The Emerging Permanent Hispanic Underclass
Hispanic workers enjoyed significant gains in employment in 2004. But the concentration of Latinos in relatively low-skill occupations contributed to reduced earnings for them for the second year in a row. No other major group of workers has suffered a two-year decline in wages. Recently arrived Hispanic immigrants were a leading source of new workers to the economy but also among the principal recipients of wage cuts in 2004. And while the economic recovery in 2004 added many new jobs for Latinos and non-Latinos alike, it did little to reduce the differences between them in their occupational distributions. Job growth for Hispanics and whites, the two largest groups of workers in the economy, occurred mostly in different occupational clusters and they appeared to be on separate paths in the labor market.
The analysis of the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau finds that Hispanics maintained their role as a primary force of change in the labor market in 2004. The demand for immigrant labor remains high and the economy created jobs for nearly one million more foreign-born Latinos. One result has been a rapid decline in the Hispanic unemployment rate in the past 18 months. A key source of new jobs for all workers in 2004 was the construction industry. The broader recovery in 2004 also saw the addition of significant numbers of workers in eating, drinking and lodging services, educational services, hospitals and other health services, and professional services.
The vast majority of new jobs for Hispanic workers were in relatively low-skill occupations calling for little other than a high school education. In contrast, non-Hispanic workers secured large increases in employment in higher-skill occupations requiring at least some college education. This polarization contributed to a growing gap in earnings between Hispanic and non-Hispanic workers. The fall in wages for Latinos was greatest among immigrants who arrived in the United States in the past five years. Thus, the new immigrants who are enjoying significant growth in employment are doing so at the expense of lower wages. This trend is, no doubt, exacerbated by their concentration in occupations calling for minimal skills and education. Despite strong demand for immigrant workers, their growing supply and concentration in certain occupations suggests that the newest arrivals are competing with each other in the labor market to their own detriment.
PRCalDude
Hispanic households have less than ten cents for every dollar in wealth owned by white households. This situation is worse than just a few years ago as the net worth of Hispanics was higher in the years leading into the 2001 recession. The recession eroded over one-quarter of the value of Hispanic wealth between 1999 and 2001. Latinos recouped some of that loss in the following year but ended 2002 with less wealth than they had in 1999. A similar picture emerges for black households in recent years. The differences are that the net worth of blacks is even less than that of Hispanic households and that it fell by more from 1999 to 2002. At the same time, the wealth of white households continued to grow, albeit at a slower pace than before the recession.
The report also shows that large segments of Hispanic and black households are extremely vulnerable to economic downturns since over one-quarter of them have zero or negative net worth. Also, more than one out of four Hispanic and black households owns no assets other than a car or unsecured debt. Most Hispanics and blacks fall into the lowest category of wealth and the size of their middle-class is relatively small in itself and in comparison to whites. One result of this is that the wealthiest 25 percent of households own over 90 percent of the total wealth in the Hispanic and black communities. But even the wealthiest five percent of Hispanic households have a net worth that is less than one-half of the net worth of comparably placed white households.
The wealth gap between white households on the one hand and Hispanic and black households on the other is much higher than the difference in income across these groups. Even though the median income of Latino and black households is two-thirds as high as that of white households their wealth is only one-tenth as much. The reasons for this disparity include the facts that minorities have more limited access to financial markets and face greater barriers to homeownership. The ownership of a home bears a strong relationship with the net worth of a household. Homeowners own more of other assets and have a huge advantage in net worth over renters and other households. Hispanic homeowners, in fact, have a net worth that is half as much as the wealth of non-Hispanic homeowners. But non-Hispanic households are much more likely to own homes and that creates an even bigger gulf in wealth across the two groups.
Compared to whites, Hispanics are also relatively young, not as highly educated, concentrated in high cost regions, such as New York and California, where homeownership can be less attainable, and are much more likely to be immigrants. All of these factors contribute to lower levels of wealth but are also self-correcting to some extent. The wealth gap should shrink as the Latino population ages and acquires greater education, especially college degrees. The Hispanic population is also starting to penetrate into new settlement areas, such as, Raleigh, Omaha and Nashville, with lower costs of living than the traditional areas of concentration, and this trend may help more Latino households become homeowners. As immigrants assimilate into labor and financial markets, their income and wealth rises naturally. Although the process of assimilation is not complete in the sense that it leads to wealth parity, it does eliminate much of the initial wealth gap between immigrants and native-born households.
10 Comments
Reader Comments (10)
A union member told me a story (maybe anecdotal, but I don't think so) of the illegals in his state, moving into the service (cleaning hotels, cooking etc) industry some years back. The union was trying to organize part of that service spectrum. With each wave of illegals, the wages went lower and lower. From a start of $15-ish to minimum wage (at least on paper.) The bad thing about all of this lower wage for illegals mess, in addition to the slave-like treatment of them, is my price as a consumer never goes down. Where is all the money going? The stock P/E's suck. The product price is thru the roof. The illegals are getting paid squat. Where is the money?
I don't know. I little understand macro-economics and know jack about finance. That would be a question for a financial expert. I do know that the consumer price index continues to rise, which contributes to inflation, but I thought inflation was controlled by the Fed by the interest rates. It could be that it's being swallowed up by the budget deficit, which I'm told is what caused us to lose our manufacturing jobs. I admit, I don't quite know.
Part of this problem is the abject fear of government that hispanic illegals have. Many prefer (as in choose) to be part of this under-class because they feel it is safer in that they are less obtrusive to society and therefore less obtrusive to government. Which is mostly true.
And if we look at the people crying out in their defense, it is generally not the majority of honest laborers but a visible minority of power mongers and race baiters (activists) causing much of the visible 'race' and crime problems.
I'm not saying that illegal imigration is okay, I'm just pointing out that this new "under-class" is a class of their own making by choice, not something they are being forced into. Unless you consider all the so-called activisits "helping" them, and so-called unions "taking advantage" of them.
Inflation has never been controlled by the Feds. Heavily influence yes, but in reality it is inflation that controlls the Fed interest rates.
What drives inflation is our continual devaluation of our currency through arbitrary minimum wage laws, our ridiculous taxation system, foolish international trade agreements, insane and bloated social welfar programs, and idiotic national energy policies that don't allow us to drill and mine our own natural resources.
Inflation is caused 100% by the Fed Reserve, which is neither federal nor a reserve. Inflation is actually the lagging indicator that tells us that the Fed is printing money. Having a fiat money system allows the Fed to artificially inject money into the US economy. That money has to go somewhere. When they inject too much, we get inflation. Right now the US money supply is at about 12%/year compared to a 'normal' 3%/yr. The Fed is running the presses wide open and making money available to banks because of the sub-prime mess, (the banks and the Fed created the mess.) They have to keep the weird financial instruments (derivatives, SIV's, etc) afloat. If they don't the economy crashes. The only way to do this w/o showing the man behind the curtain is to print money which in turn causes inflation. It's too many $$ chasing too few spenders/borrowers. It's the same as if everyone had a '55 Chevy in their backyard, you could buy one for $100. Too much money('55 Chevies) in the system causes them to be worth very little (inflation.)
There is a big difference between being "caused by" and "controlled by".
I agree with SameNoKami about inflation being "caused by" the feds, but this does not automatically mean that the Feds are "in control" in any meaningful way.
The problem I have with this statement is the sheer numbers of them that came to the May Day rallies. There were at least half a million out in 2006 in Los Angeles alone, and they were waving Mexican flags. I think we're going to have to admit, sooner or later, that there racial collectivism is here to stay, just as it is for the blacks. As is the case for the blacks, their race baiters will speak for the majority. Whether they're giving an accurate picture of what that majority believes doesn't really matter. It's the racial collectivism that even allows for such people in the first place. If they weren't voting 90% Democratic, I could believe that there is some diversity of thought amongst them, same as for the Hispanics, which are now voting something like 80% Democratic. Whenever you have such monolithic thinking, it's a strong clue to me that there's some sort of racial collectivism at work.
Ya gotta start somewhere.
Inflation is both controlled and caused by the Fed. It is a systematic method of stealing the wealth of the host country. Since they cause it, they control it. The idea is to do it slowly (steal the wealth) so no single generation notices it. The subprime mess is close to letting us see the man behind the curtain and that will never do. A good book on the subject on money and the Fed is 'Creature from Jekyll Island' (it may be out of print, I got it from the Jn. Birch Society, so take that and me for what it's worth.) We are on a precarious perch monetarily. We need interest rates high to attract foreign gov'ts to buy our bonds so our gov't can spend money like 536 drunken sailors. We also need interest rates low to spur us to borrow more and keep up the economy. The Fed is pumping Bn's of $$ into the economy to float the banks' really dumb greedy loans. The Fed is balancing recession, stagflation, deflation and hyperinflation all at the same time. One of them is going to win. A really good website for financial issues is Minyanville. It's interesting to note that this is a worldwide problem. The investors have leveraged the whole world and money has to be printed to keep everyone in the game. Most other nations' central banks are printing in the 20-50% range. We are actually on the low end. But it will work into the system at some point and we will see the effects. Sorry for the boring money talk.
I've got a friend that buys a lot of gold in addition to his other investments. I'm thinking he knows something I don't know. :P