WISER Lacks Common Sense
Written: May 31 '00
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Content Timeliness: |
 |
|
| Information Depth: |
 |
|
|
Pros: The site loads
Cons: The site loads
|
|
|
| TheAdvocate's Full Review: WISER |
WISER, the Women’s Institute for a Secure Retirement, was established as a non-profit organization in 1996 by the Heinz Family Philanthropies. Its website claims the group is “working to expand retirement planning education to enable women to make informed decisions about their finances.”
But to first establish a justification for their existence, WISER begins by citing some economic “facts” regarding women. The site reports, for instance, that women make only 74 cents for every dollar that men earn. This claim is listed under a heading that reads, “Here are some quick facts about women and retirement that may surprise you.” Yes, it did surprise me, because it’s patently untrue. In fact, the most recent wage gap figure (not yet updated on the WISER site) is 76 cents per male dollar, a perpetual economic (though politically useful) myth.
According to Women’s Figures: An Illustrated Guide to the Economic Progress of Women in America:
1. This mythical wage gap fails to consider crucial factors such as education, type of job, and consecutive years in the workforce. When these factors are considered, women earn as much as men.
2. Women earn more associate’s, bachelor’s and masters degrees than men and have been the majority on college campuses since the mid-1980s.
3. With increased education has come increased earning power for women. Between 1960 and 1994, women’s wages grew ten times as fast as men’s wages.
Wouldn’t some of this counter information be useful to an organization claiming to “enable women to make informed decisions about their finances”? Apparently not, because I found no economic counter arguments anywhere on the WISER website. Of course, if women realized that the wage gap isn’t the threat feminists would have us believe, it’s unlikely organizations like WISER would exist, much less hope to collect $12 per person from their newsletter readership.
Another wage gap statistic presented by WISER is that nine out of ten working women earn less than $40,000. What’s not explained is that many young mothers work home-based part-time jobs. The small number of hours worked each week don’t warrant extra benefits or terribly high pay, as these jobs are primarily sought out for income supplementation and convenience. Yet, once these women are included in the baseline number of “all working females,” earning numbers fall drastically and advocacy groups can claim the need for more stringent economic controls.
Now consider this statement, found in a WISER special report on Social Security: “Women are far less likely than men to have retirement income from a private pension or a savings account, so the Social Security program is crucial for women.” The report goes on to insist that the Social Security program is not going broke, and they see no reason to undertake any major overhauls to the system.
It’s true that, historically, women have been far less likely to prepare for retirement through savings or establishing an investment income, but to suggest that governmental “security” is crucial for women is to suggest that women, en masse, are still unable (or unwilling) to provide for their own futures. This assumption flies in the face of the rising tide of online women’s investing sites, a tide whose upswing can be measured in online advertising revenue. It’s also true that there are women living below, or even just above the poverty line who need a government safety net – women who have neither access to nor an understanding of investment portfolios. Still, the government is not coming to a particularly efficient aid and rescue of these women. The fed returns a 1.5 percent investment profit on money paid into Social Security. Any woman, rich or poor, could earn 2.25 percent just putting her FICA tax in a passbook savings account! So why is it so crucial for women to rely on the government’s 1.5 percent?
Obviously I have serious misgivings about the site’s content, but technically it doesn’t fare much better. As mentioned above, the site isn't up-to-date, and the “NEW!” Future Paycheck section hasn’t been updated since September of 1999. Additionally, many of their programs take the form of regional seminars and conferences which are unlikely to help the many low-income women who are financially unable to travel to these seminars. All in all, I found the WISER site patronizing and full of politically correct economic mythos. This site is of no use to women interested in taking responsibility for their financial decisions.
Recommended:
No
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
TheAdvocate
|
|
Reviews written: 53
Trusted by: 98 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2008 Shopping.com, Inc.