Louis Proyect quoted:
>Race and Class: Racism and the Wealth Gap
>by MaIik Miah
An excerpt from my forthcoming book, A New Economy? (apologies for
any rough spots - this is unproofed and unedited):
>Unfortunately, the major published report on the SCF (Kennickell at
>al 2000) divides the population is only into "white non-Hispanic"
>and "nonwhite or Hispanic" (and there's no gendered reporting at
>all). But there too, the wealth figures are stunningly more lopsided
>than income figures. The average "white" household had an income 62%
>higher than the "nonwhite or Hispanic" household in 1998 -- but had
>a net worth (including residence) nearly six times as high. Neither
>set of figures has changed much since the early 1990s, either; some
>truths appear to be timeless.
>
>Wolff (2000) provides a lot more racial detail. For example, black
>incomes were 54% of white incomes in 1998 -- but black net worth
>(including residential) was 12%, and nonresidential net worth, just
>3% of white. For Hispanics, incomes were 62% of white; net worth,
>4%, and nonresidential net worth was 0%. Just under 15% of white
>households had zero or negative net worth, compraed with 27% of
>black, and 36% of Hispanic. Even at similar levels of income, black
>households were significantly less wealthy than white ones; black
>households in the $25,000-49,999 income bracket had net worths equal
>to 46% of white averages; those in the $75,000+ category, 29% of
>white. Similarly with stock ownership; 54% of white households had
>some, but just 30% of black. And average black stockholdings were
>just 20% of white. The democratization of ownership has a bit of a
>ways to go yet.
>
>Wealth is an important part of the economics of race in America: it
>"sediments" privilege and deprivation (Oliver and Shapiro 1995, p.
>5). Though blacks in general have much lower incomes than whites,
>there's a vast racial wealth gap between households with otherwise
>similar demographic characteristics (like education and income). The
>reasons aren't hard to fathom: the first African-Americans weren't
>merely forbidden to accumulate property, they *were* property - but
>even after Emancipation, discriminatory laws and practices prevented
>black from accumulating wealth and passing it onto their children.
>So even middle class blacks don't have the advantage of spare change
>in the bank to take advantage of a business opportunity or to
>survive a bout of sickness or unemployment. This has long been
>compounded by continued discrimination in mortgage and housing
>markets -- which persists statistically even after income and other
>demographic factors are accounted for -- denying many black
>Americans access to that major component of middle-class wealth, the
>owner-occupied house.
>
