thomas considers that question in his book, America’s Expiration Date. The book came out years ago but has a new preface and is more relevant today. He was on my program recently to talk about the fall of empires and the future of the United States.
He begins with an observation by Sir John Glubb, who wrote The Fate of Empires and the Search for Survival. He noticed an interesting historical fact. The average age of a nation or empire’s greatness is only 250 years. Most nations lose their way in a relatively short amount of time.
Using that ruler, Cal Thomas gives us a history lesson of the Persian Empire, the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, the Arab Empire, the Spanish Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the British Empire, and the Russian Empire. He concludes with the United States.
Each empire fell for different reasons, but they are lessons to us today. Sometimes they fell because they became too prosperous and thus too apathetic. Sometimes they fell because the empire was over extended. Most had a period of decadence and decline. The Spanish empire was so riven with conflict, they were never invaded because other countries saw nothing worth conquering.
All of that brings him to this country. He said that whenever he hears the song, “God Bless America” sung at baseball games and patriotic events, he asks himself, Why Should He? America doesn’t seem to be doing much that would find favor in God’s sight. We seem to be living in our own age of decadence.
He does believe that there is still time to resurrect the republic, but the answer can’t be found in politicians. Our future doesn’t depend on the White House, but instead is dependent on what we do in our house.

Kerby Anderson
Law professor Glenn Reynolds wonders why so many woke institutions continue to do things that hurt their bottom line. We have all heard the catchphrase “go woke, go broke.” Yet, he laments that “people at the top of major corporations and government agencies keep, well, getting woke and going broke.” Here’s his short list.
First, there is Harvard University, “roiled by antisemitism scandals in which woke politics kept administrators from protecting Jewish students.” The school has lost so much in donations that it shut down a library and is looking to borrow money to meet expenses. Reynolds reminds us that it does have a gigantic endowment but needs daily cash to meet expenses.
Second is Disney that is losing money, especially because of failures at the box office. The Lucasfilm chief Kathleen Kennedy has been known for the “South Park” joke about her films: “put a chick in it and make her gay.”
Sports Illustrated managed to alienate readers with its venerable swimsuit issue “by featuring trans, obese, and old models on the cover.” Meanwhile, Planet Fitness decided to embrace men who identify as women. The stock plummeted while terminating memberships of women who complained.
This list would not be complete unless we mentioned beer and the military. The Budweiser debacle over Dylan Mulvaney as a Bud Light spokesperson will probably be studied for years in marketing classes. And the US military’s focus on woke politics and “white nationalism” have led to dramatic enlistment declines.
The leaders of these organizations might like the fact that some applaud their ESG scores and DEI scores. But the American people have been voting with their feet and pocketbooks and are punishing these woke institutions.

Kerby Anderson
In the opening chapter of his book, The Privileged Planet, astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez talks about watching a total eclipse in India in 1995. In order to have a solar eclipse, you need to have an object come in front of the sun. But in order to have a total solar eclipse, you need the right ratios in size and distance.
As one website explains it: ‘The Sun’s diameter is about 400 times greater than that of the Moon, but it’s also about 400 times farther away. This coincidence of nature means that the Sun and the Moon appear to be roughly the same size in our sky.”
But he began to wonder, Is it merely a coincidence? He begins to play the “what if” game. What if the Moon were much closer to earth? What if the Moon were less round? What if the Moon had an atmosphere? What if we were living on another planet in the Solar System? In case you are wondering, Earth is the only planet where a total solar eclipse can be seen.
The ratios of size and distance are “just right.” As you have probably heard me say in previous commentaries, the growing list of parameters in our universe, our galaxy, and our solar system are all “just right.” Some astronomers looking at these “just right” anthropic coincidences say we live in a Goldilocks Universe.
Non-Christian scientists are aware of these parameters and merely argue that we were fortunate and won the cosmological lottery. But others, like Guillermo Gonzalez, see the so-called coincidences are evidence of intelligent design.
Next Monday, when you look up in the sky, make sure you have approved solar eclipse glasses. But as you watch or even see the event recorded on the Internet, remember Psalm 19 – “The heavens declare the glory of God.”

Kerby Anderson
Inflation has been so much a part of our economic lives, so we take it for granted. Although the Federal Reserve aims for an inflation target of 2 percent, some economists are suggesting we should reexamine that target especially since we won’t be hitting it very soon.
Two years ago, I mentioned a book by Jeff Booth. In the The Price of Tomorrow, he argues that we should be seeing deflation in our society. His argument is simple: Technology is deflationary. That is the nature of technology.
Think about cell phones. He explains that his first cell phone (which was a Motorola 8000). “It had thirty minutes of talk time before it needed to be charged for ten to twelve hours, and it cost about $2,000.” Think of the cell phone in your hand today.
While we are talking about cell phones, perhaps you have seen the graphic that compares the Apollo 11 computer with the Apple iPhone. The Apollo guidance computer used 12,250 flops (floating point operations per second). The Apple iPhone 12 now processes 11 trillion flops. It is 900 million times faster than the Apollo computer and also a fraction of the cost.
Jeff Booth reminds us, “Our economic systems were not built for a world driven by technology where prices keep falling. They were built for a pre-technology era where labor and capital were inextricably linked, an era that counted on growth and inflation, an era where we made money from scarcity and inefficiency.”
We should be experiencing deflation, which is a world where you get more for your money. But we have inflation due to money printing and the declining value of the dollar. Perhaps it is time to rethink how we do this economy.

Kerby Anderson
The most recent Gallup survey has both good news and bad news. The good news is that Americans over the age of 60 may be some of the happiest people on earth. The bad news is that young Americans under 30 are not happy. In fact, they rank very far down the chart on global happiness.
Smartphones explain the difference. Two professors have been documenting this for the last decade. Jean Twenge is best known for her book, iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy–And Completely Unprepared. She found consistently decreased levels of happiness beginning in 2013.
Because they were on their phones, adolescents were spending less time interacting with others. They spend less time developing friendships, get less sleep, and attend fewer religious services. Instead, they spend their time looking at screens, posting comments on social media, texting, and playing games. No wonder she has found a causal link between teen depression and smartphones.
Jonathan Haidt has been on my program to talk about his book, The Coddling of the American Mind. His new book just came out: The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness.
He provided a preview of his research in Atlantic, “End the Phone-Based Childhood Now.” He begins his article by documenting that “something went suddenly and horribly wrong for adolescents in the early 2010s.” Suicide rates (along with loneliness and friendlessness) rose dramatically. Young people were struggling to find meaning in life.
I encourage you to read his twenty-page article in Atlantic. It should be a wake-up call to all parents.

Kerby Anderson
Bjorn Lomborg reminds us, “More than one million people die in traffic accidents globally each year.” He says we could solve that problem by having governments reduce speed limits to 3 miles an hour. Of course, we will never do that because you need to consider other factors.
He makes that point to illustrate that the mantra “follow the science” does not allow a rational evaluation of cost and benefit. “That assertion lets politicians obscure—and avoid responsibility for—lopsided climate-policy trade-offs.”
The Biden administration has set a goal of achieving a net-zero emissions economy by no later than 2050. Outgoing climate envoy, John Kerry, has said there is no alternative, and has also dismissed the idea that this goal is politically motivated.
Lomborg explains that this way of thinking “conflates climate science and climate policy. Man-made climate change exists, but what societies do in response is still a matter of choice.” The mantra that we must “follow the science” essentially shuts down rational discussions about the enormous and unsustainable costs being proposed.
He reminds us that “the world still gets four-fifths of its energy from fossil fuels” and “half the world’s population entirely depends on food grown with synthetic fertilizer.” Economist Neil Record showed an abrupt end to fossil fuel use would cause six billion deaths in less than a year.
In addition to the human cost is the economic cost. The latest economic research estimates that net zero policies would be more than seven times as costly as the climate problem it is trying to address.
We need a sensible, rational policy discussion when addressing the issue of climate change.

Kerby Anderson
Four years ago, we heard the announcement about “15 days to slow the spread.” The anniversary of that campaign brought many articles. Scott Atlas wrote about “Covid Lessons Learned, Four Years Later.” John Stossel did a YouTube video and follow-up commentary on “Covid: Don’t Let Them Off the Hook.”
Scott Atlas reminded us that the benefits of the lockdowns were tiny. It supposedly prevented some deaths, but those numbers are very small when compared to the number of Americans who die of the flu each year. The number of non-Covid excess deaths are huge, especially when compared to other European countries. A study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that the U.S. “would have had 1.60 million fewer deaths if it had the performance of Sweden.”
The impact on the economy and jobs was staggering. “According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, as many as 49 million Americans were out of work in May 2020. This shock had health consequences.” And prolonged school closings led to permanent learning loss and later increases in “psychiatric illness, self-harm, obesity, and substance abuse.”
John Stossel says he was always wary of politicians but “was surprised at how authoritarian many were eager to be.” Many mayors and governors locked down the society in ways that didn’t even make sense from a medical perspective.
It is worth mentioning that four years ago, I did a radio program and radio commentaries on the book, The Price of Panic. It was written by experts in several fields documenting the problems with the lockdowns and predicting much of what we can now see clearly.
These are lessons learned that we need to remember, especially during this election year when candidates will be asking for your vote.

Kerby Anderson
Today is Good Friday. On this day, believers around the world commemorate the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. We all understand that. What most of us don’t understand is why this dark day in which Jesus suffered and died is called “Good Friday.” Why isn’t it called Bad Friday or Dark Friday?
Over the years, people have put forward various theories. Some argue that it is called Good Friday because something good came about because of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. While that is certainly true theologically, that is not the linguistic origin of the term Good Friday.
Others have suggested that Good Friday came from a shortening of the words God’s Friday. Although you do see that suggestion in some articles on the Internet, there really isn’t any connection between the words god and good. At best, this is mere linguistic speculation.
It is more likely that the term “Good Friday” comes from an older meaning of the word good. It used to mean holy. So you can think of the term Good Friday as really meaning Holy Friday. This fits with other languages that refer to this day as Sacred Friday or even Passion Friday.
Today we commemorate when the wrath of God was poured out on Jesus. He was sinless, and thus the perfect sacrifice for our sins. He paid the penalty that we deserved to pay. As the song says: “He paid a debt He did not owe” because “I owed a debt I could not pay.”
Good Friday begins the most momentous weekend in the history of the world. Because of the death of Jesus, we can receive the free gift of eternal life. Because of the resurrection of Jesus, we can know that there is life beyond the grave. That is why this weekend is a cause for great celebration.

Kerby Anderson
The latest research shows that Christian parents are sending mixed signals to their kids about living the Christian life. More than a decade ago, Probe Ministries surveyed born-again millennials and found that if parents had an inconsistent biblical view, their children would also have an inconsistent view. The only major exception to that would be for kids who got involved with a campus Christian ministry and grew in their faith.
The latest research by George Barna illustrates this same finding in even more detail. His research at Arizona Christian University’s Cultural Research Center found that “a mere 5 percent of parents have beliefs that are in harmony with a biblical worldview, more often than not, those same parents do not follow through with consistent biblical behavior.”
Put another way, most parents are not even talking the talk, but the few that do are not walking the walk. This is sending mixed signals to their children who quickly pick up contradictions between what parents say they believe and how they behave.
Among pre-teen parents who attend Catholic, mainline Protestant, or traditionally black churches, merely 3 percent were found to have a consistent biblical set of beliefs. Surveys of parents attending Pentecostal, non-denominational or independent Protestant churches show only 9 percent of the parents of pre-teens had a biblical worldview.
George Barna concludes that, “It’s not surprising that young people in our nation are confused regarding gender and sexuality, the value of human life, and even why and how to nurture positive personal relationships.” Churches, he says, “must be facilitating clarity rather than confusion.”
Parents need a better understanding of biblical viewpoints and biblical behavior. And they shouldn’t feel guilty about imposing their views on children but should “bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4).

Kerby Anderson
I have found that most speakers can tell you what question they receive most often. Melissa Cain Travis was on my radio program recently and said her most asked question is about the possibility of extraterrestrials. That makes sense since she often speaks on science topics that include a discussion of the vastness of the universe.
The quick answer is that Scripture is silent on the possibility of other intelligent life forms in the universe. She reminds her audience that the Bible isn’t meant to be a comprehensive cosmic encyclopedia. The discovery of divine creations that aren’t mentioned in Genesis would not undermine the veracity of Scripture.
What if we did discover extraterrestrial creatures? Wouldn’t they need salvation just like we need? There are two possible answers to that question. If their world was fallen, then they would also need salvation. But there is another possibility that C.S. Lewis proposed in his Ransom trilogy. An alien world may not be fallen.
Of course, atheists love to pursue that question. Scientific American posted a provocative article entitled, “Did Jesus Save the Klingons?” The author suggests that the discovery of life beyond Earth “might wreak havoc on certain religions.” She goes on to argue that this would be a “serious theological problem” to imagine Jesus being born in many different alien worlds.
But Melissa doesn’t see a problem with that view. There doesn’t seem to be any theological reason why the Son of God may have been incarnated and atoned for sin in more than one place. That wouldn’t diminish our value as described in Psalm 8.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. As I discussed in a commentary in May of last year, the ongoing investigations of UFOs haven’t turned up any extraterrestrials just yet. The question is still hypothetical.

Kerby Anderson
For most of us, perception is reality. But there is mounting evidence that the perceptions of most Americans aren’t even close to reality. Two months ago, I talked on my radio program about a survey done by YouGov, an international research, data, and analytics group.
I didn’t do a commentary on it at the time because there were so many other topics in the news. But now that the graph is showing up on social media sites, it’s worth mentioning. The survey found that Americans tend to overestimate percentages.
Put another way, most Americans lack even a little bit of common sense. For example, the average American guessed that 30 percent of the American population lives in New York City, 30 percent in Texas, and 32 percent in California. Apparently, those surveyed believe that a total of 92 percent of the American population lives in one city and two states. They also found that Americans assumed that 30 percent of Americans are gay or lesbian and another 21 percent are transgender. That would be more than half the population.
When it came to estimating the percentage of minorities in this country, they didn’t do any better. They estimated that 41 percent are black, 39 percent are Hispanic, and 29 percent are Asian. You could also add the 27 percent they guessed were Muslim.
In the past, when I wanted to illustrate the influence of the media on perceptions, I used to say that if all someone knew about America was what was on TV, that person would think that there were lots of homosexuals, few Christians, and lots of violence in the streets.
Unfortunately, the average American’s perception of the world through media is also skewed. This is the view of reality held by many voters. Let me add one more. This skewed view of reality also seems to be held by many of the politicians we elect.

Kerby Anderson
I go to bookstores frequently, but I don’t ever venture into the area of books for children. But a recent video and column by John Stossel has changed that. “Go into Barnes & Noble,” says Bethany Mandel, “and you will be met with a wall of biographies. Probably 27 different books about former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.” She also talks about lots of books about Kamala Harris.
But what about biographies on conservatives like Margaret Thatcher or Amy Coney Barrett? According to Bethany Mandel, there are none. That is why she started a company that told the story of “Heroes of Liberty” like Ronald Reagan and Thomas Sowell.
Her top seller is her biography of Sowell, who overcame adversity to become a famous economist. When Sowell’s family moved to New York, his new teachers put him in a lower grade because they assumed that he couldn’t compete. He didn’t play the victim but asked to see the principal. It is an encouraging story.
John Stossel reminds us that conservatives make up about half the country so you would assume that book publishers would want to appeal to them. But that is not what is happening. Bethany Mandel explains that libraries buy many more books than moms and dads so there is an incentive to churn out books that librarians will buy.
Most of us (including John Stossel) assume that librarians would be apolitical. But he provides one statistic that shows that 90 percent of librarians’ political donations go to Democrats. Our tax dollars are used to buy a thousand copies of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and zero copies of Amy Coney Barrett.
Fortunately, there are alternatives. Heroes of Faith and the Tuttle Twins are some conservative alternatives. And Christian publishers have been providing inspiring books as well. Unfortunately, you won’t find these books in your local library.

Kerby Anderson
Even after millions died worldwide from Covid-19, there still seems to be little interest on the part of the media and most politicians in uncovering how the pandemic happened. Senator Rand Paul is the exception and has written, Deception: The Great Covid Cover-Up.
He says we shouldn’t be surprised that the totalitarian government of the Chinese Communist Party engaged in a cover-up. But we should be concerned with the cover-up that took place in this country. He documents the deliberate attempt by government bureaucrats to ridicule the idea the COVID virus originated with a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. But he also explains why they wanted to hide that fact.
The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has been funding gain-of-function research for years. We now have the emails that illustrate the cover-up. One researcher in the UK admitted that he acquired a burner phone and held clandestine meetings to shield messages from future records requests.
Senator Paul not only looks to the past; he is fearful of the future. He sees a real potential for disaster. Currently, anyone can order synthetic DNA on the Internet. If they have even a minimal amount of expertise, they can make the polio virus among others. He quotes from a biochemist who reminds us that “The U.S. grants 125 doctoral degrees in virology each year.”
The goal of this research is supposedly to prevent future pandemics. But Senator Paul concludes the risk-benefit ratio doesn’t add up. While he points to some legislation that provides some protection, I believe the COVID pandemic is a vivid reminder that we shouldn’t allow such dangerous research, especially now that we know there was a COVID cover-up.

Kerby Anderson
One of the slogans we often hear from radical environmentalists is that there are too many people on the planet. Once someone makes that statement, it is worth asking, what do you propose we do about it?
Usually, they suggest we reduce the population by reducing the fertility rate. Of course, that has been happening in every developed country. As I mentioned in my December commentary, one of my professors in graduate school was a co-founder of Zero Population Growth.
But there are some who want to go far beyond zero population growth or even negative population growth. Professor Peter Singer (Princeton) seriously questioned years ago whether it was even “justifiable” for the human species to continue.
More recently you have a Finnish bioethicist explaining in the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics that he “would be pleased to see no one have children, because that would be a rational thing to do. Reproducing carries risks to the possible future individuals.”
I recently did an interview with Wesley J. Smith, who discovered this article and talked about the current intellectual push for human extinction. I mentioned to him a commentary I wrote 16 years ago about a professor at the University of Texas who rejected the idea that humans have value. At the end of his speech, he proclaimed, “We’re no better than bacteria!”
That is not true. The Bible teaches that human beings are created in the image of God and have dignity and value. We are commanded to be fruitful and multiply and have dominion over the creation.
All of this push for human extinction reminds me of the famous quote from G.K. Chesterton. “When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”

Kerby Anderson
In April 1983, the US Secretary of Education in the Reagan Administration created the National Commission on Excellence in Education. The panel discovered that “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.”
Perhaps the most famous line from that report was this. “If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might have viewed it as an act of war.”
I read that line from the report on the radio the other day while doing an interview with Larry Sand, president of the California Teachers Empowerment Network. He quoted from that original study to emphasize that education hasn’t improved very much in the last 40 years since that dismal assessment.
He cited the NAEP, often known as the “Nation’s Report Card.” It documented that less than a third (29%) of 8th graders are proficient in reading and less than a third (29%) are proficient in math. The average scores from college exams have fallen the last six years in a row.
He explained that schools seem to be spending more and more valuable class time on wokeism. He gave many examples, but one of the most concerning is how federal money is being spent on younger and younger students. An organization called Woke Kindergarten trains teachers to “confront white supremacy, disrupt racism and oppression, and remove those barriers to learning.”
No wonder that the latest Gallup poll shows just a quarter (26%) of respondents said they have a “great deal/fair amount” of confidence in our public schools. We have had an educational crisis for decades. It is time to address this chronic problem.

Kerby Anderson
Crime costs both victims and society a great deal. Several years ago, Walter Williams wrote about the “Unappreciated Crime Costs” that especially hit black residents in low-income neighborhoods. His commentary is even more relevant today.
Thousands of black Americans are murdered each year in cities like Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, St. Louis, and Philadelphia. He documented that over 90 percent of the time the perpetrator was also black.
Crime also imposes a hefty tax on people in these neighborhoods, who can least afford it. Residents must bear the time cost and other costs of having to shop outside their neighborhoods. There are few supermarkets in high-crime, low-income neighborhoods that are often referred to as “food deserts.”
Delivery companies routinely leave packages on the doorstop of homes in low-crime neighborhoods. They wouldn’t dare do that in these high-crime neighborhoods. Taxi drivers, fearing robberies in these dangerous neighborhoods, often refuse to accept telephone calls for home pickups.
You might wonder why black people in these areas often fail to report crime to law enforcement. First, many of them have a deep mistrust of police. Second, there is also the real fear of reprisals by black criminals. Reporting a crime or criminal can have serious repercussions. Criminals rarely fear being brought to justice.
Walter Williams concluded that many of the problems in the black community in previous decades were due to racial discrimination. He then argued that the problems today are due to “high illegitimacy, family breakdown, and unsafe communities.” That’s why I believe the best solutions must come from churches and faith-based organizations.

Kerby Anderson
What is happening at the University of Florida might be spreading to other universities. Earlier this month, the university announced that it was ending its experiment with DEI, which stands for diversity, equity, and inclusion. The college closed the Office of the Chief Diversity Officer and eliminated DEI positions, thereby saving more than $5 million each year on the controversial program.
DEI is dying in Florida because of the Florida governor and the actions of the Florida legislature, that passed a law prohibiting state funding of DEI programs. When he signed the law, Governor Ron DeSantis observed that “DEI is better viewed as standing for discrimination, exclusion, and indoctrination,” and that it thus has “no place in our public institutions.”
Still the legal actions by the governor and legislature might have met resistance if not for the current president of the University of Florida. Ben Sasse left his position as US Senator to become the new university president. “Last year, in his inaugural address, Sasse made it clear that universities ought not to be ‘in the business of advancing either a theology of the right, or a theology of the left.’”
Critics of DEI argue that it is often a “Trojan horse” used to smuggle all sorts of radical leftist ideas onto campus. It may still be too much to ask our universities to teach the founding principles of this nation. I don’t expect to hear any time soon that professors have required students to read the Declaration, the Constitution, or the Federalist Papers.
Nevertheless, removing some of the toxic ideas spread on campus through DEI and critical race theory is an important first step in eliminating indoctrination and promoting true education.