Moving beyond clichés

Mud, rated PG-13, is the best film I've seen this year. It opens with a scene of a boy overhearing his mother pleading with his father to listen to her concerns, but the father walks away without responding. My first impression had me thinking this was a wife trying to confront her abusive husband but failing. Later we see the father interact gruffly with his son as they deliver fish he has caught on the river where they live in a houseboat.

But soon we discover the father’s tenderness toward his son. And we learn that the mother actually owns the houseboat, inherited from her family, and is threatening to sell it. She is the one with power.

Mud  is a coming-of-age film about two Arkansas teenagers, Ellis (Tye Sheridan) and Neckbone (Jacob Lofland), who become friends with Mud (Matthew McConaughey), a fugitive who wants to reunite with his old girlfriend, Juniper (Reese Witherspoon), and then skip town. The boys agree to help him and keep his presence there secret from the police, who are searching for him because he killed Juniper’s husband, who was abusive toward her.

The film includes many arresting characters, including the small town where it’s set. It takes us into the lives of people who make their living off the river and again moves beyond the usual stereotypes of southern small towns. Director Jeff Nichols, who also made the excellent film Take Shelter, presents the details of life in the town and the struggle to make a living.

While McConaughey gives an arresting performance, the two teenagers, Sheridan and Lofland, captured my attention even more. Their characters are so well-written and finely portrayed that we accept their struggles and their courage. Ellis (Sheridan also appeared in The Tree of Life) becomes the focus of the film, as he learns harsh lessons about love and betrayal, not only in his relationship with Mud but with his parents as they head toward divorce and with an older girl he likes.

While the film surprises us in several ways, it is not devoid of cliché. The father of the man Mud killed is portrayed as especially evil, though we do see his grief. And Neckbone’s uncle (and guardian) is a bit over-the-top. But throughout the film runs a tender concern for each character, rare in most films.

Mud  played in competition at Cannes in 2012, then again at Sundance in January, so it’s considered an art house film. But it’s proven to be popular with audiences, having played more than a month in Wichita, Kan., for example. One reason for this is its authentic portrayal of people. Its characters surprise us and draw us into their world.

The wealth gap keeps getting wider

Believe it or not, we’re in an economic recovery. But if you’re not in the upper 7 percent of American households, you may not realize it. If you’re among the rest, i.e., 93 percent of American households, you may still be feeling pinched.

According to a report released April 23 by the Pew Research Center, “wealth inequality widened dramatically during the first two years of the economic recovery, as the upper 7 percent of American households saw their average net worth increase 28 percent while the wealth of the other 93 percent declined,” writes Michael A. Fletcher in the Washington Post. The uneven recovery has only accelerated a decades-long trend of growing wealth inequality in the country, despite rising popular and political awareness of the dynamic.

From 2009 to 2011, the Pew report says, the average net worth of the nation’s 8 million most affluent households jumped from an estimated $2.7 million to $3.2 million. And for the 111 million households that form the bottom 93 percent, average net worth fell 4 percent, from $140,000 to an estimated $134,000, the report said.

These changes mean that between 2009 and 2011, “the wealth gap separating the top 7 percent and everyone else increased from 18-to-1 to 24-to-1” and that “the most affluent 7 percent of households owned 63 percent of the nation’s household wealth in 2011, up from 56 percent in 2009.”

Why such a disparity in net worth? Mostly it’s because the wealthiest households have their assets concentrated in stocks and other financial instruments, while others’ wealth is concentrated in their homes. During the recovery, stock values have rebounded and reached new highs, while housing values have stayed mostly flat.

This widening gap applies to all Americans, but “the last half-decade has proved far worse for black and Hispanic families than for white families, starkly widening the already large gulf in wealth between non-Hispanic white Americans and most minority groups, according to a new study from the Urban Institute,” writes Annie Lowrey in an April 28 article in the New York Times.

The Urban Institute study found that while the wealth gap widened, the income gap between white Americans and nonwhite Americans remained stable, writes Lowrey. “As of 2010, white families, on average, earned about $2 for every $1 that black and Hispanic families earned, a ratio that has remained roughly constant for the last 30 years. But when it comes to wealth—as measured by assets, like cash savings, homes and retirement accounts, minus debts, like mortgages and credit card balances—white families have far outpaced black and Hispanic ones. Before the recession, non-Hispanic white families, on average, were about four times as wealthy as nonwhite families, according to the Urban Institute’s analysis of Federal Reserve data. By 2010, whites were about six times as wealthy.”

By the most recent data, the average white family had about $632,000 in wealth, versus $98,000 for black families and $110,000 for Hispanic families, the report said.

Two major factors helped to widen this wealth gap in recent years. The first is that the housing downturn hit black and Hispanic households harder than it hit white households, in aggregate. Second, black families suffered bigger hits to their retirement savings, the Urban Institute found.

Without changes to government policies, it’s only going to get worse. “The Urban Institute suggests reforming government policies that encourage savings but disproportionately benefit the already wealthy and families with high incomes, like the home mortgage interest deduction,” writes Lowrey.

Such a wealth gap is far from the justice Jesus called us to practice.

An effective model for fighting poverty

I volunteer for a local group called Circles of Hope. Its motto is, "Working to end poverty one family at a time." I've written about this before, but I want to point out some information we received this week from the National Circles Campaign.

Circles USA keeps data on Circle leaders, which, the report explains, "are low-income individuals who have made a commitment to build social capital with middle- and upper-income Allies, attend community meetings and work toward goal attainment for greater economic stability." These Circle leaders report their progress in these areas:
• income
• public assistance
• assets
• debts
• employment
• education
• insurance.
In data collected from July 2008 to December 2012 from 518 people who completed at least a six-month survey, Circle leaders showed improvement in the following areas:
• increased social capital: 69.3%
• has volunteered in community: 71.5%
• has safe housing: 92.3%
• has health insurance: 34.2%
• has reliable transportation: 73.6% 
• has a valid driver's license: 36%
• obtained a car: 34.6%
• paid off credit: 29.9%
• opened a savings account: 38.1%
• enrolled in education:32.1%
• employed: 33%.
 Further data shows the following improvements:
• income after 18 months of involvement: 27% increase
• public benefits after 18 months of involvement: 27% decrease
• assets after 18 months of involvement: 88% increase.
The reports notes that "poverty creates severe financial hardship for communities, states and our nation. According to a report from  the Center for American Progress, our nation spends $500 billin a year on the fallout from children raised in poverty."
 OK, enough numbers, even though these are important. What I've witnessed in my three years of involvement with Circles of Hope is the building of community. Last week, five groups finished their 18-month commitment as a circle, and every one talked about the Circles community being a family.
This past Tuesday, the Allies got together, and the Circle leaders got together. We do this every time there's a fifth Tuesday in a month. We Allies heard that a Circle leader had said that we shouldn't be discouraged if we're not seeing a big improvement in their meeting their goals because the experience of having people around them who care about them is worth more than we'll ever know.
So the numbers above are good, and they're important. But those results are more a byproduct of what Circles is about. At its core, Circles builds community and thereby builds hope. And the community that is built is not just for their good but for the good of us all. The more we work together to end poverty, the better off we all are. 
For more information on those numbers, check out www.circlesusa.org.
And for anyone in the Newton, Kan., area, there is a training for Allies on May 11. To learn more, call 316-284-0000.