Skip to main content




PDF preview


...One thing quickly becomes clear: the Talented Tenth, [the most educated and affluent part of the black community] has outgrown that label. As we detail below, at least a quarter of today's African-American families are middle class in terms of income, occupation, or education; by some measures over half of the African-American household are middle class. This is not the impression that one gets from the mass media or from many social scientists, whose portraits of black America still focus on the inner-city poor, as if they were the black mainstream, while treating the African-American middle class as a small elite. In reality, since the civil rights era, a large portion of black America has moved decisively upward, passing substantial numbers of whites along the way.


Review-- Black Wealth/White Wealth: A New Perspective on Racial Inequality


Although Oliver and Shapiro's notion of the "sedimentation of racial inequality" highlights the role of history in forging contemporary racial differences, they could (and should) have done more with historical context. In a scant three pages devoted to the nineteenth century (pp. 13–15), the authors note that blacks emerged from slavery with little or no wealth but that a quarter of southern black farmers owned their farms in 1900. Other than a passing reference to the 1866 Southern Homestead Act, the authors have nothing to say about the phenomenon of postbellum black wealth accumulation, thereby missing relevant studies by Stephen DeCanio, Robert Higgs, Roger Ransom and Richard Sutch, Loren Schweninger, and this reviewer. Analyses of the public use microdata samples from the 1900, 1910, and 1940 censuses could have shed light on historical aspects of racial differences in self-employment and homeownership, but these (and other historical) data are largely ignored.
Black business is black wealth.

By Graves, Earl G., Jr.
Publication: Black Enterprise
Date: Wednesday, June 1 2005

Full Article


The BE INDUSTRIAL/SERVICE 100 and the BE AUTO DEALER 100 generated more than $23.2 billion in revenues in 2004. Along with the largest black-owned advertising agencies, banks, insurance companies, asset management firms, private equity firms, and investment banks that make up our lists, the BE 100s employ nearly 87,000 people. But to truly appreciate the role black-owned enterprises play as we pursue our crusade for multigenerational wealth for black Americans, you have to go beyond mere numbers to the very fabric of our nation's economy and quality of life.

Gone are the days when black-owned companies were limited to providing employment primarily to African Americans and marketing products and services exclusively to the black consumer market. Over the past three decades, black-owned businesses have fought their way from the sideshows to the main stages--and increasingly, the center stage--of American industry. Today, there's more to "buying black" than heading to a retail outlet in a black neighborhood and looking for the product with the black-is-beautiful model, red-black-and-green label, or kente cloth motif on the package.

Let's say you woke up this morning in Lexington, Kentucky, preparing for a business trip to Washington, D.C., with a connecting flight in Atlanta. You flip on CNN to check for Rally Caparas' report on airport delays around the country. The tracking system used by Caparas to display flight patterns is Flight Explorer, a product of Alexandria, Virginia-based Dimensions International, this year's BE Company of the Year. Bags packed, you hop into the new Escalade you purchased from Martin Oldsmobile/Cadillac in Bowling Green, Kentucky, which happens to be the third largest black-owned auto dealership in the country. As you head to the airport, you are blissfully unaware that many of the components in your luxury SUV were manufactured by BE 100s auto suppliers such as Detroit's Bridgewater Interiors.

You leave Lexington and land in Atlanta with just enough time to grab a meal before catching your connecting flight to D.C. You hurry through Hartsfield/Jackson International Airport to the Paschal's restaurant concession, a joint venture between the legendary Atlanta eatery and Concessions International Inc., a division of BE 100S mainstay H.J. Russell & Co. By the way, H.J. Russell, the nation's largest black-owned construction firm, also built Hartsfield/Jackson's main terminal.

Upon landing at Ronald Reagan National Airport, you grab your bags and head over to the rental car counter. Minutes later, you do what all business travelers do when they pick up their rental car--search for a radio station to listen to while you're driving. You settle on WKYS-93.9 on your FM dial, a station owned by Radio One Inc., another BE 100S company. Finally, you check into your home away from home in D.C., the upscale, residential-style Homewood Suites by Hilton. This 175-suite property is owned by RLJ Development L.L.C., a BE 100S hotel development and investment concern.

I could go on, but you get the idea. Most of us, regardless of race, buy black every day as the nation's largest black-owned companies deliver products and services that positively impact the lives of all Americans, as well as consumers the world over. This is proof of the tremendous progress made by black business over the past 40 years. However, if we are to close the wealth gap in black America, we cannot afford to be satisfied. In fact, to create multigenerational wealth, we must continue to build, support, and reinvest in building bigger, better, and more profitable companies.

Why? Because black entrepreneurs, while providing potential employment to all qualified job candidates, have proven to be far more effective than non-minority companies at creating job opportunities for African Americans. In addition to the tens of thousands of people these companies employ directly, the BE 100S create jobs for hundreds of thousands of others by subcontracting to smaller black-owned concerns and hiring freelance professionals and contract workers. In so doing, BE 100S companies enable more African Americans to generate the income necessary to buy their own homes and save for retirement, identified by the BE Board of Economists as the top two priorities we must address in order to close the black wealth gap. The creation and growth of more large black-owned companies also means providing more black families with access to healthcare coverage and the ability to provide for their children's education.

Take a moment now to recommit to DOFE Principle No. 8. Make a conscious effort to patronize quality black-owned companies, helping them gain a greater share of the more than $723 billion in after-tax dollars African Americans earn each year. Read BE to learn about successful black entrepreneurs thriving in just about every industry. It is up to us to make the effort to seek them out and refer them to others. That's why we showcase and celebrate the BE Companies of the Year as well as our nominees for the BE Small Business Awards each year at the Black Enterprise Entrepreneurs Conference, which attracts nearly two thousand black business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs annually.

Be an advocate for black businesses by learning as much as you can about the procurement needs and policies of your employer, helping to identify contracting opportunities, and recommending qualified black firms that can provide the goods and services sought. Make it a point to invest in publicly traded black-owned companies (such as Radio One) and black-owned mutual funds. (You'll find the BE Black Stock Index and black-owned mutual funds at www.blackenterprise.com/InvestingTab.asp.) Finally, let the example set by the BE 100S inspire your own entrepreneurial endeavors.

The bottom line: Supporting the growth of profitable black-owned companies means increasing the wealth-building capacity of all African Americans. Successful businesses are tremendous assets that contribute to the individual and collective positive net worth needed to close the black wealth gap and create a legacy of prosperity for generations to come.
quote:
Originally posted by Cocoa Starr:
LieDecryptor, thanks for the videos & information! I'll definitely be using those links and contact information. This is one of the best posts I've seen so far on this board! Thanks again!


You're welcome...however I just wish all the parts were uploaded that was only about an hours worth in those six parts he was given 2 hours to speak...there are another six parts to this...
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
I must admit that I haven't watched the videos; however, I am familiar with Dr. Anderson and have read, and am currently re-reading, his book, Powernomics.

I must also admit that if the videos are a rehash of the stats, I WILL NOT watch them. I am already aware that the State of Black Economics has not changed since the end of the Civil War.

But that said, I AM willing and able to to participate in a discussion on the State of Black Economics, especially if any discussion is solution/action plan oriented.

Lastly, a word of advice ...

Don't spin your wheels arguing what is evident. tfro



I'm glad you are familar with his work, Powernomics is a great book and I have also been recommending "Black Labor White Wealth" I do suggest that you view the videos though at your earliest convenience...he is not just "rehasing stats" there are some very poignant and relevant things mentioned in these videos and even if some things may have been heard in the past it never hurts to have them reinforced especially in this day and age. I'm also glad you are aware that the State of Black Economics has not changed since the Civil War.

You would think many more of us would understand this fact. However, as long as you got COONING NEGROES who insist on tap dancing, shucking and jiving and singing the hambone about the relatively small gains we've made as a people this FACT will stay hidden.

I am definitely for talking solutions and the first step is to ACKNOWLEDGE the problem and not act as though all is well with Black America just because we see more Black faces in politics and on T.V. and simply because some of us are well to do...while the VAST MAJORITY are barely making it or scraping by.

I regret that I only found those six parts to Dr. Andersons presentation because there's actually more to it...It cut off right before he got deep into the solutions part of the presentation. I guess that means the onus is on us to explore those solutions within this conversation on our own.

Your word of advice is well taken about things being evident...however everyone is not on the same level in reading comprehension and understanding so for those of us with these gifts it's our obligation to lead those that are less fortunate.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

Where have you proven that Black own more of America's wealth than they did in the 19th century?



You know, ive heard this before but the full impact just hit me recently when Zakar (i believe added some numbers). in the 1800's there were 288K free blacks who were responsible for 1/2 percent of wealth

and currently there are 40 million free blacks and our percentage of wealth relative to the larger population hasn't changed?

oh my! Eek


Good point NS. I'd also like to point out that our population has been limited to a constant 12% of the total population as well. Another trend showing that we are meant to be systematically kept down.
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
Number of Black Households earning $200,000+ annually, 2007

Washington DC 26,394
New York 23,874
Los Angeles 10,186
Atlanta 6,972
Chicago 6,693
San Francisco 5,399
Detroit 4,415
Philadelphia 4,259
Houston 3,748
Dallas 3,702
Miami 3,124
Charlotte 1,784
Raleigh 1,449
Orlando 1,547
Boston 1,280
Cleveland 1,087
St Louis 959
New Orleans 818
Greensboro 738
Birmingham 489

US Census Bureau American Factfinder.


Who's position was it that there were no Blacks making high end (in case of NY and SF just middle) middle class incomes?
You seem to have a hard time grasping the points. The point remian relatively to the majorities wealth Black wealth hasn't grow. What link that you've posted disproves that?
liediecryptor is asking for: "...an open, honest and intelligent discussion on this matter." So, let's step into my classroom. I've noticed the thread has taken quite an interesting direction--a direction that is unilaterally biased, subjective, sociopolitically partisan. Could it be that old adagium? Love to hate Romulus by any means necessary--or could it be a deeper reason. That classic black victimhood sneaking up in this thread? I think it's a mixture of both. But seeing as this is supposed to be an "open and intelligent discussion" I will adhere to the former. In order to thoroughly investigate the realm of black wealth and look deeper into the disparities between middle class and lower class African Americans I will divulge the necessary information one post at a time so as to not oversaturate one post with a plethora of information. First, we will begin with Dr. Claude Anderson and Steve Cokely.

It seems quite interesting that two black men, Steve Cokely, mentioned in the previous thread, as well as Dr. Anderson, whom happens to have transitioned from mearly being mentioned in the 'Mutts like me' shows Obama's racial comfort' thread to becoming the centerpiece in this thread. There is an interesting correlation between both men. They both preach doom and gloom to the African American masses and offer as an only solution a sort of Harriet Tubermanesque/post slavery era kind of proposition such as assembling in churches and other black venues to devise ways to overcome our common enemy--our white oppressors. Except, in this case, everyone, hispanics, asians, including ourselves, is the enemy as evidenced by Dr Claude Anderson in his six YouTube videos. The question that continued to ring in my head as I viewed the six YouTube videos was this: What does Dr. Anderson stand to gain by sending this message of hopelessness to his own people?

There's more to this black victimhood than inciting fear amongst a few individuals for kicks. It's an unpopular truth that has been ignored by black conspiracy theorists.

Excerpted from "Black Victimhood Versus Black Individual Responsibility,"


As the civil rights movement of the 1960s shifted its strategy from principled protest to pragmatic politics, which involved the acquisition of material gains such as housing, welfare, and health care, black leaders imputed the disadvantaged circumstances of the black underclass and lower-income groups to the entire black community. The effect was to disguise the achievements of individual blacks and the advancement and expansion of the black middle class that had been underway long before Rosa Parks refused to go the back of the bus. [See Section "When We Were Colored."] But the claim to victim status has been a significant characteristic of each stage of black activism. It legitimated the integration movement's politics of redemption as articulated by Martin Luther King, Jr. It was also present in the black power movement's politics of retribution and the black identification movement's politics of exclusion and racial solidarity. Today, it finds expression in the politics of sensitivity, compensation and remediation.

Black gains are seen as only symbolic in relation to white Americans; blacks are urged not to be dissuaded by arguments that they are making progress. Such pessimistic assessments of black progress are most often offered by people whose own lives and careers are falsifications of those assessments. One of the ironies of black victimhood is its appeal to people who have already made significant progress toward assimilation. Such upwardly mobile ethnics, says John Higham, are already strongly enough positioned to imagine that permanent minority status might be advantageous.

Black journalist William Raspberry has been one of the few observers of the black community to criticize the laments of black deprivation proponents. "It has become the new orthodoxy for black Americans -- particularly those doing pretty well -- to deny that anything has changed for the better," writes Rasberry. He views such denials as being motivated by the fear that an admission of progress "will take white America off the hook, reduce guilt, and preclude further advances." There is also the persistent feeling that the fragile prosperity of middle class blacks might blow away with ill economic winds, as well as their uncertainty of their status either in the white community or the black community.

Since the indices of black progress plainly show the disparity in the advances of middle-class and lower-class blacks, what purpose does it serve to emphasize the plight of the lower class as the sine qua non of the problems and status of the entire black community when it is evident to everyone that this is not the case? What function does the denial of black improvement have for its proponents?

As the upward mobility of middle-class blacks increases in the socio-economic realm, they lose claim to what John M. Cuddihy calls "the charisma of a continuing victim status" in the cultural realm. The fact of their progress, however measured, threatens to dispossess them of the psychic and material benefits of victim status. Clearly, the denial of progress disguises black success, and enables proponents of victimhood to justify their claim to the privileges of official victim status. It also enables middle-class service deliverers, spokesmen, and patrons to use the suffering of the unfortunate as a pretext for their own drive for power. For, as the quest for privileges and security under welfare-state capitalism has increasingly depended on organized power, it has become more advantageous to present oneself as a permanent member of the deprived.
Last edited {1}
Another point of discussion that I raised in this thread as well as the previous thread is the inequitable focus on African Americans in reguards to the overrepresentation of the black lower class versus the black middle class. The same biased formula standardized testing uses to lump the performance of schools into one category is the same formula many statistical organizations use to classify African Americans. For example: If in a high school with a population of 1200 students had 150 of those students that not only made progress on their SAT scores from the previous year to the current year, they scored off the charts that current year, yet the remaining population of 1050 only made average to below average scores the entire school is going to be seen as a failure regardless of the progress of the few.

To ignore the growing black middle class and dwell on black lower class misleads the American public, black and white alike. Thereby, defrauding the progress the black middle class has made. The article I posted earlier in this thread entitled: Two Black Americas clearly discusses that fact:

It's misleading, then, to make any general statement about the condition of black Americans without recognizing black America's diversity. Economically speaking, there is one group of black Americans that has achieved success and one that hasn't and the distance between those groups is growing. To make more progress toward Martin Luther King's dream, we have to take an honest assessment of how far we've come and honestly account for who've been left behind.
Well-Being of Black Middle Class Affected by Ties to Poor Siblings


EVANSTON, Ill. --- Sibling ties that cross the socioeconomic divide significantly affect the stability and well-being of black middle-class Americans. That is according to a new Northwestern University study that further illustrates the fragility of the black middle class.

Blacks teetering at the lower end of the middle-class spectrum are two and a half times as likely to have a low-income sibling as whites in the same socioeconomic bracket, the study shows. They also are four times as likely to have been poor when they were young, suggesting the relatively recent rise of many blacks to middle-class status.

“Basically the study shows that blacks in the lower middle class are much less likely to have kin to call on when an occasion arises in which they need, say, quick cash for a hospital bill or to fix a car,” says Northwestern's Mary Pattillo, chair and professor of sociology at the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences and co-investigator of the study. “And they are much more likely to have kin calling upon them for financial and other assistance.”

The study, “Poverty in the Family: Race, Siblings and Socioeconomic Heterogenity,” by Pattillo and Colleen Heflin, University of Kentucky, will be published in the December issue of Social Science Research.

The research is among the latest of Pattillo's studies showing that fragility is embedded in the networks of middle-class blacks. Her earlier research shows that middle-class blacks are more likely than their white counterparts to come from poor families and to be affected by the economic, social and political influences of living near poor neighborhoods.

The new study locates individual attainment within the context of the extended family, suggesting an unrecognized layer of inequality by race that helps explain the literature showing the economic discrepancies between black and white Americans and the higher risk of downward mobility for African Americans.

“Adding family level disparities to documented income, occupational, residential and wealth inequalities for African Americans illustrates the continuing importance of race across the class spectrum,” Pattillo says.

The study emphasizes group-based disadvantage, rather than individual difference, arguing that poverty and middle-class status are located within different family contexts for black and white individuals.

“Studies that focus solely on the individual will tend to underestimate the extent of racial stratification in our society by missing the cross-class connections that characterize groups,” says Pattillo.

Blacks' tenuous hold on middle-class status also is greatly influenced by the relatively short socioeconomic distance between middle-class and poor blacks as compared to whites. “Blacks don't have to go as far as whites to fall on the other side of the class line,” Pattillo says.

The study also addresses the social isolation literature that suggests that inner-city residents are deprived of the mainstream social networks whose resources facilitate social and economic advancement in modern society.

Compared to whites, Pattillo and Heflin found, poor blacks are more socially isolated. But poor blacks' social isolation does not eliminate middle-class blacks from their family networks. In other words, the study disputes academic references to black-middle class disconnection and resulting snobbery.

“The fact that half of poor blacks have a sibling on the other side of the class divide poses some challenges to the social isolation literature that depicts poor blacks as separated from the mainstream,” the study concludes. “Indeed, the black mainstream is more likely to remain tied to poor blacks than is the comparable white population.”





The Black Millionaire Next Door --link to windows and real media.

The Tavis Smiley Show, October 21, 2003 · NPR's Tavis Smiley talks to J.G. Thomas and Monifa Thomas about the Black Wealth and Fortunes Magazine special report, "The Black Millionaire Next Door: Black Wealth 2003." The report explores the myth that most wealthy African Americans made their money in sports and entertainment. J.G. Thomas is managing director of Niche Lab Capital Group, and Monifa Thomas is editor of Black Wealth and Fortunes.
Also a trend I found to be quite peculiar as of late is the media's loss of interest in millionaires and the current fixation on billionaires just as the number of black millionaires is becoming prevalent--as if being a milloinaire or even a multi-millionaire was as blase as watching paint dry. I found the wikipedia link liediecryptor posted about black billionaires to be quite interesting in an insulting kind of way, particularly, in the section, liediecryptor, quoted:


Although black people have never been more than half of a percent of the world's billionaires, two black people have held the title of richest self-made woman in America, and those same two women simultaneously held the title of richest African American. The first was Madam C.J. Walker (1867-1919), an African-American woman who became America's first self-made woman millionaire[26] and the richest African-American of her day. The second was Oprah Winfrey who in 2007

I found it quite odd that liediecryptor would copy and paste this part of the wikipedia article--ignoring several other black billionaires that were mentioned in the same wikipedia article. Why? Was it just to give the appearance that black wealth at the billionaire status is so "paultry" that it isn't even worth mentioning--hoping that no one would actually click his link and see who the rest of the billionaires are? As James Wesley Chestor said: "I don't go link-hunting."


What I found to be particularly insulting is the fact that liediecryptor focused on Madame C.J. Walker, a black millionairess from the late 1800's, in an article that is supposed to be dedicated to "billionaires" as if he wanted to give the appearance that black wealth were so non-existent that they listed Madame Walker as a "pioneer" out of--what--sympathy for the rest of us poor ole' negroes? Just as the mainstream media ignores black millionaires, liediecryptor ignores black millionaires in order to prove a worthless point.


If you wanted to focus on Madame C.J. Walker, a woman that died nearly 100 years ago, you may as well put the spotlight on this guy:



Mobutu Sese Seko, whom was estimated at being worth 5 billion.
At least Mobutu died in contemporary time.


And how about this next guy, liedycryptor overlooked:



Michael Lee-Chin, of Chinese and Jamaican ancestry
and worth 2.4 billion.





Aliko Dangote, whom is African but still considered
BLACK and is worth 3.3 billion.





Patrice Motsepe, He's African too
but he's still BLACK and worth 2.4 billion.




Mohammed Al Amoudi, whom is considered an "Arab"
even though his mother is Ethiopian. He's worth 1.5 billion



Sheila Johnson, whom is considered America's first black female
billionaire--not Oprah Winfrey--yet isn't mentioned in the wikipedia article.
Last edited {1}
It's quite evident that liediecryptor subscribes to the black victimhood/conspiracy mentality as evidenced from the very beginning of his involvement in this topic:


quote:
originally posted by liediecryptor:

I believe that at the root of this confusion between the two of you is the fact the you guys are talking about two SEPARATE (no pun intended) things... Zakar seems to be referring to Black wealth as a GROUP...Yet Romulus you posted info talking about INDIVIDUAL household wealth there is a distinct difference between the two.


As I have pointed out before, how can you judge the entire population of African Americans as a "GROUP" when it's clear that many African Americans are not progressing as a "GROUP"? And to understand the fact that whites have had a 500 year head start on African Americans, a race of people that even today only represent 12% of the entire population of the United States, then in the infancy of African America's realization that they can achieve success despite the odds being stacked against them, liediecryptor subscribes to the old standard of basing the entire population of African Americans to the white majority that has been in control for over 500 years? More to come...
As I have pointed out before, how can you judge the entire population of African Americans as a "GROUP" when it's clear that many African Americans are not progressing as a "GROUP"? And to understand the fact that whites have had a 500 year head start on African Americans, a race of people that even today only represent 12% of the entire population of the United States, then in the infancy of African America's realization that they can achieve success despite the odds being stacked against them, liediecryptor subscribes to the old standard of basing the entire population of African Americans to the white majority that has been in control for over 500 years? More to come...

We were talking about Group Wealth first of all. Now you trying to counter the overall condition of African people by focusing on a few tokens here and there. Dont you know the real unemployment of African people in America is over 35% and for Black men its 50%. This is the problem!
Now, let's move on to the next statement, liediecryptor made:

quote:
Originally posted by liediecryptor:

Zak's statement that "Blacks dont have no WEALTH" as a group still stands and in order for you to truly debunk this you must demonstrate all the wealth that Blacks DO possess in this country in the form of major companies, industries, infrastructures and other wealth building enterprises controlled solely by Blacks.


As requested, I posted a significant source of data that detailed the form of "wealth" liediecryptor asked for, yet somehow the information went unoticed. So, that being said, I will repost an excerpt of the information I had originally submitted in the previous 'mutts like me' thread, which is the same BE/100 data I reposted earlier in this thread as well as links to the source of the data that was compiled on some of black America's "major companies, industries, infrastructures and other wealth-building enterprises controlled by blacks":


Black business is black wealth.

By Graves, Earl G., Jr.
Publication: Black Enterprise
Date: Wednesday, June 1 2005

Principle No. 8 of the BLACK ENTERPRISE Black Wealth Initiative's Declaration of Financial Empowerment is to support the creation and growth of profitable, competitive black-owned enterprises. The BE INDUSTRIAL/SERVICE 100 and the BE AUTO DEALER 100 generated more than $23.2 billion in revenues in 2004. Along with the largest black-owned advertising agencies, banks, insurance companies, asset management firms, private equity firms, and investment banks that make up our lists, the BE 100s employ nearly 87,000 people. But to truly appreciate the role black-owned enterprises play as we pursue our crusade for multigenerational wealth for black Americans, you have to go beyond mere numbers to the very fabric of our nation's economy and quality of life.


B.E. Industrial/Service 100 - Illustration

B.E. Auto Dealer 100 - Illustration


If you take a closer look at liediecryptor's request, it is a request that is rather preposterous on a national scale:


quote:
demonstrate all the wealth that Blacks DO possess in this country in the form of major companies, industries, infrastructures and other wealth building enterprises controlled solely by Blacks.


In order for ALL black people to possess the kind of wealth liediecryptor is asking for, that would mean every black man, woman, and child would have to own a major coporation or wealth-building enterprise. Last time I checked I'm pretty sure every white man, woman, and child doesn't own a major coporation or wealth-building enterprise.
Last edited {1}
quote:
y Graves, Earl G., Jr.
Publication: Black Enterprise
Date: Wednesday, June 1 2005

Principle No. 8 of the BLACK ENTERPRISE Black Wealth Initiative's Declaration of Financial Empowerment is to support the creation and growth of profitable, competitive black-owned enterprises. The BE INDUSTRIAL/SERVICE 100 and the BE AUTO DEALER 100 generated more than $23.2 billion in revenues in 2004. Along with the largest black-owned advertising agencies, banks, insurance companies, asset management firms, private equity firms, and investment banks that make up our lists, the BE 100s employ nearly 87,000 people. But to truly appreciate the role black-owned enterprises play as we pursue our crusade for multigenerational wealth for black Americans, you have to go beyond mere numbers to the very fabric of our nation's economy and quality of life.

BULLSHYT. WE TALKING ABOUT OVER ALL WEALTH NOT EXCEPTIONS THAT PROVE THE POINT. WHEN WILL YOU DISPUTE THE 1/2 OF 1 PERECENT OF ACCUMMULATED WEALTH?

n order for ALL black people to possess the kind of wealth liediecryptor is asking for, that would mean every black man, woman, and child would have to own a major coporation or wealth-building enterprise. Last time I checked I'm pretty sure every white man, woman, and child doesn't own a major coporation or wealth-building enterprise.

PURE COP OUT. YOU UNDERSTAND THE POINT DEAL WITH IT. THE CIRCULATION OF THE DOLLARS WITHIN THE BLACK COMMUNITY IS THE ISSUE, NOT EVERYONE OWNING A BUISINESS DUDE!
"Who's position was it that there were no Blacks making high end (in case of NY and SF just middle) middle class incomes?
You seem to have a hard time grasping the points. The point remian relatively to the majorities wealth Black wealth hasn't grow. What link that you've posted disproves that?" Afro Saxon

"We were talking about Group Wealth first of all. Now you trying to counter the overall condition of African people by focusing on a few tokens here and there. Dont you know the real unemployment of African people in America is over 35% and for Black men its 50%. This is the problem!" zakar


Afro and Zakar for my part I can deal with an opposing view and I don't mind having a good debate... but what I can't stand is intellectual dishonesty. Notice how he keeps selecting small snippits and tidbits from opposing arguments and only selecting those exceptions to the rule which he thinks backs him up? He does this all while committing a malignant form of self imposed ignorance by purposely ignoring all the overwhelming facts and data staring him right in the face. This is exactly what Henry Paulson did when he stated that the "Fundamentals of the American Economy were sound" he simply just focused on a very narrow group of positive indicators to support this claim. Romulousy is doing the exact same thing... instead he is just trying to sell the lie that the "Fundamentals of the African American Economy are sound".

He acts as though I'm trying to hide the fact that there are Black Billionaires simply because I quoted the Wiki link that just so happened to be talking about Black Millionaires (which by the way there should also be many more of considering all the inventions Blacks created here that were stolen). However, what his pea sized brain can't seem to grasp is the fact that the cusp of my point was the statement that I emboldened which was "Although black people have never been more than half of a percent of the world’s billionaires (However that quote should be amended with the add on... "Since Arab and European pillaging of African labor and mineral wealth") In classic form however he glossed over this fact and went into yet another irrelevant rant playing up the numbers of Black Billionaires. What he fails to realize though is that in doing so he is once again proving my point. By listing all the Black billionaires in the world he's reminding us of just how short the list really is. Considering the fact that Africa is home to the majority of the worlds most precious resources....

http://www.planetark.com/daily...wsid/37031/story.htm

http://trinicenter.com/cgi-bin...8103919,35999,.shtml

Why are there not MANY more Black Billionaires and a MUCH larger distribution of the earths wealth in BLACK HANDS? Sure we can celebrate the few Black Billionaires in existence (who's total wealth still is just a drop in the bucket to Warren Buffet for example) or we can focus and deal with the REAL problem and that is.... how to REDISTRIBUTE real wealth back into Blacks hands where it belongs.

He then acts as though I'm unaware of the Black upper middle class when the last time I looked at my bank account statement and investment portfolio it reminded me that I AM in the Black upper middle class. However, I don't extrapolate my situation to the MASSES of Blacks who can barely pay their rent and keep food on the table. I don't think it's normal when I see the majority of homeless people on the street are Black...whether it be here or in any country with a significant Black population...is this all a coincidence and just due to the fact that Blacks need to save more?...I don't think so.

The thing that is so hilarious about this cat is that he's sitting up here crying, slobbering and moaning about people being on some "Love to hate Romulus by any means necessary" stuff and trying to play the victim like everyone is out to get him. Meanwhile he's accusing me of "subscribing to the black victimhood/conspiracy mentality" this dude done loss his rabbit @$$ mind.

That's why I'm rarely addressing him directly now because he's no longer rational...losing does very curious things to the human mind that is too weak to handle it. It starts trying to bend reality and change the rules of the game...It's like a chess match where I CHECK MATED him and I still have my King, Queen, both Rooks, both Bishops, Both Knights and a couple of pawns. While all he has is his King and a few pawns... yet he wants to still keep trying to play by moving his pawns like they're Queens....In clear violation of the logical rules of the game...Now how am I supposed to respect him enough to keep playing with him? To do so only gives him a false sense of credibility and encourages further irrational behavior....
quote:
Originally posted by Cocoa Starr:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

Where have you proven that Black own more of America's wealth than they did in the 19th century?



You know, ive heard this before but the full impact just hit me recently when Zakar (i believe added some numbers). in the 1800's there were 288K free blacks who were responsible for 1/2 percent of wealth

and currently there are 40 million free blacks and our percentage of wealth relative to the larger population hasn't changed?

oh my! Eek


Good point NS. I'd also like to point out that our population has been limited to a constant 12% of the total population as well. Another trend showing that we are meant to be systematically kept down.



If the 1/2 of 1% wealth ration remains true in this day and age, what does this say about the effectiveness of affirmative action and diversity plans in an era where we have more black doctors, lawyers, teachers, politicians,

but the relative wealth remains the same percentage as in slavery days?

I know that the stripping of land ownership in the 20th century, and now home ownership in the 21st century is central to this stagnation, but i'm wondering is there a way for african americans to go around the barriers and actually accumulate some wealth? where wealth = power to make demands and negotiate new relationships internationally?

(if that makes sense)
If the 1/2 of 1% wealth ration remains true in this day and age, what does this say about the effectiveness of affirmative action and diversity plans in an era where we have more black doctors, lawyers, teachers, politicians,
It means more rich white men started businesses in their wives name and black got a few jobs!
quote:
If the 1/2 of 1% wealth ration remains true in this day and age, what does this say about the effectiveness of affirmative action and diversity plans in an era where we have more black doctors, lawyers, teachers, politicians,

but the relative wealth remains the same percentage as in slavery days?


It means that AA and diversity programs works to the extent that they are used for Black people, as evidenced by the increase in numbers of Black doctors and lawyers and other high income Black folks. BUT ... our RELATIVE numbers will not change due to the fact that as WE benefit so do hispanics, Native Americans, but more damaging, so do white women. So as we make gains, so do they. We may be making gains relative to white men; but not white folk.

Second, it means that we, like the rest of america, are experiencing a widening of the income gap. So in order for our RELATIVE percentage to remain the same, with so many Black high income earners, there must be a 100 to 1 [numerical] gap.

Finally, and most importantly, [LD, can step in here, if he wishes] while it can lead to wealth, High Income DOES NOT = Wealth
quote:
originally posted by

while it can lead to wealth, High Income DOES NOT = Wealth



In rhetoric, a tautology is an unnecessary (and usually unintentional) repetition of meaning, using different words that effectively say the same thing twice (often originally from different languages). It is often regarded as a fault of style and was defined by Fowler as "saying the same thing twice". It is not necessary for the entire meaning of a phrase to be repeated; if a part of the meaning is repeated in such a way that it appears as unintentional or clumsy, then it may be described as tautology. On the other hand, a repetition of meaning which improves the style of a piece of speech or writing is not usually described as tautology, although it may be a logical tautology. Wikipedia
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:

Finally, and most importantly, [LD, can step in here, if he wishes] while it can lead to wealth, High Income DOES NOT = Wealth



You are right, Kweli: INCOME and WEALTH are indeed 2 different things.



If INCOME and WEALTH are two different things, then tell us where wealth comes from?
The Difference Between Income, Wealth, and Assets


Wiki: Wealth

In popular usage, wealth can be described as an abundance of items of economic value, or the state of controlling or possessing such items, usually in the form of money, real estate and personal property. ...Wealth can be categorized into three principal categories: personal property, including homes or automobiles; monetary savings, such as the accumulation of past income; and the capital wealth of income producing assets, including real estate, stocks, and bonds



Wiki: Income

"income is the sum of all the wages, salaries, profits, interests payments, rents and other forms of earnings received... in a given period of time.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
Suffice it to say, income is today; wealth is tomorrow, i.e., you can pass your wealth on to sucessive generations, you cannot pass on your income. Further, income is tied to action [active or passive], whereas, wealth is tied to being.


Thanks, kweli4real. You're the man. For a second there I was wondering why the hell those damn investment statements kept coming in my mail all the time. I thought they were just junk mail and threw them in the garbage can. Maybe the next time the postman leaves another one of them statements in my box I better open one up and actually see where my INCOME has been going all these years. 20
What I have demonstrated to the audience of AfricanAmerica.org with my two unknowingly participating candidates, kweli4real and negrospiritual, is black America's, specifically, the black middle class' inability to associate income with wealth. While more and more African Americans are catching on and figuring out how to increase their income, more often than not, they still haven't figured out how to create wealth from their income.

Somehow, blacks think wealth is something that can only be passed down from their predecessors like "white folks" do. Wealth, like getting married and having children, is something only "white folks" do--black folks are only supposed to live for today, run up unecessary debt through impulsive, peer pressured spending, and suffer for it in the long run yet blame "white folks" for holding them back.

Too many blacks run away from education siting all kinds of unsubstantiated excuses for doing so but when they grow up and realize McDonald's and KFC ain't going to pay enough to effectively support a single life let alone a family, and end up poverty-stricken, non-viable, and frustrated they want to turn around and blame "White folks." The only thing that's worse than that is when idiots do everything in their power to resist education and guidance while they're growing up and wait until they've screwed themselves and get thrown in the prison system trying to get "street cred" and prove how "black" they are through committing crimes, then they want to bust books wide open while they sittin' up in jail so they can get their GED--all of a sudden, after they've fucked their lives up, they want to find the lord and get educated.

Regardless of how 'broke' some people think k-12 public education is, it's the key, first of all, to undergraduate, graduate, and post graduate studies where black people can choose to taylor their education to their needs and focus as much on the African American diaspora as they can stand. Secondly, the alternative is illiteracy, unemployment, complacency, and poverty. I'd rather take the former. Once black people get over that self-imposed stigma of victimhood they will not only close the gap with whites they will also surpass them, which leads me to the reason why I posted the article I posted to begin with in the previous 'mutts like me' thread:

More African Americans save and begin to close the wealth gap

Washington, DC -- African-Americans are beginning to close the wealth gap with the rest
Americans, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data released today by the Consumer
Federation of America (CFA) and BET.com. From 1989 to 2001, the ratio of median black
household wealth to median U.S. household wealth rose from 9.1% to 22.1%.
Over the past decade, African-Americans have made significant progress closing the
wealth gap which has separated them from the rest of America, said Stephen Brobeck, CFA
Executive Director. "But there is more that can be done," he added.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:

What I have demonstrated to the audience of AfricanAmerica.org with my two unknowingly participating candidates, kweli4real and negrospiritual, is black America's, specifically, the black middle class' inability to associate income with wealth. [/i]



In order for this to be true, both NS and K4R must have asserted that saved income cannot be associated with wealth. Since this was not the original question, neither of them did so. What they DID do, was assert that income and wealth are not synonymous and therefore cannot be used interchangeably in a discussion about the relative status of black wealth (not income) compared to black wealth (not income)in 1860 when the bulk of african americans were enslaved.

Both provided definitions widely accepted within the field of economics. Stating an association between two things does not negate the fact that they have distinct definitions.
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:

Finally, and most importantly, [LD, can step in here, if he wishes] while it can lead to wealth, High Income DOES NOT = Wealth



You are right, Kweli: INCOME and WEALTH are indeed 2 different things.



If INCOME and WEALTH are two different things, then tell us where wealth comes from?




THE ORIGINAL QUESTION: IF INCOME AND WEALTH ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, THEN TELL US WHERE WEALTH COMES FROM?


Kweli had already stated that income can lead to wealth, so the premise that "middle class blacks" contributing to this thread have dissociated the two is proven false...

The original question asks IF income and wealth are 2 different things. This indicates a belief in the possibility that they could be the very same thing, although they clearly have 2 distinct definitions.

The clarifying question "then where does wealth come from?" is also informative. It let's the AA.org audience know that the questioner

1. Doesn't know where wealth comes from
2. Believes wealth is derived strictly from income
3. Doesn't distinguish between wealth and income
4. Believes that discussions about wealth are essentially discussions about income.


The original question (are they the same?), was thoroughly answered (no).

The attempt to now change the original question to something else(the association between the two terms), the existance of which, Kweli had already acknowledged in an earlier post is rendered moot, null, and void.

The only conclusion that the AA.org "audience" can truthfully arrive at is... INCOME and WEALTH are related, but not synonymous terms in a discussion about the relative status of BLACK WEALTH
Let the record show that the defendant, negrospiritual, saught to decieve the AA.org viewing audience with distractors, which I have labeled Exhibit "A", "B", and "C". The defendant, negrospiritual, switched from her original statement labeled Exhibit "A", which was:

quote:
Exhibit "A" posted by negrospiritual:

You are right, Kweli: INCOME and WEALTH are indeed 2 different things.


Then changed her statement and inserted the second distractor labeled Exhibit "B", which was:

quote:
Exhibit "B" posted by negrospiritual:

The only conclusion that the AA.org "audience" can truthfully arrive at is... INCOME and WEALTH are related, but not synonymous.



If the defendant, negrospiritual, can find the statement in this thread or even the "Mutts like me" thread where the plaintiff, Romulus Burnett, said to the effect of INCOME and WEALTH being synonymous, then the plantiff, Romulus Burnett, will indeed be considered wrong and, thereby, uninformed.


Let the record also show that the defendant, negrospiritual, attempted to further bamboozle, obscure, beguile, and disconcert the AA.org viewing audience by inserting a the distractor labeled Exhibit "C":

quote:
Exhibit "C" posted by negrospiritual:

The original question (are they the same?), was thoroughly answered (no).


The defendant, negrospiritual, is indeed Incorrect. To imply that the plantiff, Romulus Burnett, asked if INCOME and WEALTH were "the same", gives the AA.org viewing audience the impression that the plantiff, Romulus Burnett, was under the impression that INCOME and WEALTH are the same, which is a bald faced lie.


The original question the plaintiff, Romulus Burnett, asked was:

quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:

If income and wealth are two different things, then tell us where wealth comes from?




The question wasn't loaded. It was a simple, straight forward question. If the question was too long for you, negrospiritual, all you had to do was ask me to simplify the question. Nonetheless, the question was simple and straightforward. Even still, I'll simplify the question even more just for you.

WHERE DOES WEALTH COME FROM?

You, negrospiritual, have simultaneously supported as well as proved without a reasonable doubt exactly what I have been saying all along--that income is associated with wealth:

quote:
...Wealth can be categorized into three principal categories: personal property, including homes or automobiles; monetary savings, such as the accumulation of past INCOME....



Since the average black person--even middle class blacks--don't have the luxury of inheriting wealth or at least any wealth that can be considered substantial, their best bet, particularly, if they are making income (whether single or married) in the range of $100,000 or more, is to, first of all, eliminate or significantly reduce debt, then secondly, live within their means and budget accordingly, and develop or increase their saving practices where they can subsequently put saved income into stocks, bonds, property, subsequently increasing their wealth. Of course the ultimate goal is to generate enough wealth in assets so as the need to live solely on income will diminish or completely disappear, which was the reason, ONCE AGAIN, why I reposted the article from the Consumer Federation of America.
I found these stats interesting, of course my interest in wealth is not simply about material accumulation, but the voice and power that possessing wealth affords. Powerful people dictate policy...


http://www.nabsw.org/mserver/N...s.aspx?articleID=971

The Rich, the Wealthy and “the Others”

November 01, 2008
In case you are not one, and didn’t know any, the world’s richest got even richer last year. Even as world financial markets broke down last year, personal wealth around the world grew 5 percent to $109.5 trillion. It was the sixth consecutive year of wealth expansion around the planet. The fastest growth rate was not on America’s shores but among households in developing regions, such as China and the Gulf States. In these regions, the world-wide axiom applies: the families who were already rich got richer.


The world’s wealth is increasingly concentrated among those that have the most. The top 1 percent of the world’s households owned 35 percent of its wealth last year. Meanwhile, the top 0.001 percent, ultra-rich households holding at least $5 million in assets, commanded $21 trillion - a fifth of the world's wealth. Forbes lists 1,125 individuals and families as billionaires. Americans account for 42 percent of the world's billionaires and 37 percent of their total wealth. Russia is number two with 87 billionaires. Germany is third with 59 billionaires. Africa has two of the world’s richest, South Africa 's Patrice Motsepe and Nigeria 's Aliko Dangote. Mohamed "Mo" Ibrahim is a Sudanese-born communications billionaire based in Britain.

The planet continues to mint new millionaires rapidly. The biggest jumps in 2007 of second-tier rich came from emerging countries in Asia and Latin America. Overall, the number of millionaire households in the world grew to 10.7 million last year. Hampered by the mortgage crisis and credit crunch North Americans’ personal wealth growth slowed to 3.8 percent last year. The number of U.S. millionaire households is now roughly seven percent of all households – 9.3 million. The number of millionaire black households in America is 110,000. Most black millionaire households get their wealth from family businesses - funeral homes, medical practices, real estate and construction, retail and service sector businesses. America’s two black billionaires, Oprah Winfrey and Bob Johnson amassed their fortunes in communications and entertainment, and real estate.

Personal wealth in America is expected to continue growing, but at a slower pace. With Wall Street’s slump, growth in assets is expected to rise less than 1 percent. Things are expected to improve over the next five years with personal wealth growing more than 3 percent annually - well off the 8.5 percent set between 2002 and 2007. While Black Americans have increased their presence in mainstream and middle-class-status numbers, their wealth profile remains comparatively low. The median black household income was $33,916 (national median: $50,233). Blacks’ per capita incomes was $18,428 (national figure: $26,804). Their poverty level was 24.5 percent (national rate: 12.5%). Blacks’ rate of poverty remained statistically unchanged.
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
quote:
Originally posted by umbrarchist:
quote:
Originally posted by *Muhammad Cipher*:
quote:
$109.5 trillion

Okay, a question arises. If the world GDP is only $65 Trillion how was this "wealth" created and how is this creation evidenced.


GDP is NOT WEALTH!!!

um


20


Im not quite sure what you find so funny.

It was never my assertion that GDP=wealth. My question was about what accounted for the amount of wealth listed. If the total amount of economic activity in the world is $65 Trillion, what accounts for the $109 Trillion that is classified as "personal wealth"?

The term wealth is being used as if it can be created out of thin air and then backed by NOTHING. If this calculation of wealth is includes the ponzi scheme we refer to as the financial sector, then, I'd submit that those numbers are not only inaccurate, but imaginary. If I am incorrect, and these numbers are real, then how and where is this wealth stored?

*sorry for the multi edits, its very loud where I am.*
Last edited {1}

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×