Whites Five Times Richer Than Blacks In U.S

know1

rebornFixer wrote:

know1 wrote:

Good article, but my question is did they say how they identified people as white or black? I've still never seen a quantifiable definition.

In most studies, race is self-identified (whatever you think you are). There is no more objective definition, in part because no one is actually "pure". Obama is "black", even though he's at least half Caucasian.

I know that's how it's defined and that's exactly why it's time to get rid of those labels. They mean nothing.

cajunkiwi

catefrances wrote:

whites 5x richer than blacks......... how many times more whites are there than blacks in the US??????????

That's not how ratios work...

Its Evolution Baby

Imagine if you eliminated all athletes, musicians, actors, etc and just did it based on corporate wages. I bet its an even higher disparity. No one can say that there isn't more work to do on that front.

Jason P

The study closes by noting that African-Americans with well paying jobs will not achieve the same amount of wealth of their (I assume white) peers. So if there are two people making the same wage at the same company, and the only difference is their skin color, then lighter skinned person will be five times wealthier?

Eliot Rosewater

mikepegg44 wrote:

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

I don't think anyone would argue against that point, I think the bigger question is why

Because humans are disgusting and greedy animals. Really, we have the ability to be better than this....it's fucking ridiculous.

that is not the reason. Sometimes it is outside factors, and sometimes it is internal, but I can tell you your answer is more part of the problem than it is the solution.

My "answer" wasn't meant to be a solution. But I agree with you that it certainly is a problem.

rebornFixer

know1 wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

know1 wrote:

Good article, but my question is did they say how they identified people as white or black? I've still never seen a quantifiable definition.

In most studies, race is self-identified (whatever you think you are). There is no more objective definition, in part because no one is actually "pure". Obama is "black", even though he's at least half Caucasian.

I know that's how it's defined and that's exactly why it's time to get rid of those labels. They mean nothing.

I largely agree, but people continue to attach social significance to them, for historical and other reasons. There's some irony involved when a mixed race person decides to call themselves "black" because of something like the "One Drop" rule, based on a throughly racist, outdated law that is no longer in effect ... Now its "cool" to be black and just ignore the other elements of one's heritage, apparently. Its confusing.

Boxes&Books

Blacks were recently accepted into society....Whites just got a head start. :?

Byrnzie

mikepegg44 wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

Do you have a link to the actual study?

Here it is: http://iasp.brandeis.edu/pdfs/Racial-We ... -Brief.pdf

thanks, but i couldn't find in there how they actually went about their study and got their participants. I will find it. I think that is the most important part of all studies, the methods they use to gather the info. All too often the press we see the results and conclusions that were made but never how they actually gathered the info.

For more information, please contact:

Tatjana Meschede, Ph.D.
Research Director
Institute on Assets and Social Policy
<!-- e --><a href="mailto:meschede@brandeis.edu">meschede@brandeis.edu</a><!-- e -->


Edit: I just e-mailed her. I'll let you know if I get a reply - If were gonna engage in debates/discussions here then we may aswell do so seriously :ugeek: :P

acoustic guy

I bet my paycheck that some here think that this means most whites are racist, and/or because of this study, the ones who make more should give it to the black community.

I know you are out there so let it rip...

And why is this study done in the first place? What does it mean? That the Government should make changes to our lives so all people of different colors can make the same amount?
i don't like studies like this...Pointless. All it does is start shit.

OffHeGoes29

Education = wealth

The doors are wide open here in the US to go to school. Its a level playingfield, and in some cases, minorities have the advantage.

Byrnzie

Hello Steve,

we used the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). Detailed sampling information can be found at this link:

http://psidonline.isr.umich.edu/Guide/ug/intro.html

Best, Tatjana

Tatjana Meschede, Ph.D.
Director of Research
Institute on Assets and Social Policy
The Heller School for Social Policy and Management
Brandeis University, MS035
415 South St, Waltham, MA 02454-9110
Phone: 781-736-8678; Fax: 781-736-3925
http://iasp.brandeis.edu


The Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) is a longitudinal
survey of a representative sample of U.S. individuals (men,
women, and children) and the families in which they reside. It
has been ongoing since 1968. Data are collected annually, and the
data files contain the full span of information collected over
the course of the study. PSID data can be used for
cross-sectional, longitudinal and intergenerational analyses, and
for studying both individuals and families. The study emphasizes
the dynamic aspects of economic and demographic behavior, but it
contains a wide range of measures, including sociological and
psychological ones. Between 1968 and 1988, the PSID collected
information regarding approximately 37,500 individuals and
spanning as much as 21 years of their lives.

The general design and core content of the study have remained
largely unchanged, and considerable effort has been expended
cleaning the data. These two features greatly enhance the PSID's
potential for longitudinal analysis. Preparation and distribution
of comprehensive documentation and a User Guide also facilitate
use of the PSID data.

The study has been conducted at the Survey Research Center,
University of Michigan since its beginning in 1968, with the
Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research
(ICPSR) data archive handling the public distribution of the data
files, documentation, and User Guide. PSID data files have been
disseminated widely throughout the United States and to numerous
foreign countries.

Starting with a national sample of approximately 4,800 U.S.
households in 1968, the PSID has traced individuals from those
households since that time, whether or not they are living in the
same dwelling or with the same people. Adults have been followed
as they have grown older, and children have been observed as they
advance through childhood and into adulthood, forming families of
their own. Each year information is collected about the PSID's
sample members (members of the PSID's 1968 sample families or
their offspring) and their current co-residents (spouses,
cohabitors, children, and others living with them), even if those
co-residents were not part of original-sample families.

Because the original focus of the study was on the dynamics of
poverty, the 1968 sample included a disproportionately large
number of low-income households. The oversampling of families
poor in the late 1960s resulted in a sizable sub-sample of
blacks. Probability-of-selection weights enable analysts to make
estimates from the sample that are representative of the U.S.
population. In the absence of nonresponse bias, the PSID's rules
for tracking individuals and families over time lead to accurate
representation of the nonimmigrant U.S. population both
cross-sectionally each year, and in terms of change, since 1968.
To help correct for omissions in representing post-1968
immigrants, a representative sample of 2,043 Latino (Mexican,
Cuban, and Puerto Rican) households was added in 1990.

The study's tracking rules, along with its Latino
subsample addition in 1990, have meant substantial increases in
the number of individuals in the study as it has progressed
through time. In 1968 the PSID gathered information about
approximately 18,000 individuals; by 1988 this number had grown
to a cumulative total of about 37,500. Similarly, the number of
family units has increased from just under 5,000 at the beginning
of the study to about 7,000 currently, not including Latino
households.

The PSID provides a wide variety of information at the family and
individual level, as well as some information about the locations
in which sample households reside. The central focus of the data
is economic and demographic, with substantial detail on income
sources and amounts, employment, family composition changes, and
residential location. Content of a more sociological or
psychological nature is also included in some waves of the study.
Information gathered in the survey applies to the circumstances
of the family unit as a whole (e.g., type of housing) and to
particular persons in the family unit (e.g., age, earnings). Some
data are collected about all individuals in the family unit, but
the most extensive data are gathered for the family head (who is
male in married-couple families, but female or male otherwise)
and wife. Information about the study's core topics (e.g.,
income, employment, family composition) is gathered annually, and
this is supplemented with data on additional topics (e.g.,
health, wealth, retirement plans, flows of time and money help
among families and their friends, and motivation and efficacy)
gathered intermittently. The amount and variety of data are
substantial; over 300 pages are required to list, by topic and
wave, the variables on the study's main, cross-year data file.

The PSID staff merges each new wave of data with prior waves to
provide comprehensive coverage of information collected for
individuals and families over the entire course of the study.
These multi-wave data files become publicly available upon
completion of the merging, numerous data-quality checks, and
generation of variables. This usually occurs 18-24 months
following the completion of interviewing.

acoustic guy

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Education = wealth

The doors are wide open here in the US to go to school. Its a level playingfield, and in some cases, minorities have the advantage.

100% Correct! Case Closed.

Byrnzie

acoustic guy wrote:

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Education = wealth

The doors are wide open here in the US to go to school. Its a level playingfield, and in some cases, minorities have the advantage.

100% Correct! Case Closed.

You'd love it to be that simple wouldn't you.

Byrnzie

acoustic guy wrote:

I bet my paycheck that some here think that this means most whites are racist, and/or because of this study, the ones who make more should give it to the black community.

I know you are out there so let it rip...

And why is this study done in the first place? What does it mean? That the Government should make changes to our lives so all people of different colors can make the same amount?
i don't like studies like this...Pointless. All it does is start shit.

I take it you're white? I also take it that you don't give a shit about minorities being unfairly treated in your society?

Byrnzie

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Education = wealth

The doors are wide open here in the US to go to school. Its a level playingfield, and in some cases, minorities have the advantage.

Do you have anything to support this statement, or did you just make it up because it sounds convenient?

Songburst

This is from an old Chris Rock routine about there being no wealthy black people, no?

"Shaq is rich. The guy who pays Shaq is wealthy."

catefrances

cajunkiwi wrote:

catefrances wrote:

whites 5x richer than blacks......... how many times more whites are there than blacks in the US??????????

That's not how ratios work...

im a fool.. i read it as 5x as many whites richer than blacks. :roll:

Jason P

Byrnzie wrote:

Hello Steve,

we used the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). Detailed sampling information can be found at this link:

http://psidonline.isr.umich.edu/Guide/ug/intro.html

Best, Tatjana

Good. Not knowing the source probably bugged me more then anything.

But I'm still having problems corrolating this study with other thier other studies on the overall middle class where Brandies paints an overall gloomy picture. If the average white middle class family truly have $95K in wealth, then their other reports have some explaining to do. Their "By a Thread" report http://iasp.brandeis.edu/pdfs/byathread_web.pdf (page 8) notes that all middles class families have a median debt of $3,500 and net assets of $0.

My concern is that Brandies is using selective interpolation in their studies.

Nothingman54

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Education = wealth

The doors are wide open here in the US to go to school. Its a level playingfield, and in some cases, minorities have the advantage.

100% correct. Every single person has a right to education. I think from kindergarden to 12th grade kids should be taught how to save money because the parents are not doing it.

Eliot Rosewater

Nothingman54 wrote:

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Education = wealth

The doors are wide open here in the US to go to school. Its a level playingfield, and in some cases, minorities have the advantage.

100% correct. Every single person has a right to education. I think from kindergarden to 12th grade kids should be taught how to save money because the parents are not doing it.

I don't think we're talking about k-12 here.

But I do agree with you that kids absolutely need to be taught some sort of personal finance skills. I know it was never discussed when I was growing up. Money always had this taboo feel to it...probably cuz my parents were quite poor and ashamed to even talk about it. It should get some sort of attention in schools so kids and teens understand how to better handle money, credit etc.