I'm not an expert and I'm definitely not the right guy if you want to go way into the weeds. Moreover, I don't know enough about Professor Darity's numbers to try to explain the variations in the racial wealth gap that you mentioned. That said, my guess is that at least a portion of the variations in the black-white wealth ratio is a function of stock market volatility. The total value of corporate equities and mutual fund shares, an asset class that represents a greater share of white wealth than black wealth, was $9.48 trillion as of Q1 2005 according to the Federal Reserve. It was 7.05 trillion in Q1 of 2009 and $13.03 trillion in Q1 of 2011. It was`$40.37 trillion at the end of Q2 of this year. The total value of real estate, an asset class that represents a bigger share of black wealth than white wealth, by contrast hasn't been nearly as volatile. It was $21.76 trillion in Q1 of 2005, bottomed out at $17.99 trillion in Q2 of 2012 and was at $34.88 trillion as of Q2 of this year. Pension liabilities, which represent over 40% of black wealth compared to about 20% of white wealth have been even more stable. Their total value was $13.69 trillion in Q1 2005 compared to $30.95 trillion as of Q2 of this year.
Use this link if you want to do a deep dive into the numbers I listed above:
I can't back into Professor Darity's numbers, but I hope the numbers from the Fed suggest the possibility of significant variations in the black-white wealth ratios over time. Scholars at Brookings have done some work in this area. Their analysis of the black-white wealth gap and why it changes over time is more rigorous than my back of the envelope calculations and theories. Use this link if you want to see an analysis that was published at the end of 2020:
Thanks for the feedback!
I'm not an expert and I'm definitely not the right guy if you want to go way into the weeds. Moreover, I don't know enough about Professor Darity's numbers to try to explain the variations in the racial wealth gap that you mentioned. That said, my guess is that at least a portion of the variations in the black-white wealth ratio is a function of stock market volatility. The total value of corporate equities and mutual fund shares, an asset class that represents a greater share of white wealth than black wealth, was $9.48 trillion as of Q1 2005 according to the Federal Reserve. It was 7.05 trillion in Q1 of 2009 and $13.03 trillion in Q1 of 2011. It was`$40.37 trillion at the end of Q2 of this year. The total value of real estate, an asset class that represents a bigger share of black wealth than white wealth, by contrast hasn't been nearly as volatile. It was $21.76 trillion in Q1 of 2005, bottomed out at $17.99 trillion in Q2 of 2012 and was at $34.88 trillion as of Q2 of this year. Pension liabilities, which represent over 40% of black wealth compared to about 20% of white wealth have been even more stable. Their total value was $13.69 trillion in Q1 2005 compared to $30.95 trillion as of Q2 of this year.
Use this link if you want to do a deep dive into the numbers I listed above:
https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distribute/chart/#quarter:127;series:Corporate%20equities%20and%20mutual%20fund%20shares;demographic:networth;population:1,3,5,7;units:levels
I can't back into Professor Darity's numbers, but I hope the numbers from the Fed suggest the possibility of significant variations in the black-white wealth ratios over time. Scholars at Brookings have done some work in this area. Their analysis of the black-white wealth gap and why it changes over time is more rigorous than my back of the envelope calculations and theories. Use this link if you want to see an analysis that was published at the end of 2020:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/12/08/the-black-white-wealth-gap-left-black-households-more-vulnerable/