On their own, women face wealth gap.
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 01-13-2004 - 11:08am |
This is sad news, IMO.
In income and net worth, women heads of households fall behind others, according to new analysis.
http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/12/pf/women_wealthgap/index.htm?cnn=yes
Households headed by women who are unmarried or not living with a partner have far fewer financial resources than the average U.S. household, according to a study released Monday by the Consumer Federation of America.
Analyzing data from the Federal Reserve's Survey of Consumer Finances with the help of economist Catherine Montalto of Ohio State University, the CFA found that women who head households have a median net worth of $27,850 compared with $86,100 for all American households.

Their incomes are lower, too. Women-headed households in 2001 (the year reflected in the latest Fed data) had a median income of $20,000. That's just half the $39,000 median income for all U.S. households.
And a far higher percentage of women-headed households (41 percent) are likely to rank in the bottom fifth of income earners than are all American households, of which only 19 percent rank as low in terms of income.
The discrepancy in wealth for women on their own can be attributed to less education overall, less likelihood of being employed, lower income, and having only one paycheck instead of two to rely on, said Stephen Brobeck, CFA's executive director.
What's more, noted Montalto, there are a notable section of women-run households headed by never married mothers with dependents, divorced and widowed women, all of whom often face steeper financial challenges than other households.
According to the CFA study, women who head households are less likely to have a bachelor's degree or a graduate degree than heads of households as a whole. And they are more likely to have less than a high school education, although a greater percentage of female-headed households have high school degrees than do all heads of households as a group.
In terms of jobs, nearly 40 percent of female household heads reported not being in the labor force versus 27.4 percent of household heads overall.
A lag in savings, too
When it comes to savings, women on their own are also living closer to the edge. Fifty-three percent of female-run households spend all or more of their incomes versus 41 percent of all households. And only 32 percent of women-headed households save regularly compared with 41 percent of U.S. households in general.
In terms of financial planning, only 31 percent of women headed households had a horizon of at least five years; 38 percent weren't planning out farther than the next year.
To boost savings, Brobeck recommends taking advantage of any savings opportunity when it comes along, even if it means putting away just a few extra dollars a month.
Among his top recommendations: participate in automated savings programs at work, particularly those that offer matching funds from an employer such as a 401(k); and ask your bank or credit union regularly deduct some money from your checking account and deposit it into your savings account.
Earmarking some of those savings for a down payment to buy a home is also useful, he said, since home ownership has proven to be one of the keys to building net worth.
For help with savings goals, check America Saves.org, a campaign organized by CFA and other nonprofits in conjunction with corporations and government agencies to help Americans build their net worth.


Pages
>"If you have trouble keeping up with the news, or only have time to read the headlines, ifeminist.com is one good resource for you to keep in mind, so you don't have to continually ask others to do your own research on issues that are common knowledge to those of us who keep up with the news."<
Generally it's helpful to ALL concerned when a link
It quite reminds me of that ABC piece from a few weeks ago that came right out and admitted there is bias in the media because the liberal position is the 'default' position which is not examined or questioned, just assumed to be correct.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/10/141042.shtml
Around here, the liberal postion is definitely the default one with those of us who know differtly having to do the research to disprove the liberal rhetoric that's accepted around here along with having to do all of the research to back up our own heretical positions.
What I think would help us all, is if people who have been spouting the same political/feminist/Palestinian/etc. 'facts' they picked up years ago in college would do a little fact checking and post their so-called common knowledge with links to back them up.
Renee
If that's true, you should have no problem disproving it. Let's see some facts and links that show when apples and apples are compared women make 64 cents on the dollar--yeah, right. I've never met this mythical creature who toils hour for hour along side her male breatherern and at the end of the day is so grateful for her .64 cents that it never occurs to her file a lawsuit against her employer.
Your gracelessness in the face of defeat is charming.
Renee
You threw out a fact which was debatable are we surposed to take your word for it? Or is it asking too much for you to substantiate the fact? Instead of X amount of board members all doing research.
There are posters that aren't computer savy enough to post links, you're not one of them.
>"heretical"< LOL
<>
Toils hour for hour alongside her male brethren? Hah. They all leave at the stroke of five while she's still there working her a$$ off.
I sense that in your next post you'll call her a chump, but please remember you'd be talking about my family. Thanks.
No problem at all. Let me recap for you. In msg 3 you stated, “Single women, on the other hand, have comperable saleries to single heterosexual men”. Just the statement, no reference. Again in msg 6 you state, “Single men & women with comparable education make comparable salaries.” Again no reference.
Libraone then posted three references that support the wage gap. Then you said, “you don't have to continually ask others to do your own research on issues that are common knowledge.” For the record I only asked you to support your statements. I do not need you to do my research, I usually try to support any statements that are not opinions.
I can only conclude that you made statements, you thought was common knowledge and then had to go find the supporting data. Did you read the URLs you listed?
The first two paragraphs of your first reference read, “A recent study found that in the second quarter of 2003, women's hourly median wages totaled 81.3 percent of men's median wages, representing the narrowest wage gap in any quarter on record.
“But before celebrating the news, women should notice a less-than-thrilling trend below the surface of the data: Namely, that the narrowing wage gap was caused by a drop in the median male wage rather than a real gain for women during that period.”
Buried within the article was the section you quoted; written by Ron Bird, economist for the Employment policy Foundation, in defense of employers. In essence he was trying to explain away the gap: the fault is not with employers but decisions made by female employees.
____________
The second site begins, “Tuesday, April 16, 2002, is Equal Pay Day - the day on which many organizations protest wage discrimination between men and women. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median income for all women is about three-quarters that of men, although the results vary significantly among demographic groups
Again the wage gap was not disputed it is explained away because women make different choices than men.
_________________________
The third site begins, “For all the strides that women have made in the workplace over the past quarter century, one sub-group has been left behind: older women.
“Those within five years of the normal retirement age have made no progress – relative to men's earnings – since 1975, according to a recent census report. Those within 10 years of retirement have advanced exactly one percentage point; by 1999, they were earning 56 percent of what men earned.
“Discrimination? Perhaps. But the findings suggest other factors are at work.”
Again there was no disagreement that there was a difference, the authors contend that the gap is not a result of discrimination.
I conclude that there is a wage difference between women and men. What differs is the reasons for the gap.
Eventhough I know that all the common posters who I have had such exchanges with have been perfectly capable of posting links when it suited them, I'd be willing to bet that if there are any such challenged posters, they would be conscientious enough to offer a few quotes with an explanation of where they were found, or at least a comment about where they recall reading it or who they heard it from and they would not be quick to shoot off rude and sarcastic posts to prove them wrong.
<>
Indeed I did; just like posters do with the liberal 'default' position all the time around here. If you don't like taking my word for what I know to be true, you are beginning to get a taste of what it's like when yet again someone posts what they deem to be common knowlege, but is nothing more than popular mythology, and refuses to back up their statement with statistics or links and put the burden on others to do their research.
Since you are now so vocal in your belief that it is my responsibility to backup my statements when they are called into question, I assume the next time I question a bit of so-called common knowledge, I'll have your support and when I'm told to disprove their statement, I will be backed up by you pointing out to the poster that since it is their statement, it is incumbent on them to support it.
Edited 2/22/2004 12:21:52 AM ET by wrhen
Renee
What can I say about her particular situation? Nothing really because I don't know anything about it. Is your sister working on commission, or are these male counterparts being promoted and given salary increases ahead of her?
It it sounds like all the male stock analysts at this company are making twice as much as she is for significantly less work. Is that right? Are there no men who are struggling to get ahead like she is? Do any of these hotshots who cut out early put in hours working at home after the kids are in bed? What about the other women? Are they all finding themselves in the same boat as your sister?
What is the situation at the competition? Has she thought of finding another company to work for? Certainly you are not implying that all the female analysts on Wall Street work more hours and only earn half of what male ones do.
Since we know that is not the case, we have to find out what the most successful female stock analysts are doing that is different from what your sister is doing. I don't know if that means they are working for companies that are more egalitarian, or more female/family friendly than your sister's. Maybe they are playing politics & schmoozing more or have cutthroat work ethics, or a whole variety of other things.
Notice I'm not suggesting that these women are acting differently than their male counterparts in schoozing or playing hardball, or whatever, but there is something they are doing that is different than what your sister is doing and it is up to her to identify what it is and decide if it is something that she is willing to do to acheive their level of success or not. For example, I don't get involved in office politics and have paid a price for it, but it is the same that I would have paid if I were a male who did the same thing, and one that I am willing to pay. If I were more ambitious, I would have to set aside my recalsitrance, hone my social skills, get out there and start greasing some wheels.
Renee
Well, now that you mention it, several prominent men in her field have recently been caught in illegal backroom deals ...but she's not willing to break the law to get ahead. ; )
<>
In your earlier post you suggested that none do, which is clearly not the case. Maybe some Wall Streeters are lurking here and can chime in with their own experiences.
I once quit a good job because I found out a guy I worked with, who basically did the same job, was making twice as much as me. I worked my butt off - all-nighters and weekends - while he did not much at all. Granted it was sort of a mistake by the business manager who thought he'd be bringing in more work than he did, but still, I was pissed enough to leave.
Pages