> They weren't really allowed viable property access until the last 50 years or so. 100's of years of catch up to make up for.
You don’t need property ownership to have a decent upbringing. It does mean there isn’t a lot of generational wealth to go around, but that’s no longer specific to being black because it applies to huge swaths of the population.
Yes, but if you're comparing black performance to the performance of other races - you can't leave wealth accumulation out of the picture.
Sure, there are plenty of poor people who are white, but when you are looking at aggregate statistics, the gap is extremely clear.
In my city, Boston, the average household wealth of a white family (excluding the value of the home) is $200,000. The average household wealth of a black family is $5. (and no, I didn't forget to put a thousand after the 5)
The study doesn't exclude the value of the home. In fact, most of the net worth disparity is attributable to home ownership.
Total Assets:
White: $256,500 | U.S. Black: $700
Liquid Assets:
White: $25,000 | U.S. Black: $670
Net Worth:
White: $247,500 | U.S. Black: $8
Some definitions:
>Liquid assets, which can quickly be converted into cash, include money 18 in savings and checking accounts, stocks, money market, and government bonds.
>We totaled the value of all assets held by each racial group, including the value of all liquid assets, financial assets, retirement, home and vehicle equity, and the values of all other assets (these include life insurance policies and valuables such as jewelry)
>Net worth (or wealth), the sum of the value of total assets minus the value of debts, provides a snapshot of household financial well-being.
>In my city, Boston, the average household wealth of a white family (excluding the value of the home) is $200,000. The average household wealth of a black family is $5. (and no, I didn't forget to put a thousand after the 5)
Do you have a source for that?
Seems like you may be referring to this study[1] which only had a sample size of 78 white households and 71 black households. In that sample, the median net worth disparity was $247,500 to $8. I was not able to find how they picked their sample set.
You're correct - I misremembered the exact numbers. Median is an average. The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston was my source for this.
Despite your usage of the qualifier "only" to describe the sample sizes, that is more than sufficient to draw statistically significant conclusions about the racial gap in wealth in Boston.
Finally, here's the description of how the samples were selected:
> Various sampling techniques were used to locate and identify an ethnically plural sample consisting of the specifically defined ethnic groups. The techniques included the following: directory-listed landline samples targeted to census tracts where groups were known to reside; cell phone random digit dialing samples drawn from rate centers that covered the targeted ethnic group ZIP codes; samples drawn from targeted ZIP codes on the basis of billing address; and the use of surname-based lists targeting specific national origin groups.
Obviously there is a considerable wealth gap among different demographics. But if you compare a poor black neighborhood with a poor white trailer park, there won't be much of a difference. If you compare that poor neighborhood or trailer park with a rich white gated community, you're not really saying much that isn't already known. How do we know the people who conducted the study didn't purposefully do the latter?
Because the Fed is a reputable organization and described their methodology above?
Not really going to keep replying to this thread, but I think it's much more likely that the Fed is accurately reporting the reality of an extreme racial wealth gap, as opposed to the Federal Reserve Bank doctoring results to fake those wealth gaps.
I wonder how much of that is the legacy of redlining given that home ownership is the major vehicle for long term middle class wealth accumulation. (House as financial instrument is itself a problem, but that's another matter.)
Yes, except this study explicitly excluded the value of the house as an asset. I think the legacy of jim crow, continued racism, and slavery have just as much to do with it.
Redlining is also not over - a recent study found that when undercover black and white people went to the same realtor, 50% of the time the black buyers were given worse options or refused service.
You don’t need property ownership to have a decent upbringing. It does mean there isn’t a lot of generational wealth to go around, but that’s no longer specific to being black because it applies to huge swaths of the population.