To measure the wealth gap, this paper relies on data from the 2007 Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF). The SCG is a triennial national survey sponsored by the Federal Reserve Board and is considered to be one of the best sources of data on wealth inequality. This paper uses the same definition of wealth employed by the Federal Reserve Board.... Although the SCF is considered the best source of data on the extent of wealth inequality, Asians and Native Americans are combined into a single category in the public data due to their extremely small sample sizes in the survey. For this reason, when statistics on persons of color are disaggregated into constituent racial or ethnic categories in this paper, only data for blacks and Hispanics will be presented. However, when data for people of color are presented in an aggregated form, Asians and Native Americans are included in the statistcs. Where possible, data from other sources for Asians and Native Americans will be included. The sample size for non-white and Hispanic unmarried males over age 65 is particularly small in the SCF and so the data for unmarried men and women of color are more representative of persons under age 65. [2010:3]
Although the SCF is considered the best source of data on the extent of wealth inequality, Asians and Native Americans are combined into a single category in the public data due to their extremely small sample sizes in the survey. For this reason, when statistics on persons of color are disaggregated into constituent racial or ethnic categories in this paper, only data for blacks and Hispanics will be presented. However, when data for people of color are presented in an aggregated form, Asians and Native Americans are included in the statistcs. Where possible, data from other sources for Asians and Native Americans will be included.
The sample size for non-white and Hispanic unmarried males over age 65 is particularly small in the SCF and so the data for unmarried men and women of color are more representative of persons under age 65. [2010:3]
Never-married women of color experience the largest wealth disadvantage, with median wealth of zero."
Table 2."While fathers are increasingly being granted custody, the financial burden of single parenthood falls disproportionately on women. The motherhood wealth penalty is particularly acute for women of color, who are not only facing the financial strain of single parenthood, but also the double wage disadvantage of being a woman and a person of color."
Table 3."Women of color ages 65 and older are least likely to receive retirement income from pensions or from assets. For instance, while 49% of white men and 30.5% of white women receive income from pensions, 26% of black women, 17% of Asian women and 12.7% of Hispanic women receive any income from pensions."
Table 4."Because different types of assets have historically had different rates of return and because they each have different characteristics in terms of liquidity, level of risk, and tax treatment, it is important to understand the types of assets owned by women of color." Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
Affirmative action, though, has put a happy face on this racial reality. Seeing black people graduate from Harvard and Yale and become CEOs or corporate lawyers -- not to mention president of the United States -- causes us all to marvel at what a long way we've come. Recent data shows, though, that much of black progress is a myth. In many respects, African Americans are doing no better than they were when Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated and uprisings swept inner cities across America. Nearly a quarter of African Americans live below the poverty line today, approximately the same percentage as in 1968. The black child poverty rate is actually higher now than it was then. Unemployment rates in black communities rival those in Third World countries. And that's with affirmative action! When we pull back the curtain and take a look at what our "colorblind" society creates without affirmative action, we see a familiar social, political, and economic structure -- the structure of racial caste. The entrance into this new caste system can be found at the prison gate. Read more...
Recent data shows, though, that much of black progress is a myth. In many respects, African Americans are doing no better than they were when Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated and uprisings swept inner cities across America. Nearly a quarter of African Americans live below the poverty line today, approximately the same percentage as in 1968. The black child poverty rate is actually higher now than it was then. Unemployment rates in black communities rival those in Third World countries. And that's with affirmative action!
When we pull back the curtain and take a look at what our "colorblind" society creates without affirmative action, we see a familiar social, political, and economic structure -- the structure of racial caste. The entrance into this new caste system can be found at the prison gate.
Read more...
DJP says: March 11, 2010 at 4:28 pm At the very least, framing the problem as "people of color" doing relatively poorly compared to whites is misleading. And it is conveniently misleading in the direction of the "blame whitey" theory. In these sorts of discussions, you hear it framed that way constantly. You'll hear CNN talk about "minorities" struggling, etc. But some "minorities", such as the Chinese-American population, do better than whites on average. If there really were an anti-white bias in society which is to explain why "people of color" do relatively worse, then that should also apply to Asians (including Indians, Chinese, Koreans, etc.). Something like 40% of top California universities, such as UC Berkeley, are composed of Asians, even though they make up something like 10% of the California population. "Model minority" is a derogatory term coined by the proponents of the "blame whitey" ideology. Read more...
At the very least, framing the problem as "people of color" doing relatively poorly compared to whites is misleading. And it is conveniently misleading in the direction of the "blame whitey" theory.
In these sorts of discussions, you hear it framed that way constantly. You'll hear CNN talk about "minorities" struggling, etc. But some "minorities", such as the Chinese-American population, do better than whites on average.
If there really were an anti-white bias in society which is to explain why "people of color" do relatively worse, then that should also apply to Asians (including Indians, Chinese, Koreans, etc.).
Something like 40% of top California universities, such as UC Berkeley, are composed of Asians, even though they make up something like 10% of the California population.
"Model minority" is a derogatory term coined by the proponents of the "blame whitey" ideology.
