Huge Disparity in Income Gains for Unmarried Women vs. Unmarried Men: The "Single Gap"
USA TODAY -- "If you think women still reap more economic benefit than men do from marriage, you may be living in the past. Today, men are better off economically because their wives are, too, suggests a new study on the economics of marriage by the Pew Research Center.
It shows women's education and earnings advancements are translating into overall improvement for men. "Marriage is a different deal than it was 40 years ago," says Pew economist Richard Fry, a co-author of the study. "Typically, most wives did not work, so for economic well-being, marriage penalized guys with more mouths to feed but no extra income. Now most wives work. For guys, the economics of marriage have become much more beneficial."
6 Comments:
Mark, isn't your headline living in the past?
It seems that the content of your post and the headline are mismatched. The whole thing is about how men have benefited from being married now that women work.
This is confusing causation and correlation.
Men with low incomes don't marry as often.
No mention of the Supreme Court ruling? (an activist move to help business fight Obama?):
Landmark Supreme Court ruling allows corporate political cash
Thu Jan 21, 2010
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Corporations can spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, a landmark decision denounced by President Barack Obama for giving special interests more power.
"The Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics," Obama said after the 5-4 ruling that divided the nation's high court along conservative and liberal lines.
"It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans," Obama said.
Court ruling on campaign spending could pay off for GOP
January 22, 2010
Washington - The Supreme Court's decision Thursday to wipe out most campaign spending limits, coming on top of the Massachusetts Senate race upset, could prove to be a major blow to Democrats and a boost to Republicans in the November midterm elections.
"The decision is a big worry for Democrats," said Michael Meehan, who has run several Senate campaigns in recent years. "It totally swings the balance.
After Nearly 20 Years, U.S. Supreme Court Finally Recognizes Corporate Free Speech Rights, Michigan Chamber of Commerce Reports
LANSING, Mich., Jan. 21 /PRNewswire/ -- ..."It's gratifying after so many years to see the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledge that corporations have a First Amendment right to express their views at election time," said Bob LaBrant, Senior Vice President & General Counsel for the Michigan Chamber.
"What this decision means is that corporations will still be prohibited from making direct contributions to candidates, but corporations will be permitted to make independent expenditures in support of or in opposition to candidates," LaBrant explained.
The Michigan Chamber of Commerce is a statewide business organization representing approximately 7,000 employers, trade associations and local chambers of commerce...It is one of only four state chambers of commerce in the nation accredited by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The Ascent of Money by Niall Ferguson also suggests that in general women are better credit risks than men based upon the micro credit experience. Part of this is said to be due to the mans desire to go to the pub and drink with buddies, which was the motivation of the prohibition party in the 1910s. The book also remarked that until recently if the husband was unemployed but the woman was employed then she could not borrow any money. (Used to be that womens income did not count for credit purposes)
Combine the income change which is driven by the gender ratio in colleges and the credit worthiness, it is likley that in 30-40 years women will have a very large part in running society. (For a long time a lot of the wealth was nominally owned by women in trusts as they outlived their husbands, but now the trustee may soon be a woman.
Also, I may add, the jobs market looks grim:
Unemployment rose in 43 states last month
The Associated Press
Friday, January 22, 2010
WASHINGTON -- Unemployment rates rose in 43 states last month, the government said Friday...Analysts said the report showed the economy is recovering at too weak a pace to generate consistent job creation.
"A lot of states that had started to add jobs (in November) gave up those gains in December," said Sophia Koropeckyj, managing director at Moody's Economy.com.
Nationally, more than 600,000 people left the labor force in December, according to government data. The large exodus from the labor force indicates that "unemployment is a lot worse than the numbers suggest," Koropeckyj said.
The economy grew at a 2.2 percent annual rate in last year's third quarter, after declining for four straight quarters during the recession. Many economists estimate that growth accelerated to more than 4 percent in the October-December quarter. But that's still sluggish by the standards of many previous recoveries.
And growth could slow in the first half of this year as temporary factors, such as government stimulus spending and inventory restocking, fade.
Many states saw sharp drops in restaurant, hotel and other leisure employment, a sign that consumers are still holding back on their spending. Nationwide, the United States lost 25,000 leisure and hospitality jobs in December.
The rates are seasonally adjusted, which means they are altered to account for seasonal jobs.
My comment: This is a slow recovery after a severe recession. A large tax cut, e.g. $5,000 per worker, a year ago would've strengthened household and bank balance sheets, and then spur consumption through higher income and lower unemployment, to clear the market of excess goods, for a strong recovery.
so women adjust for income, the way men adjust for looks?
Post a Comment
<< Home