I have an even more important question: why do women tend to have more wealth?
For decades, economists have known that wealth inequality is linked to gender inequality.
In fact, this has been known for decades.
The idea that women earn more money because they earn more than men is the central finding of many social psychology studies, including the famous “Gini coefficient,” which measures the correlation between inequality and wealth.
A Gini coefficient of 0.60 means that women are better off in all areas of life, and a coefficient of 1.0 means that men are worse off.
But this is not true for wealth.
Wealth inequality, or the fact that women have far more wealth than men, has been well-documented in the US, Britain, France, Germany, Canada, Spain, Brazil, and Australia.
But it has never been the focus of this column.
This is not to say that the Gini coefficients aren’t valid.
But in the United States, the Ginis that are widely used are quite different than those that have been used for centuries.
The Gini has been used in the UK since the late 19th century and the US since the 1960s.
In the UK, for example, the number of women who earn more has increased from 7.3% to 9.3%.
In France, it has increased slightly since 1960 but the Ginsies are different.
In Germany, the proportion of women in the top 10% has increased since 1960.
In Canada, the gender gap has narrowed over the last century, and in the last 20 years, the ratio of women to men in the richest 50% of earners has fallen to almost half.
The same holds true for Britain.
In 2016, the wealth of the richest 10% of people was $3.1 trillion.
The bottom 10% had a combined wealth of $1.4 trillion, with the richest 1% holding $932 million.
The wealth of each of the last four generations of Americans, those born between 1928 and 1955, has risen from $7,700 to $31,300.
These changes are due to both the economy’s transformation and the decline in the size of the middle class over the past three decades.
But inequality is still a major factor in our economic life.
We are living in a world where the gap between the haves and have-nots is even wider than it was in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
For decades after World War II, the top 1% of households had almost half the wealth as the bottom 99% of families.
Today, the gap is about three times that, with a median wealth of almost $3 million.
There is also a much wider gender gap.
In 2014, women earned on average almost $16,000 less than men in a median family income of $58,000.
Women now earn more on average than men by more than 50%.
But the gap has never gone down: the gender wage gap in the mid-1990s was a staggering $50,000 per year.
And that was before the economic crisis.
As a result, women today have been paid less than ever before.
It’s been argued that the gender pay gap was actually higher in the 1980s and 1990s, but it has dropped significantly since then.
But the data is more complicated than that.
While the gap in wages has been narrowing, there has also been an increase in the gender-based pay gap.
A 2011 report by the Congressional Research Service concluded that the overall gap has been shrinking for the last two decades, while the wage gap between men and women has remained relatively flat.
This has created a huge economic and political opportunity for Democrats, particularly in urban areas, to take back the White House and get to work on policies to help women.
One such policy would be to boost the number and pay of women and minorities in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields.
Women in STEM fields account for about 30% of all employees in STEM, but only make up just under 10% in the entire US workforce.
If we increased the number, and we also paid women and minority workers the same as their male counterparts, we would reduce the gap.
And the Congressional Budget Office estimates that a $5,000 increase in women’s pay would have an immediate, significant impact on the US economy, especially in industries where women are often under-represented.
That is why the White house is trying to use the Congressional Review Act to undo the 2010 gender pay discrimination law and to enact a national pay equity policy that would allow women and people of color to join the workforce without fear of discrimination.
But as a policy, this policy would not have much effect on the gap itself, because the gender disparity is so much larger than that of the wage ratio.
The gap is much larger when we take into account the gender and race composition of the workforce.
As of 2014, men made up 61% of STEM workers, but women made