Economy Hitting Women Hardest, Say Experts

Login to comment
Print
Text Size
Email

WASHINGTON, Nov 20 (OneWorld) - Women are being disproportionately affected by the U.S. mortgage crisis and economic plunge, said a panel of women leaders Wednesday, urging a strong woman-focused response from the federal government.

Women are behind many of those doors. © spankyblu1 (flickr)In Rhode Island, the state with the highest unemployment rate in the country, one woman has not been able to find a job for the past eight months and is losing her house to the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Another, struggling to take care of her 14-year-old granddaughter because her own daughter is in jail, is a tenant in a building that is being foreclosed. She is being evicted by the bank, even though she is willing to pay rent.

These women's stories, told by Sara Mersha, the executive director of Direct Action for Rights and Equality (DARE) in Rhode Island, are part of what she calls the "economic Katrina."

Mersha spoke along with other women's rights advocates at a teleconference sponsored by the Ms. Foundation for Women called, "Lifted Up or Left Out? Economic Stimulus Policy that Benefits Low-Income Women." The experts discussed the challenges facing women in the United States today and policies that could make a difference.

Mersha said the current sub-prime mortgage crisis is similar to the 2005 hurricane not only in terms of scale -- the number of people affected -- but also who is being hit the hardest. She said that in Rhode Island, most of the foreclosures and evictions are happening in poor communities and neighborhoods with African-American or Latino residents. DARE is doing a local research study concerning the crisis. While visiting homes being foreclosed, Mersha noticed another disturbing trend: "There are disproportionate numbers of women behind those doors," she said.

The effects of the sub-prime mortgage crisis on women are exacerbated by other, pre-existing problems, according to the panelists. Sara Gould, president and CEO of the Ms. Foundation, said that out of the 37 million Americans living in poverty, 27 million are women and children. In fact, she added, single mothers and their families are more likely to live in poverty than any other demographic group in the United States.

"We need a fundamental shift in our priorities."
- Sara Mersha, Direct Action for Rights and EqualityPanelists agreed that there is not an adequate support system to help these women living in poverty. Fully two thirds of the minimum wage and below-minimum wage workforce in the United States are women, said Gould. For many of these workers, the laws are inadequate to protect their rights.

Ai-jen Poo, a lead organizer and founder of Domestic Workers United in New York City, advocates on behalf of a huge low-wage workforce: domestic workers. Ai-jen said that in the city, 200,000 women are employed as domestic workers.

She told the story of a woman who worked for a family for three years before she was called and told not to come to work the next day. She was replaced by someone who would work for half the amount she had been paid. Without notice and with no severance pay, this woman was left to figure out how to put food on the table for her own four children.

Ai-jen said she gets calls like this every day from women wondering what their rights are. The truth is, she said, there are no laws in the domestic work sector concerning severance pay or notice.

"There is no safety net," she said. "We're realizing that 25,000 jobs lost at Lehman Brothers means 25,000 jobs in jeopardy for domestic workers."

Nancy Duff Campbell, co-president of the National Women's Law Center in Washington, DC, said the creation of a safety net begins with an economic stimulus package. The first stimulus package, released in February, had very little effect, Campbell said, but the new ideas being proposed by Democrats may help build long-term solutions.

According to Campbell, the essential elements of a "safety net" would include an extension of unemployment benefits and more funding to support programs that many women depend on.

Campbell emphasized that unemployment benefits should not just be extended, but also expanded to cover more people. This would help all those who have lost jobs in the economic crisis, many of whom are women. Campbell said this is an opportunity to push for better unemployment compensation for part-time and low-wage workers.

Campbell said another element that should be included in the economic stimulus package is money to increase food-stamp benefits, WIC benefits for low-income women and children, and other programs to help people cope with rising food costs. Most of the beneficiaries of these programs are women and their children, said Campbell.

The package should also help states that are suffering in the economic crisis. For example, Campbell said, if the federal government funds a larger share of the Medicaid program, it takes some of the burden off state budgets and prevents cuts in other state programs on which many women depend, like child care.

Mersha said that even half the money devoted to the $700 billion government bailout for banks could have a huge impact on housing, jobs, health care, education, and other social programs that would benefit women and communities.

The government should focus on increased investment in programs that "prevent folks from being in a situation where they have nowhere else to turn," said Mersha. "We need a fundamental shift in our priorities."

OneWorld.net: Latest News, Groups Working on Gender Issues Worldwide

OneWorld TV: Fighting for Women's Liberation in Eritrea

Many people most especially women are now living in extreme poverty due to the current economic situation. With the rising foreclosure and unemployment rate, many people find themselves in need of financial assistance just to meet their needs. The unemployment is the highest it has been for almost thirty years; the US BLS announced that the unemployment leaped up from 7.6 to 8.1 percent last February 2009. Many people wonder if they should get a payday loan if they just got a notice of lay off. Securing employment is the best thing to do right away. It is a much better idea to get money rolling in right now than to seek financing and additional debt. Relying on loans will never solve anything in the long run. If you find yourself facing a situation like this, it is better to find yourself another source of work and income to find a real solution to unemployment.

Sorry, but this has been bugging me too much that I had to say something. As someone with a degree in mathematics, I have to point out that the statistics about Americans in poverty are horribly and intentionally misleading. The article says "37 million Americans living in poverty, 27 million are women and children." This is presented to lead readers to believe that women are suffering more, statistically speaking. Let's examine why this is actually false.

First, people in poverty tend to have more children. I never fully understood why this was, but that's how things tend to happen. So the ratio of mothers to children is almost definitely going to be more than 1 to 1. It's probably 1 to 2, or 1 to 3. That shouldn't be hard to accept. Thus, it's reasonable to assume that among the 27 million "women and children" group, between 67% and 75% are children. But for the sake of argument, we'll use a number that is generously lower than that, let's say 63%. So we assume 63% of those "women and children" are children. That's not unreasonable.

That means that (27 million x 63%) = 17 million are children, and (27 million x 37%) = 10 million are adult women. Let's also not forget that (37 million - 27 million) = 10 million are adult men. Also, let's assume that among the children, there are just as many boys as there are girls. That means there are 8.5 million boys and 8.5 million girls.

In conclusion, we see that we have a total of about 18.5 million males and 18.5 million females--exactly a 50/50 split. And remember! This was when we used a generous estimate of 63% children among the "women and children" group. If we boosted that number up to 67%, or 75%, etc., we would find that more males are "suffering."

But of course we don't know the exact percentage of children, because the author conveniently omitted it. My point is: at the end of the day there are just as many men suffering as women. The math proves this. The article just used misleading turns of phrase to make it seem otherwise. Now I'm not saying that women aren't suffering. They are, for sure. That definitely needs to be addressed. But men are suffering just as much, and this article uses deceitful rhetoric to diminish that.

I understand there are a lot of people that are going down hill but what about the rest of us? What about the hard working single moms, that don't and or didn't take advantage of the welfare system but used as a tool. I have written to congress, I have written to legislatures. I am a single mom just HANGING ON BY A THREAD and no one seems to want to work with me.

Please see my story below:

I have written to my state representative on many occasions, and looked for financial help just to help me breathe a bit, but there doesn't seem to be any kind for people that don't abuse the system.

I am a small timer making just 30k year, single mother of one 16 year old which have yet to see a dime of child support cause as soon as the father would go to jail, they don't do anything about work release so taxpayers such as myself get to pay for his stay. I am barely keeping my head above water, YET still finding a way to make minimums and paying everyone so I don't have to be another statistic filing bankruptsy or forclosure, but when I need a bit of help I get screwed. Well I have to tell ya at this point I am about to become another statistic that says screw it. They can have my 98K mortgage and my 8200.00 in cc debt then I can file bankrupsty or forclose and start over.

So maybe you can talk to the elected President of the United States and see if there can be programs for SINGLE WORKING MOTHERS not recieving child support. Maybe loans or Grants. Since I have a MSHDA loan, they can't touch it so guess what? The 8gazillion dollar bail out just DOESNT seem to help me or MY LOAN CICUMSTANCE any and I'm 2 months behind and standing. Let's look at this in reality, hmmmm "defer 2 payments of 785.00 or 98K?????" I'd have to say that should be an easy answer, unfortunately no one is seeing it that way.

I keep paying my credit card minimums which are KILLING me.Cause I may pay 125.00 on one and only get 30 available to use but then get with the rates and then overlimit fees. I can't win. And Im sure you have heard this all before. I just want to get my point out. I have no one helping me trying to do 3 times as much BY MYSELF for my son, where is my help?

WHERE IS THE BAILOUT for the mothers that have jobs, not relying on the welfare system but using it as a tool to get their feet off the ground as I did in 93. WHERE IS OUR BAILOUT WHERE IS OUR ARREARAGE?

Or lets take my best friend for example, the father of her 17 year old finally got off the bottle went to rehab finally finds a job so that they can take child support and give it to her, 2nd day into his job when he reports his new job, they come, throw him in jail, he loses his job and now hits the bottle AGAIN. THIS BENEFITED HER! Once again thanks to Child Support and the judicial system NOT doing their jobs!

WHEN IS IT OUR TURN? EVEN WHEN WE PAY WE STILL GET PENALIZED AND THEN THE GOVERNMENT IS WONDERING WHY THIS IS HAPPENING.....

SO YEAH WOMEN ARE TAKING A HIT, A HARD HIT

Normally I don't bother with this stuff, but couldn't pass this one up. As a single mother, I am always amazed when I see stories like this published in the media. "a group of women said a group of women are having the worst time & need special provisions". First of all, of course if a group of women talking (which there's *always* a group of women talking somewhere) they are saying this. Perhaps it's a fact, perhaps not. If it is, all it really proves is that more women are either renting from untrustworthy people or more women were inclined to run (and I mean run) to the bank to sign paperwork they didn't fully understand for an agreement they KNEW they couldn't keep on a mortgage. Then they lost their most likely completely illegal domestic almost certainly under-the-table job & they want unemployment, to supplement their welfare/alimony/child support. Otherwise where will they go??? A shelter. I consistently see more & more women speaking out not at all for *equal* rights .. they have in fact been for years demanding and/or extorting *special* rights every chance they get for years. For those of you who are really buying this whole "way more women affected & they'll be destroyed" nonsense, I can only say that except for those who are simply in deep due to an unexpected widespread layoff of a legitimate job, and those being evicted from rental properties because the owner is being foreclosed (been there almost 2 years ago:), most of these women put themselves in a position where it would be impossible for this *not* to happen to them eventually. Wish all those who were married with children & buying this story's nonsense could perform a little experiment. Mom - you take the kids, because you usually do anyway. The two of you separate & go to different shelter/social service office or whatever. Tell those there you are jobless & homeless & see who fairs better. And if you really want to make things interesting, have Dad take the kids, and see if it really switches the outcome completely (as you probably thought it should). I think being a woman is much harder only if you are one of the many born or bred to be a victim, as the majority seem to be. The fact of the matter is we are all suffering together. Ooh .... special kudos to Mersha of DARE for daring to suggest that 1/2 of the $700 Bln go specifically to "housing, jobs, health care, education, and other social programs that would benefit women and communities." Fascinating, I suppose she would like to have all men removed from said communities prior to this little project too..

Obviously, if the economic situation doesnt affect you personally than you dont complain about it. Women and children are the hardest hit by the economic downturn especially since women earn less in the workplace than men, are usually sole heads of household, and are depending on child support to provide for their children (which most of them do not receive)..so for you to say that no one should be singled out when it comes to poverty is proposterous! I also think that men who are sole providers for their children (single parents) should have additional help to provide for their children if they are in financial need. Single men do not have to worry about anything but themselves. They do not have to worry about childcare costs, education, clothing and feeding their children and keeping a roof over their heads. And before anyone says that many single men pay child support think about this...men pay child support based on a percentage of their income..and I know some that pay $50 a week for 2 children. $200 per month is not much to cloth, feed, provide medical care, housing, and necessities for 2 children for a month. The parent with sole custody always ends up paying the majority of the support- which in many households are women who do not have education, or make as much money as men.

Just spitting more money at the problem is not going to make it go away. I truly believe that this Ms. foundation has the wrong idea. Has any one realized this "solution" will not make any thing better. More people will suffer for the inablity to see things any diffrently. This is the same crap over again, & whats worse is that the control the Government wanted over the people is coming back to bite them in the butt, & its about time. They can keep this begging up or revert to a diffrent solution.

It amazes me that when the unemployment rate goes up there is a belief that the government should step in and fix things or bail them out. The government is the US citizens. Being a female US Citizen it upsets me that there is no big outcry when the troubles affect men, only when it affects women or minorities. What minorities? We are all equal here. Rather than bailing out or throwing money to those who need help, how about teach them a trade? Sure would like to know who these “experts” are that on this panel of women leaders.

You know this website about 6 months ago had a article about how men were really big hole.

Houseing market went down at first so no more builders needed.

The unemployment rate was 80% male compared 20% female.

Most people laughed at men, but as soon as it chages,

Now we NEED to help women.

Where is the fairness in that?

I am amazed at the Sexism against men in the U.S.

Its called equal opportunity. It is an unfortunate situation for everyone, and just because there is a lot of one "type" of person affected by this, does not mean that anyone should get any more special treatment than the next person. If the article talked about how white males were being hit the hardest in Rode Island, would it be the same issue? Gender has nothing to do with economics. Any law, or privilage that favors a group because they are some form of minority completely goes against all standards of being on an equal level with the rest of the population. This is ridiculous.