|
basically blacks are doing poorly than non-hispanic whites (i really hate this categorization, btw) in almost all indicators -
newly immigrant hispanic population is doing as poorly as the black population
the only group doing worse are the american indian population (seriously... this country totally shits on the Amer.Indian population, if these stats are accurate)
its a long read, but quite sobering- especially for those who argue that socio-economic differences are more or less equal. huge disparities still exist in almost all areas
-----
Although all racial and ethnic groups considered here have experienced substantial improvements in well-being over the second half of this century, disparities between groups have persisted or, in some cases, widened. Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians continue to suffer disadvantages in opportunity and in material and physical well-being.
For example, although the Hispanic poverty rate is far higher than that of non-Hispanic whites, differences in infant mortality between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites are relatively modest.
Blacks have nearly closed the gap with non-Hispanic whites in the attainment of a high school degree, but the gap between blacks and non-Hispanic whites in the completion of a four-year college degree has widened.
On average, non-Hispanic whites and Asians experience advantages in health, education, and economic status relative to blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians.
Over the second half of the 20th century, black Americans have made substantial progress relative to whites in many areas. But this progress generally slowed, or even reversed, between the mid-1970s and the early 1990s. In many cases, large disparities persist.
The relative economic status of Hispanics has generally declined over the past 25 years. However, the Hispanic population has grown rapidly, more than doubling in size between 1980 and 1997, in large part because of immigration. Thus, in interpreting trends in the relative well- being of Hispanics, it is important to keep in mind that the increasing representation of Hispanic immigrants with lower average levels of education and income has contributed to the decline in average Hispanic social and economic well-being.
American Indians are among the most disadvantaged Americans according to many available indicators, such as poverty rate and median income, although comparable data for this group are sparse due to their small representation in the population.
In particular, growth of child poverty has often been associated with the rising share of single-parent families. Since 1970 the fraction of families maintained by a single parent has increased for all groups (Population 6) and is highest among blacks (38 percent), American Indians (26 percent), and Hispanics (26 percent).
Between 1960 and 1990, interracial married couples (not including marriages between Hispanics and non-Hispanics) more than tripled as a percentage of all married couples (not shown in chart). However, intergroup married couples still accounted for only 4 percent of all married couples in 1990.
• Non-Hispanic blacks and non-Hispanic whites are proportionately least likely to marry outside their groups. When non-Hispanic whites marry members of minority groups, they are least likely to marry non-Hispanic blacks (not shown in chart).
Black and Hispanic children are more likely than non-Hispanic white children to be poor (Economic Status 3) and to have parents with lower education levels. As a result, they often begin life with disadvantages related to family financial and educational resources.
Non-Hispanic black and Hispanic children score lower on achievement tests, on average, than non-Hispanic white children at similar ages (Education 4 and 5). Like many other indicators of educational progress, however, between-group differences in achievement test scores may be influenced by differences in a variety of social and economic factors, including school quality, parental education, and family income.
in 1997 blacks were considerably less likely than non-Hispanic whites to have completed a college, professional, or doctoral degree. Asians have by far the highest level of educational attainment of any of these groups. Generally, Asians’ educational attainment increased since 1980 as more attended and completed college.
The percentage of 25- to 29-year olds with a high school diploma is nearly as high among non-Hispanic blacks as among non-Hispanic whites (Education 7). However, Hispanics aged 25 to 29 continue to have lower rates of high school completion. And, although young blacks are attending college at increasing rates, the gap in college completion between young non- Hispanic blacks and non-Hispanic whites did not narrow appreciably over the 1980s (Education 8).
On average, non-Hispanic white children score higher than non-Hispanic black or Hispanic children in reading proficiency at each age.
On average, non-Hispanic whites tend to score higher on tests of mathematics proficiency than non-Hispanic blacks or Hispanics at each age.
Asians and non-Hispanic whites are more likely to have completed education beyond high school than are blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians. In 1997, nearly half of Hispanics aged 25 and older had not completed high school.
In 1997, 9 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 15 percent of Asians held master’s, professional, or doctoral degrees, compared with 4 percent of blacks and 3 percent of Hispanics and American Indians (not shown in chart).
• Non-Hispanic whites are more than twice as likely as non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics to have completed a four-year college degree. Nearly 33 percent of non-Hispanic whites had completed a four-year college degree in 1997, compared with only about 14 percent of non- Hispanic blacks and 11 percent of Hispanics.
Unemployment rates for Hispanics and blacks are higher than those for whites; they also tend to rise more in economic recessions and fall more in expansions.
The unemployment rate for blacks has been twice that of whites for more than 20 years. It was above 10 percent from 1974 to 1997 (but below 9 percent by mid-1998). In part, this disparity reflects differences in educational attainment. However, substantial differentials persist even among blacks, whites, and Hispanics with similar levels of education, which may reflect discrimination.
Median wages of black and Hispanic men are substantially lower than those of white men.
Adjusted for inflation, median wages of men generally declined from 1970 to 1990, but have risen in more recent years. The gap in pay between whites and blacks has changed little over this period. The gap between whites and Hispanics has widened, however, in part due to the widening gap in educational attainment between these two groups.
After adjusting for inflation, weekly earnings of black and white women were higher in 1997 than in 1967. The black-white gap in pay narrowed in the 1960s and early 1970s but has widened since the early 1980s.
Differences in pay between whites on the one hand, and blacks and Hispanics on the other, are larger for men than for women (compare charts 6 and 7). The median black male worker earns 74 percent, and the median Hispanic male worker earns 63 percent, of the median for white men.
The median wage of all black men has changed little relative to that of all white men since 1979. However, the relative pay of college-educated black men has fallen by more than 10 percentage points.
Relatively high percentages of white and Asian men are employed in managerial and professional occupations, whereas black, Hispanic, and American Indian men tend to be concentrated in the “lower-skilled,” lower-paid occupations of operators, fabricators, and laborers.
Asian and non-Hispanic white families have much higher median incomes than black or Hispanic families. The median income of black families as a percentage of non-Hispanic white median family income was about the same in 1997 as in 1967, at less than 60 percent. According to the 1990 census, the median family income of American Indians (not shown in chart) was lower than that of blacks.
The poverty rate for non-Hispanic whites remains well below that of Asians, blacks, and Hispanics. According to the 1990 census, the poverty rate for American Indians was the highest among the five racial and ethnic groups. The poverty rate for Hispanics increased from the 1970s until the early 1990s, and it has been above the rate for blacks since 1994.
The higher poverty rates of blacks and Hispanics are in part related to educational attainment, the age distribution, and the prevalence of single-parent families for those groups. However, even among individuals with similar characteristics, poverty rates are higher for blacks and Hispanics than for whites. Lower wages and higher unemployment play a role in these differences.
In 1993, households maintained by whites were more likely than those maintained by blacks or Hispanics to own stocks or mutual funds, have equity in their home, or hold assets in a retirement savings account such as an individual retirement account (IRA) or Keogh account.
Among those who own assets of each type shown above, the median value (not shown in chart) of assets held by whites is higher than that of assets owned by blacks and Hispanics. In 1993, the median net worth of households maintained by whites was about 10 times that of households maintained by blacks or Hispanics.
Wide disparities in infant mortality among racial and ethnic groups remain. In 1995 the rate
for blacks was more than twice the rate for non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics, and Asians.
American Indians also had relatively high rates. It is notable that Hispanic infant mortality rates are equivalent to those of non-Hispanic whites, despite the considerably lower socioeconomic
status of Hispanics.
For both men and women, whites can expect to live longer than blacks.
Black men and women have the highest death rates from heart disease and cancer. Hispanics have lower death rates than non-Hispanic whites for these diseases. Asians generally have the lowest death rates, particularly for heart disease. American Indians have high rates of heart disease mortality relative to Hispanics and Asians.
The homeownership rate of non-Hispanic whites is more than 25 percentage points above that of non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics. Less than half of non-Hispanic black and Hispanic householders own their own homes.
Non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian households are nearly twice as likely as non-Hispanic whites to spend 50 percent or more of their income on housing costs. Differences across groups in the fraction paying 30 to 50 percent of income for housing are much less pronounced.
.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.
|
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
General Discussion
