Women and Wealth

This stunning study has been really making the rounds of the interwebs today* -- and for excellent reason -- its findings, particularly as they relate to the economic state of black and hispanic women, are deeply troubling.  I highly recommend that you take some time to read the study and examine the graphs contained therein.  It's well-written, nuanced, compassionate, devoid of jargon, and contains more information than can usefully be conveyed in a blog post.   (You might also read this post by Ta-Nehisi Coates who objects to the way that some bloggers have presented the study's findings -- although I found his take to be a little confusing and somewhat quibbling in its complaints.)   

The real headline grabber in the study is the finding that the median wealth of black and hispanic women between the ages of 36 and 49 is $5.  Yes, that's right -- the price of a foot long sub at Subway.  By contrast, black and hispanic men in that age category have median wealth of $11,000, white women have a median wealth of $42,600, and white men median wealth of $70,030.  Now some of this gap is lessened as women of color move into the age range from 50 to 65, widening somewhat again after age 65.  But it is sobering to see adults in their prime earning years having amassed so little to fall back on. 

Among the things that the study drove home to me once again is the importance of unions to allow working people to be in a position to amass at least a modest amount of wealth.  My clients strive to see that their members have 1) a decent wage; 2) medical insurance; 3) at least modest amounts of life insurance; and 4) at least one pension.  Some of my clients with more bargaining power make sure that their members have both a defined benefit plan -- a pension that pays a guaranteed monthly amount for life with survivorship rights for married members -- and a defined contribution plan, where the member can amass some wealth that can be later accessed in a lump sum, rolled into an IRA, used to buy an annuity, etc. 

If we are going to assure that the vast majority of Americans have sufficient wealth to live decent lives and retire with some degree of comfort, we are going to have to embrace policies that 1) make joining a union easier; 2) provide health insurance to everyone; 3) strengthen and improve Social Security, which remains by far the major share of income for large numbers of retirees, especially among women of color; 4) adopt programs to provide income replacement to women while they are on maternity leave and provide child allowances to them in order to mitigate the economic harm often incurred when raising children; and 5) improve the earned income tax credit.  On top of this, I would also suggest that at least a full year of financial planning and education be made a part of the standard high school curriculum in order to help people be better equipped to make decisions about their future financial lives.

The picture painted by this study is of a stunning number of our fellow citizens living the most precarious of financial lives, often one step away from disaster.  A meaningful progressive politics would make alleviating this condition a very high priority.

*h/t to Dana at The Edge of the American West.   

Comments

[Eric Wilde]

That's pretty stunning.

I work in a profession that has long resisted unionization. Although I myself would be considered part of the corporate management, I've always wondered why IT professionals have so long resisted becoming unionized. I imagine that's true in so many white color industries. It sickens me sometimes to see how much executives in my company are paid while middle management and individual contributes struggle to keep their jobs and earn enough to live a decent life. I guess the fact that highly skilled labor is paid enough to get all the gadgets they want, if not a home of their own, is enough to keep the unions out of favor. Its kinda sad and I do wish white color industries would start accepting unions more.

[kathy a.]

eric, i suspect you meant to write "white collar" industries, but the typo is unfortunately too true.

[minstrel hussain boy]

while that may have been a typo, it's probably a fruedian type typo.

i mean, look around your average IT firm, look around your average board room.

what color scheme will you see?

[Eric Wilde]

Too true, too true. Its actually not so bad on my team. If you just count the US personal (about 30% of the team) you'll see 52% caucasian. Black and hispanic groups are not represented at all. We have quite a few of the different cultures of Asia represented.

[Eric Wilde]

More to the point of the post, there is a much larger gender divide. Only 26% of the US personnel are women. Its worse overseas.

[oddjob]

I am again reminded of How it Works.

(Not a criticism of Eric's particular employer, but rather an observation regarding the amount of misogyny still embedded in the sciences.)

[Sir Charles]

Eric,

There is a general fear about unionizing leading to termination, which it does in all too many cases.

However, I think in the white collar professions that there is a strong cultural aversion to unions. People think that they don't need a union and that their value should be apparent to an employer. They have a touching, if naive, faith in employers and the market place. That is why many of my blue collar clients make more money than people in businesses like IT.

[kathy a.]

oddjob, thank you for that link! as it happens, one of my sisters is a software engineer [with patents, even], and she has stories.

eric, i find it really troubling that there are no african-americans or hispanics represented in your company's US workforce, and only 26% women. i gather that troubles you, too.

[Eric Wilde]

eric, i find it really troubling that there are no african-americans or hispanics represented in your company's US workforce, and only 26% women. i gather that troubles you, too.

Its not a corporate-wide stat, just my particular team.

I find it troubling in three ways (apart from the obvious social disparity):
(1) Lack of diversity on the team means less diversity in ideas/viewpoints. This in turn leads to less creative solutions.,
(2) A disproportionate number of women lost their jobs in the last round of layoffs. The layoffs were explicitly designed around positions that were no longer to be supported and, perhaps not surprisingly, women were more over-represented in eliminated roles. Although there is no hard dividing line in the engineering teams between gender roles, there is a tendency toward men in the design/architecture realm. This in turn leads to the same lack of diversity problem mentioned in #1.
(3) Lack of black or hispanic skilled labor. The vast majority of the work force does not come from the community in which the company exists. The positions are for extremely highly skilled labor and there simply aren't that many black or hispanic candidates applying. In my years of hiring, there has been only one (count them, one!) candidate that I knew was african-american. There were probably hundreds more that never got past the resume review phase and so I have no idea what ethnicity they were. I have occasionally hired an hispanic engineer; but, they are relatively few compared to the total population. The lack of technical education and training for the african-american and hispanic population is appalling.