And ohhhh the hell did I catch.
Of course I was expecting this because Bachelor Pad Economics was a book based in truth. And there's no point in time you'll catch more hell than when speaking the truth.
The problem though was that I was going based off of my now-approaching 20 years of researching and studying economics. Not only does this present the problem that I may have recalled some information incorrectly (and women may actually have been the ones better with their money...HAR HAR HAR!!!), but that this fact may have changed in 20 years. And so, being the good economist that I am, I went online to the St. Louis Federal Reserve to look up the savings rate for men and women.
Just one minor problem.
They don't break it down between men and women. Could have swore they did.
This then required that I track down the data that I could have sworn was out there. And as is many things on the internet, whatever data series I once found was now lost to the fates of time.
Thankfully, I found some relatively new data that proved what I believed to be true. Women are indeed worse than men when it comes to savings and preparing for retirement. However, if you're the visual type, here's some nice little charts making the point.
There were other charts they threw in that were irrelevant but purposely made to make women feel better, but the moral of the story is two fold.
1. Women need to save more (which I'm sure most female readers of Cappy Cap already know, and probably are doing much better than the average bear when it comes to finances)
2. For everybody all upset that I dared to say in Bachelor Pad Economics that women had worse finances than men, I'm sorry, it's true. And I'm not sorry in the slightest truth upsets you. I find it refreshing actually.
13 comments:
Now that the SJWs define so many more genders you are going to have to expand your research exponentially. For example does a transgendered "female" save more like a male or a female?
The point of saving while your (our) governments are actively destroying the currency is ... ?
In an inflationary economic environment - which all Western economies have been since 1918 and especially since Nixon removed the gold peg, debt is a reasonable choice. Particularly if you can just shrug and say 'bankrupt'.
Just think what the savings rate would if you factored out divorce theft and life insurance benefits from dead men.
There's nothing that Modern Western Womyn hate more than "The Truth".
And (it is only a supposition of mine, but based on a long time of observation) I think the reason that Western Womyn don't save more is simple: they plan to marry a wealthy man (or a man that has the 'potential' to be wealthy).
If they can't get a wealthy man to marry them, then they will marry a MC schmuck and either:
1) wait until he's paid off her debts and then take him to the cleaners in a divorce, or
2) just take him to the cleaners in divorce post-haste, and make sure that he's saddled with her debts and is obligated to pay them off.
The manosphere is loaded with men's stories of the now-ex-wife who did either of these things.
This would also explain Modern Women's hate, fear, and opposition to MGTOW -- if a man won't marry her, a woman can't stick him with her debts.
If you troll dating sites, you'll notice as I did that a stunning variety of women have traveled to a huge number of exotic locales, even at a very young age, and expect to keep doing this with any prospective partner.
I've asked a couple of them how on Earth they pay for these annual vacations and the conversation gets frosty very quickly.
Wait, Men have 75% more savings than women? So there's a "Savings Gap"? This must be part of the "War on Women" and needs to be corrected by a government mandate.
Uh, and a female bear is called a "sow". Just sayin'.
This does not surprise me.
As a man, I have always said men are better are saving more money than women.
All the women in my family who earn 6 figures, are always in debt, have credit card debt and overdraft debt.
Stupid idiots. And these are the same women that are given high paying jobs over men.
Unfuckingbelieveable.
Let's not get too ahead of ourselves. This could very well be a reflection of the current western culture. Places like China have high savings rates for both males and females. I would argue it is a matter of future orientation, enough resources to survive, the perceived safety net and scarcity of desirable mates.
Doesn't surprise me.
It goes deeper than just "savings"..
Women seem to have a God-given talent for making money virtually *disappear* with NOTHING to to show for it!
"Travel" is one such item - and they don't do it on the cheap, either..
Survivorman: "...Women seem to have a God-given talent for making money virtually *disappear* with NOTHING to to show for it!"
They're especially good at doing that with someone else's money -- which also explains why the majority of women are socialists (just as long as they are the ones on the 'receiving' end of the deal, of course).
hi CC,
i quoted some interesting stuff in another article, see
http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/25m89j/inertia_of_social_changes/
interesting are the danish and new zealand contributions by gender over time.
denmark: http://www.dandebat.dk/images/1205p.jpg
nz:
http://nzinitiative.org.nz/site/nzinitiative/images/graph%20of%20the%20week/Issue%204%202014%20graph.jpg
note that
a) the danish graph (unlike the NZ graph, which is based on historic net fiscal contributions), the danish graph shows the net fiscal contributions of a woman **born in 2001**
b) men tend to die earlier, i.e. their right-hand tail will be much less frequent
good luck financing yourself, welfare states of the world, especially in the light of the dropping out of (potentially very productive) beta males in the workforce.
on another note, where do you see good ideas to invest in? long condos in cities, pet-related companies, sex tech, short suburban real estate, larger houses, anything academia/tuiton related?
40500/12400 is about 3.27, which suggests men save about 227% more, not 75% more. If men saved 75% more than $12400, then the value would be 12400x1.75 = 21700, not 40500.
Post a Comment