EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Wealth Gap Yawns--and So Do Media
Little interest in study of massive race/gender disparities
The Insight Center for Community Economic Development (3/8/10) released a stunning report about the wealth gap for women of color: Single black women have a median wealth of $100 and Hispanic women of $120--dramatically lower than white men ($43,800), white women ($41,500) or black men ($7,900).

Insight Center for Community Economic Development, March 2010
The median wealth for single white women in their prime working years, age 36-49, is 61 percent of the wealth of their male counterparts, who own $70,030. That's terrible, but the corresponding ratio between women and men of color is nearly off the charts, at just 0.05 percent--$5 versus $11,000. Almost half of single black and Hispanic women have zero or negative wealth. (Data was unavailable for Asian-American and Native American women.)
A racial wealth gap had been well established, as had a gender wealth gap. But the intersection of the two had never been measured, and the numbers in Lifting as We Climb: Women of Color, Wealth and America's Future, which demonstrate the compounding effects on women of color, are jarring and powerful. Yet almost more jarring is the near-complete lack of interest on the part of corporate media. According to a search of the Nexis database, the weeks following the report's release witnessed one national television news mention, one NPR story, two opinion pieces which were republished in a few different papers, and a single newspaper report.
It's not as if the Insight Center wasn't trying; it even held a media briefing at the Capitol building in Washington followed by a day-long symposium on the issue (3/8/10). Remember Hurricane Katrina and corporate media vows to bring race and poverty back under their lens? The deafening media silence on the racial and gender wealth gap lays bare corporate media's true priorities.
While income is the most common measurement for inequality, wealth--an individual's assets minus their debts--reveals even greater disparities in the United States. While the top 1 percent received 21 percent of the income in 2006, it held over 34 percent of the wealth (UCSC.edu, 2/10). And racial disparities are drastically greater in terms of wealth than in terms of income. (See graph below.)
Wealth can be more relevant to people's lives, too, particularly in a time of economic crisis. Not only does wealth have a lot to do with the ability to retire or support yourself in old age, people of all ages are much more likely to lose their homes or otherwise find themselves unable to support themselves or their families without savings or assets to fall back on during economic hardship. And, indeed, women of color have had the highest foreclosure rates of any group during the current recession--both as a result of their lack of wealth and their being targeted for subprime mortgages, regardless of their income level (National Council of Negro Women, 6/09).
Wealth also helps people get ahead: Home equity can be borrowed against to send children to college, for example, and wealth can be passed down through the generations to provide them with more stability, access and options. Research has found that family wealth is the biggest predictor of the future economic status of a child, giving lie to the old American "bootstraps" mythology.
Of the 600-plus U.S. newspapers in the Nexis database, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (3/9/10) was the only one to publish a news report on the study. Tim Grant's front-page piece made connections with the local situation, and pointed out that "upper-income black women [were] five times more likely to have received a high-cost mortgage than upper-income white men." A few days later, NPR Weekend Edition (3/13/10) broadcast an insightful interview with Julianne Malveaux discussing the report. (In alternative media, some of the more prominent coverage came from Latoya Peterson at the blog Racialicious--3/11-24/10--and Democracy Now!'s interview with study author Mariko Lin Chang--3/12/10.)
The Post-Gazette (3/16/10) followed up Grant's article with an editorial (also published in the co-owned Toledo Blade, 3/12/10) saying the report "should keep every American up at night." Unfortunately, the rest of the corporate media don't seem to have lost the slightest bit of sleep over it.
In fact, the majority of the corporate media coverage came from the several small papers that published syndicated columnist Bonnie Erbe (Scripps Howard, 3/17/10), who managed to minimize the racial angle of the story and flip the message of the report. The very first of the "interesting although not in any way unexpected data points" Erbe listed is "that the median amount of wealth controlled by American women is less than half the amount of median per capita wealth owned by American men." Her solution? Forget unionization and better jobs. "The best thing women can do to build wealth is to start businesses, as opposed to getting caught in time-consuming and income-limiting salaried positions."
After dispensing that less-than-helpful advice to women with no assets to speak of, Erbe wrote that the report "fails to take note of how women got themselves into the predicament where they currently find themselves," pointing a finger at "women who bear children out of wedlock before they have completed their own education" and thereby "consign those children to a cycle of poverty":
White women and women of color who are under- or uneducated and have children outside of marriage need to be given the facts before they make the decision to continue that cycle of poverty.... We need to stop them from spinning ever downward in that cycle before they launch themselves into it.
Having children out of wedlock can hardly account for the disparities; even among single women with children under the age of 18, white women have a median wealth of nearly $8,000, versus women of color's $0. And as Dalton Conley showed in his 1999 book, Being Black, Living in the Red: Race, Wealth and Social Policy in America, lack of wealth--particularly housing wealth--is a significant factor in premarital childbirth. Framing the issue as something that poor women have brought upon themselves masks the structural barriers and discrimination that need to be addressed in order to bring about real change.
In the Insight report's executive summary, in fact, a section on "Why Women of Color Have Less Wealth"--which Erbe apparently overlooked--explains the many structural inequities that are the primary cause of the wealth gap. Not only is there a sizeable income gap for women of color, they also are much less likely to get jobs that provide benefits like paid sick days, health insurance and retirement plans, all of which are critical to helping build wealth.
Another major factor is the uncompensated work that falls disproportionately on the shoulders of women, and particularly women of color--things like raising children and caregiving for elderly or otherwise incapacitated family members. That work is not only unpaid, but it doesn't count towards benefits like Social Security and unemployment insurance.
And then there's homeownership: Women of color are less likely to own homes (and therefore benefit less from related tax breaks), but when they do, they're more likely to be targeted by subprime loans regardless of their income level, which means they're paying out more in interest that could have been saved-and to top it off, residential segregation tends to make their homes gain value more slowly than homes in predominantly white neighborhoods.
But Erbe's tactic of casting the blame on poor women themselves echoes a familiar media theme. In the sole national television mention of the Insight report, CNN Newsroom anchor Fredricka Whitfield (3/13/10) raised the report's findings with guest Ryan Mack, president of Optimum Capital Management, asking him how black women "recover" from that. Mack's response: "We have to start learning how to save, start learning about where to put our money at and where our values are. Spending a little bit less and trying to make sure we are squeezing that budget."
In one of USA Today's few pieces to address wealth inequality in 2009 (5/8/09), guest columnist Yolanda Young pinned the gap on black "social behavior and financial ignorance and irresponsibility," noting that it's not just Wall Street that bears responsibility for the economic crisis: "Many of us bought frivolous things that we couldn't afford."
At the Washington Post (4/15/09), a rare mention of the wealth gap came in coverage of Fed chair Ben Bernanke telling students at historically black Morehouse College that part of the cause for the racial wealth gap is a lack of "financial education." Bernanke, said the Post, pointed to minorities' use of check-cashing services when they really ought to be "in the mainstream banking system." While financial education is not an entirely negligible factor, one hopes that Morehouse students summoned more criticism of Bernanke's arguments than the Post did.
Often, though, the very concept of a wealth gap is something the media only seem to be interested in with respect to other countries. In 2009, three of the New York Times' four articles that mentioned a "wealth gap" were about China.
Tim Grant of the Post-Gazette told Extra! that he was "shocked and amazed" that his was the only paper to cover the story, even if in some ways it wasn't entirely surprising. "When it comes to issues of people at the lower end of the economic ladder, that's not an issue that gets a lot of attention," he said. "There's a general lack of interest on the part of the media about the poor, women and people of color."
Grant said that, as an African-American male who covers personal finance, he took great interest in the Insight report, which he said "gave me a whole new perspective on what women of color are dealing with." Two of the paper's top three editors are women, he added, and their strong interest in the story helped land it on the front page. It's a powerful reminder that newsroom diversity can affect editorial priorities. According to the American Society of News Editors (4/16/09), only 13 percent of newspaper newsroom employees are minorities, and only 37 percent are women. Women of color are few and far between. And supervisors are almost 90 percent white and two-thirds male. As the old saw goes, news is what happens to or near an editor.
The Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade wrote that the Insight report "shines a harsh light on something that is too often ignored. Having the unvarnished facts is the first step toward dealing with them." The rest of the corporate media seem content to continue ignoring the wealth gap for women of color and aborting the public policy discussion before it can even begin.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


17 Comments so far
Show AllGood article. I've seen the research covered in non-US papers, I've been wondering when an article would show up on CD.
Bill Clinton exacerbated the income gap in 1997 when he proclaimed that he "ended welfare as we know it" by diluting or eliminating the welfare safety net for low income Americans and enhancing corporate welfare. Dubya subsequently increased corporate welfare to stratospheric levels.
When Obama announces the "findings" of his "deficit commission" after the November 2010 elections, the income gap will be further widened as social security and medicare are diluted to allow Obama to hand out more corporate welfare than Dubya did.
As long as we have socialism for corporations losses..with their immunity to criminality...we will continue to have economic slavery...as they devide us by race and sex.. while the rest of us fight over the crumbs.
having children is natural...
working at jobs that destroy this planet to earn money to pay someone else for the right to live on this planet is not...
are we sure we're not trying to fix systems that should be allowed to break...perhaps, even be broken intentionally?
excellent comment. thanks.
The numbers would certainly worsen for women of color
when Oprah's many millions are omitted from the equation...
The information gap about finances, personal and public, is astounding and shameful in this country. So is the impact of early pregnancy and a host of other important issues in this country. We pay so much for education and yet the disasterous effects of not really getting the important points across continues to amaze. I blame it on the advertisers and marketers. They defeat the mechanisms of impulse control and financial control in even the smartest and most disciplined of this country everyday. That is their job and they're damn good at it. So it goes.
I agree totally with this comment. The twin evils of ignorance about finances and early pregnancy are decimating this country.
We can blame it on some star chamber conspiracy or accept full responsibility for where we are and where we need to go. we can also blame it on the tone-deaf opponents of abortion, who've recklessly promoted abstinence as an ineffective method of avoiding unwanted pregnancies.
I'm also in agreement about the role of commercial messaging. It's not just that there are more of them, it's also that people let their lives and those of their children get immersed in TV and multimedia time. This makes kids physically weak and they often lack initiative and healthy lifestyles.
If we don't change, who will? Can we afford to wait for someone else to come and rescue us, some embodiment of hope who'll "take away everything and me people feel high." (Bob Marley) "Look to you and yours..."
How bad does it have to get before Americans recognize the need for change? I'll suppose that until the pain of going on gets to be more than the pain of change, things will go on as they always have.
Now none of this assumption of responsibility considers the role that race still plays in denying people of color the same opportunities as those afforded by whites. I don't think we've attained a point--at least economically--where race isn't a factor. As our country's racial mix diversifies--like it or not--it should be incumbent on Americans to help one another. I don't think housing projects and school desegregation (emanating from a central authority) are the best tools. We need to reach a point where race is not a limiting factor, or at least not the huge wealth gap that it represents. The how is the next step, but only after we accept the scope of the problem and the need for change, a task the corporate media has abandoned.
Corporate media are criminal. We need to find a way to have them forced out and/or put in jail, while insuring that real news is covered and disseminated.
YES. Wall Street owns us.
Most corporations--they sit in large rooms and sell buy corporations like Baseball cards. Been there. Know it. Want to vomit.Sneak into very very private country club near NYC and listen to Very Rich of Richest talk about robbing Labor. Been There. Heard that.
Pabst Blue Ribbon check who has owned it over last few years.
Worst is Simmons Mattress. A shame on us.
It will take a Government with Guts to Redistribute Wealth-Income to Middle Class for Rich now powerful who will fight it big time.
A Bernie Sanders with tough middle class Congressmen could do it.
We need more academia in our government. Robert Reich-Joseph Stiglitz-Paul Krugman-Edward Wolff-Kevin Phillips many many more great minds and spirits
First--FIRE every Ex-Wall Streeter working in Executive and Legislative.
ALL. Even good ones. Wall Street owns all our Financial Control of Government. ALL.
Someone explain to me how--
We can have a Secretary of our Treasury who came out of Goldman Sachs CEO and owned a Hedge Fund worth Billions?????? Treasury was staffed with ex-Goldman staffers.
Federal Reserve from top to bottom ex Wall streeters.
If that is not Conflict of Interest there is none.
His Earth Is Falling if no action today and 700B aided whom?
AIG was known as an Insurance Company. It was known also As the Big Gambling casino where one could place any type of bet.
AIG WAS PRIMARILY A GAMING CASINO
180 BILLION GIFT FROM US. WHAT IN XXXX?
History will show big time Fraud but no one will go to jail.
clarence swinney -old ugly mean honest and toally frustrated with Democrats "friend of labor" ????
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ can buy control anything anyone
The gap between rich and poor gets buried a lot more than racial and gender gaps do.
The mainstream media cares, they just don't want the public to know. They want those who are struggling to think it's their fault.
"At the Washington Post (4/15/09), a rare mention of the wealth gap came in coverage of Fed chair Ben Bernanke telling students at historically black Morehouse College that part of the cause for the racial wealth gap is a lack of 'financial education.'"
LOL! Yeah, white men all have it together. I don't think I know too mmany white men who aren't on financial thin ice due to all the debt they're in.
Who are all these wealthy white people? I don't know them.
How many people actually have their homes paid off? It belongs to the bank until the mortage is paid.
"We have to start learning how to save, start learning about where to put our money at and where our values are. Spending a little bit less and trying to make sure we are squeezing that budget."
Don't they tell everyone that? And is that sort of thing really helping anyone?
The mainstream media loves to talk about race since it's emotional and divisive. Discussions on class, while dismissed as dry, are actually even more explosive due to the solidarity that can result from it.
But certain people want other to think that their problems are their own damn fault and that they have nothing to worry about but people who are different than they are.
$43,800. LOL.
"The gap between rich and poor gets buried a lot more than racial and gender gaps do. "
In that case, I'm sure you're well aware that women, with similar academic qualifications as men, have lower incomes. That black people, with similar academic qualifications as white people, have lower incomes.
"Who are all these wealthy white people? I don't know them. "
If a person is earning say, 40k per year, he isn't wealthy. BUT, he is wealthier than a person earning 20k per year.
"The mainstream media loves to talk about race since it's emotional and divisive. Discussions on class, while dismissed as dry, are actually even more explosive due to the solidarity that can result from it. "
Bollocks. The mainstream media hates pointing out that income inequality exists based on race and gender.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
I haven't lived in the middle-class since the era of the WTO final trade agreement, and I live in the "right to work," very anti-union Deep South. But what I want to know is where are all these $21/hr. jobs that this article says is the median income for white males ($43,800/yr). I sure as hell don't see them. I'm guessing these days a hell of a lot of them are government jobs of one kind or another, or offshore military contractor jobs, or entry-level to intermediate professional jobs. I sure would like to get one of them.
A brief Analysis from forthcoming book
How Democrats created the Great Middle Class (1945-1980)and Conservatives (1981-2008) are determined to DESTROY it.
1945-1980 were Great Middle Class Years.
Affordable Education-Homes-Health Care-Jobs Jobs-Unions-Pensions
Reagan and NeoCons came on in 1981.
Ir was intentional ENRICH Wall Street reduce Middle Class.
TOTAL FINANCIAL WEALTH
1945-1% owned 30%
1989-36% (Ron big tax cuts for 1%)
2008--Bush Finished the Job
1%=43%
10%=70%
20%=93%
80%=7%-=120,000,000 workers=SHAFTED
20 years 3 Conservative presidents
18 years Conservative Senate
12 years Conservative House
6 years TOTAL CONTROL
Bush 8 let Wall Street go into Big Time Gambling
Instead of using investors money to create new businesses and increase current ones and create Jobs.
They created 31,000 Net New Jobs per Month.A sham. a disgrace.
Prior were Carter 218,000--Reagan 175,000--Clinton record 237.000
31,000 was an insult to working America.
Union Leaders screamed it for years but Democratic leadership kept quiet. Why?
Owned by Wall Street $$$$$$?
During Bush 8 Wall Street shipped 2,300,000 of our jobs to China,
The Conservative ideology of Market knows best gave us Great Depression and Great Recession. Even Ultra Conservative Alan Greenspan had to admit it.
Who has told the masses that in 20th century each "signifcant" Recession has been under a Republican president? Shhhh do not disturb the people!
Who has told the people that since 1921 Democratic administrations created more than twice the number of jobs as Republicans? Shhh! Keep it secret!
Who will show the people how Clinton wiped out Reagan average record.
Even under the 110M Newt Gangmob spent on smear campaigns (gao number).
WHAT DID THEY DO??
SINCE 1980-----
60% Tax Cut to Top 1%
47% Tax Cut to Gamblers on Wall Street in Unearned Income Tax
Huge Estate Tax Cut
Revenue Sharing costs to rich in income taxes transferred to Middle Class in property taxes.
Fed gave Bush 1% Interest and big increase in Total Money Supply
1920's Deja Vu. Banks rushed to borrow and lend lend lend to Developers
to build homes too large-too expensive for middle class declining disposable income
In 1980--10 Billionaires-- In 1989=51---In 2008=403.
While Median "real"Income for Labor 120,000,000 was staganan or went backwards.
ATTACKS ON MIDDLE CLASS
Increased Middle Class Payroll Tax--capped it for rich.
Taxes SS income
Five Cent Tax On Gas
Spending Spree on Defense which enriched Rich Investors in Defense
stocks.
The Big Three took a 1000B of Debt from Carter and added on 8000B in 20 years of Spend + Borrow Our kids Can Pay Tomorrow.
Carter left Reagan a 600B Budget to which he added on 80%.
Carter left Reagan a less than 1000B of Debt and he added on 1700B
Clinton left Bush an 1800 B Budget which Bush took to 3600B..
Clinton left Bush a Surplus as far as an eye could see and Bush added on
6000B Debt or more than we had after 220 years.Grover Nutquist had a party..
Folks! It was intentional. Grover Nutquist of ATR made 127 visits to White House in Bush first term. He was one who wanted to drown Government in a bathtub..How! Spend and Borrow to force us to eliminate Social Programs.
He has us, in 2010, exactly where he wanted us.
Facts hurt. Democrats are just dumb to not preach it over and over
8 more of Neocons and American World Status will disappear to number two or three or worse.
Neocon ideology destroyed Rome-Spain-Holland-England and now America?
cswinney old ugly mean honest political historian since 1991 Lifeaholics of America
Burlington NC
prove me wrong please with facts and numbers
rfloh-When I see "Poor In America" or "Working Class In America" I'll believe you. Race and gender are juicier I guess.
I'm not saying that disparities in pay don't exist in terms of race or gender, but people on the Left often miss the larger picture of class.
"If a person is earning say, 40k per year, he isn't wealthy. BUT, he is wealthier than a person earning 20k per year."
True, but that class of people is shrinking. The gap between rich and poor is widening, but I never see that discussed anywhere but on sites like CD. Class is far more taboo in the U.S. than race or gender has ever been.
Howard Zinn explained that the constitution was "framed" ("We the people...") to "imply" that we are all in this experiment together. But, the framers were privilaged, and they were designing how they could keep control, pass it to their heirs, and continue that control in perpetuity. Zinn showed how the constitution framers were already under huge pressures from the abused underclass, and their heirs have continued abuses of the underclass to maintain control to this day. It has never been any different.
We need every race, nationality, type of person to help overthrow the controlling class. People in poverty might have grievences against "illegal aliens", others making 40, 50, $100k, others with different social beliefs, but I bet the truly wealthy people in the mansions are pitting all these other groups against one another. I had some brief work in a super wealthy neighborhood and noticed small armies of Mexicans tending lawns. The filthy rich probably like that it keeps low-level warfare on the borders distracting from any pressures for fair economics.
OBAMA PLEASE SAY IT IS NOT TRUE
PRIVATIZE LOW INCOME HOUSING
He does he loses my support.
Local Low Income Housing is excellent
One three blocks from my home is superb.
Well managed by BHA.
It blesses my heart to see nice well cared for homes for low income.
Look at "Private" owned Low Income Housing in this city.
One of largest being destroyed and rebuilt into public controlled. Others are in same condition.
It has been a slum for years.
Public "well managed" is best. For profit is worst.
olduglymeanhonest