White women earn less that black women

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
May be so, however, I was one of the few women that worked 2 jobs when I was younger because I had to pay rent. Now, where I lived was of issue, which may have put me fabulously broke. However, I think I did it mainly to have "comfort items", rather than making ends meet...

But that's just me and my life. The census data does not suggest a social implication, the data just show numbers with a relative correlation to whatever the question was that they designed: i.e. what types of people are getting paid the highest wages--or even more broader than that...

I even doubt they developed a hypothesis until after they got all the data calculated and noticed some trends... It would be nice to see their actual stats that they used.

Of course the census data does not suggest social implications. That's why there are people like myself who understand and research the social implications. The Census is not a research tool in the sense of hypotheses and using theoretical foundations for their work. They are only a clearing house and a data collection unit. Similar to other research institutes that just collect the data and crunch the numbers.

There are a lot of people who have "comfort items," but there are MANY more who are struggling to just make ends meet. This is moreso for families with children because children make up over half of the people in poverty and near-poverty. So, if you thought "comfort items" meant not going to bed hungry or being able to afford nutritional meals, I would agree with you.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
May be so, however, I was one of the few women that worked 2 jobs when I was younger because I had to pay rent. Now, where I lived was of issue, which may have put me fabulously broke. However, I think I did it mainly to have "comfort items", rather than making ends meet...

But that's just me and my life. The census data does not suggest a social implication, the data just show numbers with a relative correlation to whatever the question was that they designed: i.e. what types of people are getting paid the highest wages--or even more broader than that...

I even doubt they developed a hypothesis until after they got all the data calculated and noticed some trends... It would be nice to see their actual stats that they used.

Right so the spending is interesting. I remember walking in Jamaica, Queens (a black neighborhood in NY) and it was obviously not full of well-to-do people, but there seemed to be an abundance of spending on clothing and sneakers. That spending to be fabulously broke is somewhat baffling.

-Rudey

[DSTCHAOS]

Just to keep it in perspective: The average American lives paycheck to paycheck yet lives in "abundance."

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
Of course the census data does not suggest social implications. That's why there are people like myself who understand and research the social implications. The Census is not a research tool in the sense of hypotheses and using theoretical foundations for their work. They are only a clearing house and a data collection unit. Similar to other research institutes that just collect the data and crunch the numbers.

There are a lot of people who have "comfort items," but there are MANY more who are struggling to just make ends meet. This is moreso for families with children because children make up over half of the people in poverty and near-poverty. So, if you thought "comfort items" meant not going to bed hungry or being able to afford nutritional meals, I would agree with you.

I know that census data is just a data collection unit. And after the data is collected, it is an invaluable tool to have some series of sociological hypotheses tested just based on the numbers with the appropriate stats.

However, in 2000, the Census Bureau did make a concerted effort to "outreach" to communities of color for data collection so that the "needs and resources" are allocated to municipal/localities, state and federal budgets... That was the primary dictate made by the Census 2000 committee upon presentation of the application to various audiences at national conventions...

But "Census 2000" did allow folks to "pre-select" there "racial/ethnic" categories into several, which does skew data interpretation... i.e. if folks select more than one ethnic identifier, then by basic number crunching alone, does that variable get counted one time or more? Even if you do multivariate ANOVA, you still get data skewing...

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by Rudey
Right so the spending is interesting. I remember walking in Jamaica, Queens (a black neighborhood in NY) and it was obviously not full of well-to-do people, but there seemed to be an abundance of spending on clothing and sneakers. That spending to be fabulously broke is somewhat baffling.

-Rudey

Like DST Chaos said, folks still live paycheck to paycheck, yet lives in "abundance". Whether it is in the 'hood with new spinners--or whether it is in a brownstone that is about to foreclosed...

[Rudey]

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
Like DST Chaos said, folks still live paycheck to paycheck, yet lives in "abundance". Whether it is in the 'hood with new spinners--or whether it is in a brownstone that is about to foreclosed...

Monet, your income and spending habits are both important aspects of the equation.

If the incomes are higher for whites in family units and the spending is higher, then what?

-Rudey

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by Rudey
Monet, your income and spending habits are both important aspects of the equation.

If the incomes are higher for whites in family units and the spending is higher, then what?

-Rudey

I think your question has many answers to it... You have got to remember history plays are HUGE role in the "economic development" of the African American community as a whole...

After MLK was assasinated, many affirmative action programs were dedicated to "incorporating African Americans" into the mainstream of society by instilling similar values of a "nuclear family unit"... Most folks did not take too kindly to this act, black or white...

But somehow by the time of Ronald Reagan, there were a "handful" of upper middle class African Americans that could "play the game" with the "hand that was dealt" and "make a profit" from it, legally...

So what you are talking about is ~20 years of "active investments" into the Stock Market by African Americans as a community as a whole...

Well, how many African American top Fortune 500 companies are brokerage firms?

With the exception of AMEX, there are only a handful of African American CEO or corporate execs sitting on boards and most of them male...

With more than 75% female headed households, how long do you think it will take folks of African descent to fathom catching up to other ethnic groups level of investing within their communities given there is a global economy?

The fact is the United States government did some unsavory things ~30 years ago that destroyed the economic base of the African American community that they have yet to own up to...

[Rudey]

When discount brokerages first came into existance they were offering $100/trade as opposed to $500/trade. Now I can put in an order for $5. In the last 20-30 years, is where the market has really made some rapid changes. Prior to that, investing was something left for only the very wealth Americans and it was limited since there weren't so many companies offering tech innovations.

Here is a list of famous Black fortune 500 employees. Obviously, it's not expansive but there are folks like Vernon Jordan and Stanley O'Neal who work at these brokerages. And ML is a bulge bracket, there are quite a few MBE firms out there that do work on AfAm client or get work from non-black companies because of their MBE status.

But if a black household makes less money than a white household and spends more on short-term items like clothing, where would the money come from for investing?

-Rudey

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
I think your question has many answers to it... You have got to remember history plays are HUGE role in the "economic development" of the African American community as a whole...

After MLK was assasinated, many affirmative action programs were dedicated to "incorporating African Americans" into the mainstream of society by instilling similar values of a "nuclear family unit"... Most folks did not take too kindly to this act, black or white...

But somehow by the time of Ronald Reagan, there were a "handful" of upper middle class African Americans that could "play the game" with the "hand that was dealt" and "make a profit" from it, legally...

So what you are talking about is ~20 years of "active investments" into the Stock Market by African Americans as a community as a whole...

Well, how many African American top Fortune 500 companies are brokerage firms?

With the exception of AMEX, there are only a handful of African American CEO or corporate execs sitting on boards and most of them male...

With more than 75% female headed households, how long do you think it will take folks of African descent to fathom catching up to other ethnic groups level of investing within their communities given there is a global economy?

The fact is the United States government did some unsavory things ~30 years ago that destroyed the economic base of the African American community that they have yet to own up to...

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rudey
Monet, your income and spending habits are both important aspects of the equation.

If the incomes are higher for whites in family units and the spending is higher, then what?

-Rudey

Then it all balances out and results in the same thing...overspending and an inability to accumulate wealth and have a safety net in times of economic downturn.

$100,000K income + $99,000K spending = living from paycheck to paycheck

$12,000 income + $11,500 spending = living from paycheck to paycheck


The difference is that whites disproportionately have intergenerational mobility and the passing down of wealth. Whites are also more likely to have family members and friends with money or networks who can increase their profit margin.

So, you are right that there IS a difference. However, talking about black spending as an explanation for the findings of certain studies is a cop-out.

[Tom Earp]

Well, I guess I am one of the Majority of Poor.

Payceck to pay check. I am so regimented because of Gasoline price, Fod Price and Booze Price! My 3 damn vices but out of need.

It may or may not make a difference what color someone is. If someone does not want to work, they wont. If some want to or need to work a job or several, they will.

Never make a judgement stand because of the way You live compare to others. Have you been there? If not, dont group all into a little censuse.

The Economics of today are a lot different than they were yesterday. Called expendable Income. Living above The Means is more so because of the Ethic of today.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
So, you are right that there IS a difference. However, talking about black spending as an explanation for the findings of certain studies is a cop-out.

I also would add that only until recently have a larger number of African Americans began to understand the accumulation of wealth and managing it rather than purchasing consumables...

However you do get some ol skool pimped out mack daddies and mammas that gotta look good in da clothes... Even "Snowflake" hasta look gwood...

Whereas, not too many of those folks be thinkin' 'bout opening up a savings account at BofA...

I mean, BofA doesn't launder low amounts of ca$h--in the 6 figure range... Oh HAYLE YEAH, they will do it if it is in the 8 figure range--the high 8 figures... But they call those "global high cap growth dividend funds" with your own seat at the NYSE...

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Tom Earp
It may or may not make a difference what color someone is. If someone does not want to work, they wont. If some want to or need to work a job or several, they will.

Never make a judgement stand because of the way You live compare to others. Have you been there? If not, dont group all into a little censuse.

@ your first paragraph: You are still missing the crux of the issue here. But, that's okay I guess.

There is something positive to be said about "grouping," though. Despite how each of us individually lives our lives, there are generalizations to be made based on trends and patterns across individuals. These trends and patterns can be categorized by race, class, gender, region of the country, occupation, and so forth. That is helpful for research, social activism, public policy, and governmental funding.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
I also would add that only until recently have a larger number of African Americans began to understand the accumulation of wealth and managing it rather than purchasing consumables...

However you do get some ol skool pimped out mack daddies and mammas that gotta look good in da clothes... Even "Snowflake" hasta look gwood...

Whereas, not too many of those folks be thinkin' 'bout opening up a savings account at BofA...

I mean, BofA doesn't launder low amounts of ca$h--in the 6 figure range... Oh HAYLE YEAH, they will do it if it is in the 8 figure range--the high 8 figures... But they call those "global high cap growth dividend funds" with your own seat at the NYSE...

I agree with your first paragraph.

Regarding the remainder of your post, you should be careful when making such comments because many people on this board will take your post as the gospel. They will not realize that not having a savings account, etc. is directly related to what you mentioned in your first paragraph. Therefore, they will be quick to use "mack daddy" as an excuse to think negatively of the poor and particularly poor blacks.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
Regarding the remainder of your post, you should be careful when making such comments because many people on this board will take your post as the gospel. They will not realize that not having a savings account, etc. is directly related to what you mentioned in your first paragraph. Therefore, they will be quick to use "mack daddy" as an excuse to think negatively of the poor and particularly poor blacks.

Yeah, you're right about that, most folks on GC also think I'm full of isht, too...

But, I am not concerned because those fools will always think that level of ignorance no matter how exacting either one of us are in our statistics and facts...

I guess their mentality is one such that "poverty sucks", so they never had to truly lift a finger to help those less fortunate than themselves. But, I am of the thinking that "one reaps what one sows" and the "chickens come home to roost" (if you catch my drift) and I have yet to care about those fools mentality...

That is why I can trump some of them with ignorance abound, because I watch the logic of their argument and see their thought processes (no matter how mundane they are) and I pounce immediately to questioning it...

S.O.P. of doctorate training at any graduate school with a lunatic professor... I had to learn the hard way... 8 years of hard "thought" labor... And now I'm out on parole... I feel institutionalized, and I'm on the street--Ice Cube...

[Lady of Pearl]

I wonder if they took into account in what field are these Black women outearning white women?Obviously not in education, or the social sciences, I don't think their data holds any validity. I wonder how they overlooked me, a Black Women two years ago ,with an advanced degree ,and I did not earn as nearly as much as their statistics claim. Anyone can use data to suit their own purposes!