TIME Money

How Rich Immigrants Can Solve L.A.’s Housing Crisis

house-white-wall
Getty Images

Zocalo Public Square is a not-for-profit Ideas Exchange that blends live events and humanities journalism.

If the city wants affordable homes, it needs to tap into funds from wealthy foreign investors

How could Los Angeles pay for more affordable housing?

One answer is money from wealthy immigrants.

To build apartments that are accessible to low-income residents, high-rent cities across the country—from San Francisco to Miami—have been tapping funds from EB-5, a federal government program that offers U.S. green cards to foreigners in exchange for investments in U.S. businesses. Launched in 1990 as a vehicle to create jobs, the program requires each investor to give at least $500,000 to a business that provides 10 full-time jobs to Americans. The investment is “at-risk,” so there’s no guaranteed return.

As an immigrant, a former securities lawyer and the founder of a business, I immediately found EB-5 compelling, and have worked to spread the word about its advantages and make it more transparent. I’ve created EB5 Investors Magazine, EB5investors.com, and a series of educational EB-5 conferences.

But the program was rarely used and little known until the Great Recession hit and traditional sources of capital dried up. Since then, real estate developers have embraced EB-5 funds from foreign investors around the world as an alternative for financing all kinds of construction projects, including buildings that contain affordable housing units. EB-5 funds helped build 115 affordable units at Stadium Place, an office-hotel-retail-residential project located in front of the Seattle Seahawks stadium. San Francisco’s massive Shipyard development in Bayview-Hunters Point, one of the poorest sections of the city, includes several hundred million dollars from individual EB-5 investors. As part of its negotiation with the city, the Shipyard developer pledged to devote 30 percent of its planned 10,000 units to affordable housing. And last month, Miami Mayor Tomas Regalado said that his city plans to target EB-5 immigrant investors as a source for financing an ambitious agenda to build affordable housing.

Like Los Angeles, most of the cities that have benefited from EB-5 appear toward the top of “least affordable’’ lists of U.S. cities. They all have large populations of homeless people, although Los Angeles has the highest number. (The homeless population in L.A. County grew by 12 percent in the past two years; the number of tents, vehicles, and homemade shelters being used as housing jumped 85 percent.)

But Los Angeles hasn’t cultivated EB-5 projects that involve affordable housing. Instead, L.A. developers with EB-5 have focused on building hotels – an easier route when you have to show job creation. Flag hotels in big cities are also easier to “sell” than low-income housing with migration agents in China who connect potential immigrant investors with projects. Of course, San Francisco and Seattle projects face the same reality and have gotten deals done. That suggests that developers here need a nudge to be more creative; one nudge might involve some form of city incentives.

Yes, there are challenges. Real estate developers, will tell you that affordable housing—defined as housing priced for people making less than 50 percent of a community’s median income—is notoriously difficult to greenlight because it is perceived as unprofitable. But what they don’t understand is that the use of EB-5 funds can help developers overcome that hurdle.

The big advantage for developers is that EB-5 funds are relatively cheap capital. Most EB-5 investors want to immigrate to the U.S. to raise their families, send their children to American universities, and take advantage of the entrepreneurial opportunities. A large return on investment is down the list for these immigrants. That translates into reduced demand for a high rate of return, which ends up costing the borrower less.

Another advantage: developers don’t have to put as much cash into projects, because of the lower proportion of equity in most EB-5 deals. In a typical deal using EB-5 funding, the developer maintains equity amounts equal to between just 15 and 25 percent of the total project cost.

Los Angeles affordable housing advocates would do well to look into EB-5 funding as an alternative source for financing mixed-use projects that include affordable and workforce housing. The money is there. Investors from China, Latin America, Europe, and the Middle East already have invested billions of dollars of capital through the EB-5 program with the hope of raising their children in the U.S. What better way to use wealthy investors’ funds than by helping to finance the construction of housing for middle and low-income Angelenos?

Ali Jahangiri is the founder of EB5 Investors Magazine and EB5Investors.com, a platform allowing investors to communicate directly with attorneys, and developers to connect with EB-5 regional centers and funding sources.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME Economy

Global Stocks Stumble As Greece Debt Troubles Escalate

Spain Greece Bailout
Andres Kudacki — AP A broker speaks on the phone as he looks at a screen at the Stock Exchange in Madrid, June 29, 2015.

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 213 points Monday amid Greece's deepening debt troubles

(NEW YORK) — Global stock markets are stumbling as investors worry about fallout from Greece’s deepening debt troubles as talks between the country and its creditors broke down over the weekend.

Greece has shuttered its banks to prevent nervous depositors from pulling their money out, and the country faces a deadline Tuesday to may a big debt payment.

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 213 points, or 1.2 percent, to 17,733 as of 11:45 a.m. Eastern time Monday.

The Standard & Poor’s 500 gave up 24 points, or 1.2 percent, to 2,076.

The Nasdaq fell 71 points, or 1.4 percent, to 5,009.

The declines were steeper in Europe. Indexes fell 3.5 percent in Germany and 3.7 percent in France.

Bond prices rose. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note fell to 2.36 percent.

TIME Money

How the Sharing Economy Is Hurting Millennials

car-piggy-bank-top-driving
Getty Images

Millennials are having to cope with an economy that is not delivering high-quality jobs

Coming of age in the wake of the Great Recession, the Millennial generation has had to accept an uncertain economic landscape as their new normal. One critical adjustment they’ve made is to enthusiastically embrace the upsides of the share economy. While their parents helped Craigslist and eBay become household names, today’s youth rely on crowdsourcing and funding sites like Kickstarter and Indiegogo. Their collaborative ethos promotes a peer-to-peer approach that can cut out the broker and benefit both provider and consumer in the process.

By taking advantage of their collective connectivity, this generation shares information openly and at scale to (among other things) make best use of the excess capacity of goods and services. Examples of this approach are everywhere. Why buy a car—and pay money for a parking space— if you live in a pedestrian city where the vehicle will sit idle most days anyway? Instead, you can join Zipcar when you need wheels or use the Uber or Lyft app on your phone to get a ride across town. With so many shared resources, it makes sense to cooperate with others, especially if it means having access to assets that one wouldn’t be able to afford independently.

But as these economic arrangements gain popularity, there may be downsides for the rising cohort of young adults. Journalist Monica Potts offers a critical assessment of the “sharing economy” in the latest issue of the Washington Monthly that features a set of in-depth articles that focus on the relationship of Millennials and money (additional contributions are made by Phil Longman, Matt Connolly, and Jordan Fraade). Potts shows how Millennials have been creating virtues of necessity as a means of coping with an economy that is not delivering high-quality jobs.

Instead of following in the footsteps of their parents who married, bought homes, and had kids, Millennials are renting everything from homes to bikes, phones, and software, signifying a cultural shift that is radically altering their relationship to ownership. Instead of opting for the suburbs, Millennials are remaking the urban core of cities across the country, demanding improved transportation, more walkability, and better integration of technology into public services in order to benefit the collective rather than the individual. Some of these arrangements make sense over the long term, especially when the underlying assets are depreciating, but it also means that Millennials are missing out on recouping the gains from owning appreciating assets.

If we look at the balance sheet of young Millennials, and even Gen-Xers, we see declining incomes and lower levels of wealth, not merely vis a vis the rich, but compared to previous generations of Americans. In his piece, Phil Longman presents this as an emerging and consequential expression of inequality, arguing that perceptions of growing disparities might be best understood in generational terms. Rather than focusing on how exceedingly well the 1% is doing, it’s more instructive to recognize the decline of every generation of young adults born after the Boomers. In so much as the rise of the share economy is delaying a generational wealth-accumulating process, it is contributing to the pervasive downward mobility experienced by the Millennial generation. If people feel as though it is harder to get ahead than it used to be, it’s because it’s true.

One way that young people have traditionally been able to build up the assets side of their balance sheets is through entrepreneurship. However, Matt Connolly describes how Millennials are starting fewer businesses in recent years even as a seemingly endless wave of aspiring young Mark Zuckerbergs report in surveys and in the media that they want to do so. Without steady jobs, many of these young entrepreneurs take on temporary work, in effect creating a “Gig Economy,” characterized by a small, and less powerful, form of entrepreneurship that ends up supporting one job at a time and fails to spark the benefits we traditionally associate with small business creation.

Another impact of the Great Recession has been the delayed entry of young families into the economy as homeowners. Without savings to cover a down payment or the ability to qualify for a mortgage, Millennials are lagging behind previous cohorts in their rate of homeownership. Jordan Fraade sheds light on an innovative response, shared equity homeownership, which is gaining momentum in communities across the country. In shared-equity housing, the buyer gets a one-time subsidy that allows them to purchase a home that they would not be able to afford otherwise and in exchange, they are required to share the accumulated equity upon resale. This approach still offers the potential for wealth building but also provides access and stability for a generation desperately in need of both.

Shared-equity homeownership is just one example of the innovative policy solutions that we will need more of if we are to help the current crop of young families make the move up the economic ladder. Reversing their growing generational inequality is the new Millennial challenge and it will require a broad set of policies that can deal effectively with the numerous ways that inequality has expanded and grown more entrenched. Certainly, one set of policies should focus on limiting debt and bringing down the costs of accessing education and health care so liabilities don’t overwhelm the family balance sheet. But another set of policies is needed to assist young adults in building up their asset base over their life course and connecting them to productive ownership opportunities. It is our collective responsibility to make sure the emerging “share economy” doesn’t leave Millennials completely devoid of wealth.

Reid Cramer is director of the Asset Building Program at New America. He was a convener of the Millennials Rising symposium, which helped inform the articles described in this piece. This piece was originally published in New America’s digital magazine,The Weekly Wonk. Sign up to get it delivered to your inbox each Thursday here, and follow @New America on Twitter.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME China

China-Backed Development Bank Holds Signing Ceremony in Beijing

China-led AIIB members ink accord for its inception by year's end
AP—Kyodo Delegates from more than 50 countries gathered to sign the articles of agreement that specifies the new lender's initial capital and other details of its structure.

Conspicuously absent from the ceremony was the U.S., which declined to join the bank

Delegates from 57 founding member states gathered in Beijing on Monday to finalize and ratify the terms of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the China-backed multilateral development bank seen by some as a strategic rival to the World Bank and similar international financial institutions.

The signing ceremony comes eight months after Beijing officially launched AIIB, which intends to “focus on the development of infrastructure and other productive sectors in Asia” and “promote interconnectivity and economic integration in the region,” according to its mission statement. It will begin with a $50 billion capital base, the BBC reports.

Of its founding members — which include Australia, Russia and Germany — China will be the largest shareholder, with 25% to 30% of all votes. Conspicuously absent from the roster is the U.S., which in October expressed concern over the bank proposal’s “ambiguous nature.” While World Bank President Jim Yong Kim has praised the new institution, citing the “massive need” for fresh investments in Asia, some critics see its establishment as a self-serving exercise in Chinese soft power.

TIME Netherlands

This Dutch City Plans to Give Residents a Universal ‘Basic Income’

CYCLING-FRA-NED-TDF2015
ROBIN VAN LONKHUIJSEN—AFP/Getty Images A man cycles past a cafe displaying Tour de France items for sale, ahead of the upcoming Tour de France cycling race, in downtown Utrecht on June 23, 2015.

Residents will receive money to cover living expenses with no strings attached

A city in the Netherlands is planning a large-scale experiment to see what happens when a society sets a standard, baseline income for all its citizens.

Utrecht is partnering with a local university to provide residents with a “basic income,” which is enough to cover living costs, The Independent reports. The idea is to see whether citizens dedicate more time to volunteering, studying and other forms of self and community improvement when they don’t have to worry about earning money to survive. People who participate in the experiment won’t have any restrictions placed on how they choose to spend the money they receive.

During the experiment, researchers and city officials will study the people who are offered a basic income as well as a control group who continues earning money in the traditional way. Utrecht officials hope to launch the experiment this summer and are in talks with other cities to expand the experiment to other locations as well.

[The Independent]

MONEY Shopping

The Latest Sign That The Economy Is Getting Back on Track

A family uses the self-checkout at the Wal-Mart owned Sam's Club in Bentonville
Rick Wilking—Reuters A family uses the self-checkout at the Wal-Mart owned Sam's Club in Bentonville, Arkansas June 4, 2015.

Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of US economic activity.

U.S. consumer spending recorded its largest increase in nearly six years in May on strong demand for automobiles and other big-ticket items, further evidence that economic growth was gathering momentum in the second quarter.

The Commerce Department said on Thursday consumer spending increased 0.9% last month, the biggest gain since August 2009, after an upwardly revised 0.1% rise in April.

The sturdy increases suggested households were finally spending some of the windfall from lower gasoline prices, and capped a month of solid economic reports.

Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic activity, was previously reported to have been unchanged in April. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast a 0.7% rise in May.

It was the latest sign that growth was accelerating after gross domestic product shrank at a 0.2 percent annual rate in the first quarter as the economy battled bad weather, port disruptions, a strong dollar and spending cuts in the energy sector.

From employment to the housing market, the economic data in May has been bullish. Even manufacturing, which is struggling with the lingering effects of dollar strength and lower energy prices, also is starting to stabilize.

The firming economy suggests the Federal Reserve could raise interest rates this year even as inflation remains well below the U.S. central bank’s 2 percent target.

Spending on long-lasting goods such as automobiles jumped 2.2 percent last month, while outlays on services like utilities rose 0.3 percent.

When adjusted for inflation, consumer spending increased 0.6 percent, the largest jump since last August, after being unchanged in April.

Personal income increased 0.5 percent last month after a similar gain in April. Income is being boosted by a tightening

labor market, which is starting to push up wage growth. With households stepping up spending, the saving rate fell to 5.1 percent from 5.4 percent in April. Still, savings remain at lofty levels.

Inflation pressures remained tame last month despite the acceleration in consumer spending. A price index for consumer spending increased 0.3 percent after being flat in April. In the 12 months through May, the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index rose only 0.2 percent.

Excluding food and energy, prices edged up 0.1 percent after a similar gain in April. The so-called core PCE price index rose 1.2 percent in the 12 months through May, the smallest gain since February 2014.

TIME society

How to Break the Millennial Debt Spiral

money-stack
Getty Images

'We need to go beyond financial knowledge'

Finding ways to increase an entire generation’s wealth is a messy business.

That’s probably been the case for decades, but this time around things are even more complicated because millennials—those born between the early 1980’s and early 1990’s—had the unenviable task of coming of age in the wake of the Great Recession. Despite having the distinction of being America’s largest working generation, millennials have been entering one of the worst job markets in recent history while carrying unprecedented levels of debt and are struggling to attain the same levels of wealth achieved by previous generations.

“Financial capability is the opportunity to put knowledge into practice,” noted Dr. Terri Friedline during a recent event at New America, where she spoke with Parker Cohen of the Corporation for Enterprise Development (CFED), Sunaena Chhatry of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and Vox education reporter Libby Nelson about how millennials could change their financial fortunes for the better.

For Dr. Friedline, the best way to accomplish this is by giving millennials the chance to practice financial decision-making. In her research, she has found that “the combination of having received financial education and being financially included via a savings account” is the most effective way to improve outcomes and help millennials prepare for financial emergencies or work toward long-term purchases. “We see that savings accounts and credit cards perform pretty consistently [as tools for financial experiential learning],” Friedline explained.

The “financial capability as key to stability” argument is certainly an attractive proposal for a generation that has resorted to using the oft-mentioned “sharing economy” as a way of circumventing large expenses and unmanageable debt, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that knowing what an IRA is or having a small amount of savings will solve every financial struggle. Friedline acknowledged this tension by explaining that economic inequality adds enormous complexity to the goal of increasing financial capability because it creates larger burdens for people with lower incomes. When financial emergencies arise, millennials with access to higher incomes and family support are often able to use already-amassed savings to keep themselves afloat while their lower-income peers have to draw upon things like credit cards and payday loans just to get by. The discrepancy between high-income and low-income millennials’ access to resources shouldn’t mean that pursuing financial capability is a less worthy endeavor, but it does point to the need for a conscious effort to address the unique challenges lower-income individuals face in an economy where assets matter.

If financial capability is the gateway to financial well-being for lower-income individuals and families, how can financial knowledge be made accessible to the people that need it most? When asked this question, Cohen identified the education sector as the perfect breeding ground for increasing financial knowledge and opportunity. “That time when a youth is starting to get their first paycheck and make different sorts of financial decisions on their own is an excellent time to get them educated so they make informed decisions,” he noted, highlighting Live the Solution’s AZ Earn to Learn initiative (which supports high school students by using financial education in conjunction with matching funds in order to teach the importance of saving money up for college) and the financial coaching program at New Mexico Community College as examples of how educational institutions could leverage their influence to improve the financial futures of students.

But even the fact that education can be a very important step towards financial stability for lower-income millennials lacking an inherited stockpile of assets is itself a distraction from a paradoxical reality. Going to school isn’t simply a tool for reducing financial insecurity; it is oftentimes the very factor that exacerbates that insecurity.

“One of the things most people don’t realize is that although getting a bachelor’s degree is still a minority experience, going to college is actually an increasingly universal one,” Nelson explained, pointing out that “college is a major financial decision” for students and their families. Less-than-optimal systems of notifying students about their financial aid have only served to make concerns about rapidly accumulating student loans and appropriate borrowing amounts even more confusing, especially when they create scenarios where a student must drop out of school due to insufficient finances.

“I am a financially capable 28-year-old woman, and if someone had told me ‘I am going to give you your salary for the next six months now, good luck with that,’ I hope I would still have something to eat in December, but I don’t really know,” Nelson joked when commenting on the common higher education practice of sending students financial aid notifications only once a semester. She emphasized that finding ways to get financial information to students “at the right time” is an important step in ensuring that millennials can keep their heads above water. She commented that Indiana University came up with a particularly good way of accomplishing this task when it opted to notify students of their cumulative debt through an annual letter. While a letter may not seem like much, Nelson explained that the correspondence gave students a way of monitoring their borrowing and avoid the pitfall of crushing student debt.

Ultimately, the panelists agreed that sustainable solutions to debt will require a complete overhaul of how our society approaches financial education. Dr. Friedline’s report suggests that a universal system of child savings accounts could be a catalyst for vastly improving financial capability if account access were paired with financial education. The panelists were optimistic that building greater financial capability was possible with the right combination of early education and access.

“We need to go beyond financial knowledge,” Chhatry urged. “Young people are developing their understanding of financial matters very early on.”

P.R. Lockhart is an editorial intern at New America. This piece was originally published in New America’s digital magazine, The Weekly Wonk. Sign up to get it delivered to your inbox each Thursday here, and follow @New America on Twitter.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME conflict

We’re Remembering Napoleon’s Failure at Waterloo this Week. Here’s Another

Napoleon Bonaparte, French general and Emperor.Artist: Paul Delaroche
Print Collector/Getty Images Napoleon Bonaparte, French general and Emperor. Napoleon (1769-1821) From Harmsworth, History of the World, published in London, 1909.

Unable to defeat Great Britain on the high seas, new research shows that he tried and failed to win by sabotaging Britain’s economy

History News Network

This post is in partnership with the History News Network, the website that puts the news into historical perspective. The article below was originally published at HNN.

Two hundred years ago British, German, and Dutch troops decisively defeated Napoleon Bonaparte at the Battle of Waterloo. Historians have since studied and written about the great general and the Empire he established and lost. The majority of these studies explored military campaigns to explain Napoleon’s success and failure. In the last twenty years, an international community of historians has explored the nature and structure of the Napoleonic Empire to reveal nuanced perspectives on its supporters and its opponents. This approach helps us better understand why Europeans ultimately united against Bonaparte between 1813 and 1815, and why his Empire began to falter and to disintegrate even before the final military showdown took place at Waterloo.

Examining Napoleon’s Empire, in particular his Continental System, provides insights into the economic warfare that followed in the wake of French conquest and expansion. When Britain and Revolutionary France entered into military conflict in 1793, both states embraced economic warfare, including restricting the trade of neutral states. One year after the failure of the short-lived Peace of Amiens (1802-1803), Britain seized French and Dutch vessels in British ports, proclaimed a blockade of the Elbe and Weser rivers, and extended it to French ports a year later, as France undertook a range of policies to restrict British commerce on the continent. France and Britain alike targeted neutral shipping, which sought to continue trade with both belligerents.

Following the expansion of the Napoleonic Empire economic, warfare spread to the high seas, harbors and marketplaces across Europe and the Atlantic. In 1806 following the defeat of Prussia, the Berlin Decrees formalized Napoleon’s Continental System and generated a new level and intensity of trade disruption, when Bonaparte criminalized trade with Britain and British subjects in French-occupied areas. The British retaliated with their own Orders in Council in January and November 1807 that sought to tighten the blockade of France and its allies, deny French trade with neutrals and prevent Britain’s enemies from trading with their colonies.

As Napoleon gained more territory on the continent, and Britain exerted its muscle on the high seas, the Continental Blockade expanded: Russia, Prussia, Norway-Denmark (following a British invasion and bombardment of Copenhagen), and Portugal (following a French invasion) joined in 1807. Napoleon retaliated to the British Orders in Council with the 1807 Milan Decrees and expanded the blockade of continental ports to include neutral shipping that complied with the British directives. The economic disruption, hardships and declining standard of living caused by the dual blockade engendered widespread hatred of France and Britain. Merchants everywhere condemned their common practice of privateering and disregard of neutrality.

Too weak to win at sea, Napoleon sought to defeat Britain by attacking the vast capital and credit that made possible its sustained mobilization of financial assets for use in the war. Foreign trade financed Britain’s power, and Napoleon sought to damage British financial stability and balance of trade. He tried to reduce the British supply of gold and specie and weaken its credit, so Britain could not subsidize continental warfare against the French. Napoleon’s Continental Blockade was not a conventional naval blockade that endeavored to deprive its enemy of weapons, food and commodities; rather, it sought to deny Britain the financial ability to wage war.

In addition to subduing Britain, the restructuring of the continental trade attempted to establish French industrial and commercial hegemony on the continent. Far from a constructive program for European industrial development and trade under French guidance, the Blockade represented an act of aggression against the continent. Intensified economic warfare altered the character of the Napoleonic conflict since both France and Britain pursed victory at the expense of the continent as both states targeted neutral, conquered, satellite and allied states alike.

The Continental Blockade and System are often used interchangeably, but they are distinct if related in origin. The Blockade was Napoleon’s economic weapon against Britain, whereas the Continental System encompassed the political organization necessary to enforce this Blockade on the continent. For example, Napoleon reorganized the political boundaries on the Italian peninsula to better implement the Blockade, ultimately annexing Tuscany, Parma and Piacenza in 1808 and Rome, Umbria and Lazio in 1809 directly into the Empire. Within a few years, commerce in Mediterranean ports was reduced to short-term coastal shipping.

In 1810 Imperial economic warfare reached a new level following the annexation of the Papal States, Illyrian Provinces, Holland and the north German coast into the Empire and the issue of three new decrees: Saint Cloud, Trianon and Fontainebleau Decrees. Napoleon sought to turn privateering to the advantage of the French Treasury, strengthen the already privileged position of French industry and commerce by raising imperial tariffs, increase the number of customs officials and imperial troops to enforce the Blockade, punish smugglers, and confiscate British goods. Imperial officials burned seized goods with ceremonial pomp in hundreds of towns and cities in the last months of 1810 and first months of 1811, creating a customs terror.

An overview of continental Europe reveals that Britain’s opponents and France’s satellites–Holland for example–suffered the most economic disruption. Relentless commercial warfare with virtually no recognition of neutral commercial rights meant that neutral states saw their peoples and economies become pawns in the great power conflict. Blocked from legitimate trade with Britain and colonial markets, such entrepôts as Amsterdam and Hamburg faced commercial, industrial and financial decline. The full impact of the Continental System, therefore, included the costs of imperial occupation, which ultimately discredited the French regime. By 1813 impoverishment brought on by economic warfare and exploitation generated an ever-growing anti-French sentiment that erupted in a range of riots, desertions from the Grand Armée, and even revolt in northern German states and across destitute western Holland. Burning custom houses and targeting toll collectors underscored the source of local grievances and popular hostility toward the Empire. The impoverishment attributed to Continental System provided anti-Napoleonic propaganda with examples of Gallic oppression and exploitation that resonated throughout Europe.

New research on daily life under French rule illustrates the hardships associated with economic warfare, the growth of illegal trade and new merchant networks, and tensions with neutral states generated by the Anglo-French conflict to reveal the contradictions inherent in the Napoleonic Empire–at once rational and progressive, but also coercive and exploitative. Transnational, regional and urban examples underscore the vulnerability and ingenuity of Europeans as they faced transformative social and economic challenges. The difficult years of economic warfare and new commercial networks and practices predisposed Europeans to openly associate peace with trade and prosperity and offered contemporary experience to support Adam Smith’s moral vision of free trade that emphasized a benign spirit of commerce and the interdependency between peace and prosperity that would reduce conflict. In the end, however, the British Empire emerged as the winner of the Anglo-French contest, positioning Britain as the preeminent global power throughout the nineteenth century. For this reason alone, it is not surprising that the British celebrate Waterloo as their own hard-won victory: one that resonated and ultimately marked new towns and city squares across its growing Empire.

Katherine B. Aaslestad is Professor of History at West Virgnia University and has published widely on the Napoleonic era, in particular its ramifications in German Central Europe. She recently co-edited Revisiting Napoleon’s Continental System: Local, Regional, and European Experiences with Johan Joor, released by Palgrave in November 2014. Just published: “Serious Work for a New Europe: The Congress of Vienna after Two Hundred Years” in ​Central European History (Vol. 48 Issue 02, June 2015), pp. 225-237.

TIME Money

What Happened When the U.S. Decided to Put a Woman on Currency in 1978

Portrait Of Susan B. Anthony
GraphicaArtis / Getty Images Profile portrait identified as Susan B Anthony in her 30s by SouthworthHawes (Albert Sands Southworth 1811-1894 and Josiah Johnson Hawes 1808-1901, American) (from a daguerreotype in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York), c 1850.

There were lots of suggestions for who it should be, but the end result was a disappointment

The U.S. Treasury Department has announced that an upcoming redesign of the $10 bill, which features the likeness of Alexander Hamilton, former Secretary of the Treasury, should include the image of a woman. In a statement, the Treasury said it should specifically feature one “who was a champion for our inclusive democracy.” The note would be unveiled in 2020, a century after women were given the right to vote. But in the mean time, the Treasury is asking Americans to voice their opinions about the change on social media.

This won’t be the first time the Treasury decided it would be a good time to make the nation’s currency a little less male. As TIME reported in 1978:

Susan B. Anthony, the celebrated suffragist (1820-1906), is the front runner, but Amelia Earhart is closing fast, well ahead of Helen Keller, Eleanor Roosevelt. Harriet Tubman, Jackie Onassis, Elizabeth Taylor, Fanny Farmer, Grandma Moses. Martha Mitchell, Sara Lee, Anita Bryant. Shirley Temple and Whistler’s Mother. All are candidates in a campaign to put a woman’s face on a dollar coin that the Government plans to issue, probably in mid-1979. Since word became known of the plan, the Treasury has been receiving 700 to 800 nominations a day.

The Treasury’s official suggestion, meanwhile, steered away from historical women. The Statue of Liberty was their pick. (Which didn’t go over well: “We have real birds and real buffalo on our coins; it’s time we had a real woman,” said Patricia Schroeder, a Colorado congresswoman.) It was expected that the chosen face would be one that Americans would get very used to seeing. The new coin worked in vending machines! It didn’t fall apart! If you kept it in your pocket in the laundry, no big deal! Plus, its unique shape would be a help for the vision-impaired.

A year later, however, it was clear that those hopes were misplaced. More than 750 million of the coins had been minted, but only about a third were in circulation. Congress had acted to make sure that introducing the coin didn’t mean phasing out bills, and the public didn’t seem interested in making the switch voluntarily, especially because many felt that the coin was too easily confused for a quarter.

It wasn’t in production for very long—minting was “postponed” in August of 1980—but it did go through a brief resurgence in 1999, when it was reissued for a little while in order to meet demand as vending-machine change in the time between depletion of reserves and the issuance the following year of the Sacagawea coin, which has stuck around but similarly failed to inspire the nation to put away their notes.

Now, however, it looks ever like those who want to see a woman on currency won’t have to ditch their billfolds.

Read all about the 1979 decision to put Anthony on the dollar coin, here in the TIME Vault: Numismatic Ms.

TIME Economy

Asia Now Has More Millionaires Than the U.S.

HONG KONG-ECONOMY-PROPERTY
Alex Ogle—‚AFP/Getty Images This long exposure picture shows apartment buildings and office blocks clustered tightly together in Hong Kong's Kowloon district, with the famous skyline of Hong Kong island in the background, on October 28, 2013.

The one percent are eastward bound

The population of newly minted millionaires across Asian-Pacific nations has swelled to 4.69 million, bringing the grand total a hair above North America’s millionaires club, according to a new survey of the world’s high net worth individuals.

Capgemini and RBC Wealth Management surveyors estimate that the global economy produced 920,000 newly minted millionaires last year, who they define as anyone with investable assets exceeding $1 million in value. Asia-Pacific led the world with 8.5% growth in the population of millionaires, followed by North America’s 8.3%.

While the cumulative wealth of North America’s millionaires still led the world with $16.23 trillion in holdings, the study estimates that Asian-Pacific millionaires will hold a greater sum by the end of this year.

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com