|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:31 PM June 15th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
"Another factor is that high-earning individuals will often share assets with their partners in order to mitigate taxes, which means women may appear to have more money than they actually do, Guirdham points out."
Especially in high-tax areas like England....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:46 PM June 15th, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
There is only one set of figures in this "report" - all the rest are percentages - which mean nothing unless one has the "n", the base figures. Junk-science, that's what it is!
Anyway, many of the "women owned" businesses are the local lolly shops, craft stores, market stalls, country post-mistresses, home-office mail-out enterprises, that sort of stuff.
One reason why so many women have moved into higher wealth brackets was left out - outrageous divorce settlements.
The good thing, of course, is that such High Achievers have a shorter life span - and since most of them are, apparently, already over 65, there's good news in the offing!
All this is only a hiccough in the bell-curve!
Cheer up, lads, things can only get better!
Cholmondolly Smythe-Jones (Ret.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article slyly disguises the main source of women's riches -- i.e. what they inherit from their dead workaholic husbands when the fellows make the obligatory chivalrous courtesy of dying on average 5 years earlier than their wives.
(Quote - "Spousal inheritance also becomes an important factor.")
Any average life insurance salesman can tell you where their money comes from.
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One item that has always been overlooked is the other end of the equation, how the money is spent, the outcome if you like. Advertisers have targeted women for decades, even when they were supposedly oppressed, knowing that women have a lot of say in what is bought.
Mere possession of money does not always mean total control over it. A married man may have money in his name in a bank account, but if he spends it it ways she wants, then it's not all effectively his. Of course, theoretically he could take all of it and leave, but the fact that most men spend a lot of money on women or in a way that women want implies power and effective ownership on their part of money that the man has on paper. The other way round, I doubt if many women, even rich women as mentioned in the article, spend a lot on men, even if they are married to them. In a way it's the old "what's mine is mine, and what's his is mine". She expects to be looked after when she's married and a good settlement when divorced. If she is rich she doesn't think he's entitled to half either during the marriage or after the divorce. It is also true for example if women complain that they are paid less for doing the same work, which is a myth, they have no complaint about him paying for dinner.
This implies the sexual power of women getting money or resources from men has existed from the word go. Women have expected to be looked after and still do. Men have looked after them. They basically have had no choice. Her weapon has always been in effect no money means no sex means no children which means that men who refused women's desires don't exist; they have died off. This doesn't mean all woman have always got what they wanted, but it does mean they've often got a lot of what they wanted simply for being women.
Having £10 in his bank account and £10 in her bank account is not the same if she can get him to buy her dinner. In effect she owns some of his £10. Theoretically he has choice, but if h wants sex or love or children he'd better pay up, dinner, her choice of family car, alimony or whatever. It's a little like one company having monopoly over the water. In theory you don't have to buy any, but it you want to drink...
The idea of what might be called monetary outcome is much more difficult to measure than who's the name on the account, but if we did manage to measure it I think we'd find that the money has always flowed towards the women.
Raymond Cuttill
menshour@menshour.com
Men's Hour Blog - http://men.typepad.com
Father 4 Justice News - http://men.typepad.com/f4j
Men's Books
http://www.cyberManbooks.com
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
